Re: Is EME usable regardless of the software/hardware I use ?

> It's
> not
> an argument against a capability to say that there exists hardware or
> software than cannot support it. I can point to such hardware/software
> for
> any given aspect of the web.
 
"One of W3C's primary goals is to make these benefits available to all
people, whatever their hardware, software, network infrastructure, ..."

EME is not a step towards this.  It is specifically designed to restrict
certain media to the subset of people who have a particular combination
of hardware, software and network infrastructure that is blessed by the
CDM vendors.

> It is progress towards the goal if such software can be made more widely
> available (more platforms).

You keep saying that, as though there is something about the EME
proposal that makes this more likely.  What evidence have you to support
that assertion?
 
> As for languages, there is nothing in EME that restricts the number or
> kind
> of languages supported and I can say that at least for our service DRM in
> no way restricts the languages we offer with our content. You seem to
> have
> accepted John F's arguments on accessibility.

And note my weaker language on those points initially; "probably" rather
than "most assuredly not".  My understanding of the intended
implementation of CDMs is that they will be closed-source, proprietary
blobs.  The content they 'protect' will not be available in the clear. 
This means that users cannot extend the system to support languages
other than those supported by the CDM vendor, and can't use machine
translation on the content either.

> Regarding geographic location, to my knowledge the DRM products that are
> likely to be made into CDMs don't support that. The CDM would need
> some privileged access to an accurate geo-location service, something
> which
> I think would be technically difficult. That's not to say Internet video
> services don't have geo-restrictions, just that they aren't enforced
> using
> DRM, to my knowledge.

I don't think it'd be any more difficult than the IP-based geocoding
that's currently used to restrict website content based on location?

> It's a fact that there is content which comes with restricted licensing
> terms. If we can make that content available on the web to more people,
> on
> more platforms, with better consideration of security, privacy and
> accessibility,

Privacy?  I'm curious as to how you expect inscrutable closed-source
proprietary blobs to enhance the security of those who use them.

> then this is progress towards the goal you quoted.

But - and note that I'm only agreeing with accessibility amongst the
points you raised - is such progress worth sacrificing the goal of an
Open Web?  I argue that it's not. 

> Yes,
> there will be people whose choice of hardware/software is incompatible
> with
> the licensing terms. That's not something that can be fixed by W3C.

No, it's not something that can be fixed by the W3C, which is one of the
many reasons why they shouldn't be recommending EME.

-- 
Duncan Bayne
ph: +61 420817082 | web: http://duncan-bayne.github.com/ | skype:
duncan_bayne

I usually check my mail every 24 - 48 hours.  If there's something
urgent going on, please send me an SMS or call me at the above number.

Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 22:27:44 UTC