- From: Duncan Bayne <dhgbayne@fastmail.fm>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 22:45:50 -0700
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
> To some extend it is funny to watch closed source proponents attempting > to (re-)define "Open" in a way which is incompatible with Open Source. EME lends itself to this sort of thing. Because EME is, itself, completely implementable in FOSS applications it allows people to say "look - EME is compatible with Free Software." That is true, of course. But it is also an utterly misleading statement to make, because in practice no Hollywood-sanctioned (and thus, Apple-, Microsoft- or Netflix-sanctioned) CDM will be released under a FOSS license. Therefore, for practical purposes, EME can be considered merely an integral part of an end-to-end closed source proprietary DRM system. That is why it's inimical to the W3C mission, and why the W3C should reject it utterly. But that is a much more complicated position to explain than the simple "EME is compatible with FOSS" story. -- 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 Friday, 28 June 2013 05:46:12 UTC