- From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 16:29:52 +0100
- To: Hugo Roy <hugo@fsfe.org>
- Cc: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>, "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
Sent from my iPhone On Jun 5, 2013, at 3:19 PM, Hugo Roy <hugo@fsfe.org> wrote: >>>> Since the EME spec doesn't specify the CDMs, someone could certainly >>>> create an open CDM (for whatever definition of open they prefer) and >>>> EME would work with that. >>> >>> This is a dubious statement. >> >> Why? > > I referred to the bit: “for whatever definition of open they > prefer” (I thought it was obvious from the following sentence). > Don't know if "dubious" is really the word I was looking for > though, excuse my French. But I just wanted to emphasise there's > no debate about what's “open source” or not in the context of > software. This is very much established. The point of my qualification was that my main point is independent of what you think open source means. You can certainly implement EME and a CDM under whatever open source terms you choose. > >> There's a trivial existence proof in the clear key CDM. I see no >> reason why there could not be others. >> >> As I said, whether and to whom such CDMs would be useful is a >> different question. > > I think the two questions are not that separate. What does EME > solve, what is it designed for? What would clear key systems > really gain from this? > > If clear key CDM in the context of EME are absolutely useless, it > is a strong hint that EME is actually designed for closed-source > CDM It's frequently claimed that DRM goes too far in controlling usage to align with content license terms. So, presumably, some people would like to see other solutions that do not go so far. I don't know what those might be, but EME provides a place to experiential with such things, over time. Maybe that won't work. Maybe there is a mathematical proof that anything short of DRM as it is today is equivalent to clear key for some kind of equivalence accepted by content producers. The point is that whether a useful CDM can be built in open source is clearly not a technical issue. It depends on the ingenuity of people creating CDMs and the requirements of content producers. ...Mark > >>> >>> The definition of what is referred to as “open” in the context of >>> software is very well defined by two bodies (amongst others) >>> >>> - The Open Source Initiative >>> - the Free Software Foundation >>> >>> There are other orgs, but these definitions define the same thing. >>> >>> -- >>> Hugo Roy | Free Software Foundation Europe, www.fsfe.org >>> FSFE Legal Team, Deputy Coordinator, www.fsfe.org/legal >>> FSFE French Team, Coordinator, www.fsfe.org/fr/ >>> >>> Support Free Software, sign up! https://fsfe.org/support > > -- > Hugo Roy | Free Software Foundation Europe, www.fsfe.org > FSFE Legal Team, Deputy Coordinator, www.fsfe.org/legal > FSFE French Team, Coordinator, www.fsfe.org/fr/ > > Support Free Software, sign up! https://fsfe.org/support
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 18:09:01 UTC