- From: Nikos Roussos <comzeradd@mozilla-community.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:59:31 +0300
- To: Renato Iannella <ri@semanticidentity.com>
- Cc: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, 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 Tue, 2013-06-25 at 21:35 +1000, Renato Iannella wrote: > On 25 Jun 2013, at 20:19, Nikos Roussos <comzeradd@mozilla-community.org> wrote: > > > Norbert already answered on that, but just for the sake of the argument, > > an analogy like this would only make sense if "slanderous" text is the > > only way you could use HTML5 effectively. > > So are you implying that all use of a DRM-like technology is "bad" because it is _always_ used to do "bad" things? I'm not saying is "bad". I'm saying is wrong to upgrade it to a W3C recommendation, because it _always_ defies the worldwide legal spectrum around consumer rights.
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2013 11:59:58 UTC