- From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 19:38:31 -0400
- To: Joshua Gay <jgay@fsf.org>
- CC: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On 6/6/2013 5:47 PM, Joshua Gay wrote: > Dear Jeff, > > I would like to get your response to my argument in my previous email -- > that the purpose of EME is to deny a user access to data and therefore > this goes against the fundamental mission of EME. I don't think I agree with this characterization. First, I believe that most people would agree that there is nothing wrong with access control. So denying a user access to data does not go against any fundamental mission of W3C. People don't object to access control. They object to the particular way that access control is performed with DRM. Second, I don't believe that the purpose of EME is to deny access to data. There are existing CDM schemes that manage (or restrict/deny) access to data. The purpose of EME is to enhance interoperability by providing a common means to incorporate such schemes and data into a user experience - when the user chooses to do so. > I would also like to > emphasize that I believe this argument I have made is distinct from > other arguments that have been made (for example, in my argument, EME is > not analogous to proprietary media formats, since in the case of > proprietary formats, a user is provided access to the data itself). And > lastly, one of the reasons I think it would be most useful to address > the meaning of "access" in this context, is because if my argument > holds,then we could rely upon existing policy (i.e,. the mission > statement of the W3C) and we wouldn't need to create new policy with > regard to freedom or openness. > > Josh
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2013 23:38:32 UTC