Re: I strongly urge all supporters to reconsider the EME proposal. It is not in your best interests!

On 5/19/2013 8:24 AM, piranna@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > 2. The technologies I would use to do such a thing shouldn't be part 
> of a standard that promotes openness. It could be implemented, it 
> could be free or not free, it could even be a standard. But it 
> shouldn't be part of the W3 standard.
> >
> I totally and definitelly agree with all this words. I don't like DRM, 
> but I also think an open DRM platform wouldn't be such a bad thing up 
> to some degree and in some limited user cases always there's an option 
> to remove them (like parental control), but W3C standards are (should 
> be) so basic and generic that DRM doesn't fit there.
>
> Browsers are almost becoming first-degree OSes in part thanks to W3C, 
> do you want your OS kernel has DRM functionality? I don't.
>

EME is not part of HTML5, so a browser can choose to not implement and 
be fully HTML5 compliant.  Browsers will make business decisions whether 
they want EME or not; just as they would make business decisions whether 
to include DRM or not (irrespective of EME).

We have many standards that are not implemented in the OS kernel.


 > An adequate comparison would be a DVD that doesn't allow your DVD 
player to play the DVD unless it is connected to the Internet and has 
cleared authorisation using a DVD player specification standard that 
promotes openness. Also, the DVD can disable the 
pause/mute/fast_forward/etc functions of your DVD player and why not 
even be remotely controlled entirely while playing this DVD.
>
> >
> It's actually happening with videogames, and in fact, I'm worried 
> about what would happen with my Steam games when I'll pass away... Or 
> worst than that, if Steam is the one that pass away and I can't be 
> able to login again to play my games :-/ This has happened before 
> several times, imagine now that it happens with all your legally 
> adquired music, series and movies collection, just a lot of money 
> going to the trash in just one second...
>

Received on Sunday, 19 May 2013 14:17:58 UTC