What change could we make? (was Re: Letter on DRM in HTML)

On 06/19/2013 12:07 PM, Mark Watson wrote:
>On Tuesday, June 18, 2013, Nikos Roussos wrote:

>> > It's safe to say that there is a consensus among those who object to
>> > EME, that we believe it contradicts with Open Web principles and
>> > therefore W3C's mission. If EME gets approved the most important thing
>> > we'll lose is W3C.
>> >
> I still have not seen it explained whether this "in principle" position
> comes with a corollary that the situation for actual users will be improved
> (and how), or whether it is accepted that the situation for users may be
> worse - in terms fo security, privacy, interoperability, accessibility - if
> W3C does not get involved here, but that is a price worth paying for
> avoiding a compromise of principles ?
> 
> I'm not trying to make a point here, just trying to understand the
> position. Do you believe your position will make things better for users
> and if so exactly how ?

This is, to me a key question the restrictedmedia group can address:
What is the best way for W3C, starting from where we are now, to make
the world better for users -- whatever your perspective on "better for
users" is.

For those who don't like DRM, recognizing that W3C likely doesn't have
the leverage to kill it, should we try to slow it down or open it up?
Are there ways we can usefully make the restrictions less onerous
without merely driving their proponents elsewhere?

For those who like the business models DRM enables, are there ways to
make the encrypted-media content more web-accessible (linkable, privacy
protective, accessible) and to shrink the restrictions on open source
development, to broaden the base of support for these models?

--Wendy

-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wseltzer@w3.org +1.617.715.4883 (office)
Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
http://wendy.seltzer.org/        +1.617.863.0613 (mobile)

Received on Friday, 21 June 2013 03:15:54 UTC