- From: Nikos Roussos <comzeradd@mozilla-community.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 20:34:39 +0300
- To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Cc: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>, Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch>, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>, "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>, "coordinators@igcaucus.org" <coordinators@igcaucus.org>
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 07:56 -0700, Mark Watson wrote: > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 21, 2013, at 7:35 AM, Nikos Roussos > <comzeradd@mozilla-community.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 02:42 -0400, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: > >> Nikos's statement "... EME [...] contradicts with Open Web principles" > >> is rousing but doesn't say which principles those are nor > >> how they are necessarily contradicted. > >> > >> One principle of the open web is "anyone can publish", > >> Can we design an EME system where that is true, and anyone can > >> publish content using it? > > > > Also "anyone can consume", regardless of "their hardware, software, > > network infrastructure (...)" > > > > So for start that's one principle of Open Web (and W3's own mission) > > that EME is contradicting, since it seems that it will require users to > > trust binary blobs from content providers in order to be functional. > > > > Another principle that DRM contradicts is that it disregards consumer > > rights. Quoting Norbert Bollow from a previous email: "rights that > > people have as a matter of law as soon as they have legal access to a > > digital good" > > I am not a lawyer, so I am wary of stepping into an area in which I do > not have expertise, but just as a personal opinion and as a matter of > logic it seems the situation cannot be as black-and-white legally as > stated above. If so, there would surely be numerous legal challenges > to the widespread use of DRM. If it is indeed a 'right ... as a matter > of law' there should be cases upholding that right and striking down > the use of DRM. That's not to say there is no public interest in the > effectiveness of limitations on copyright, just that it is a balance > not a black-and-white thing. Did I miss something ? Or, are you > arguing that you believe this is clear, legally, but there isn't a > complete legal consensus on that ? Certainly the legal issues are not black-and-white in a worldwide scale. That's why we shouldn't support DRM-based technical solutions that are clearly on the black side of the spectrum and disregard any shades of gray on consumers rights.
Received on Monday, 24 June 2013 17:35:19 UTC