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

> Perhaps I am missing something, but how does EME "make" or "require"
users to install proprietary software ? EME is optional, for browsers, for
websites, for users.
>
Since I'm required by a website to install a propietary software to access
to a particular content I'm interested about, I'm not free anymore. Also,
such system is illegal on my country, so I'm twice not free anymore, and
since probably it will not be supported on my habitual OS, I will be three
times not free anymore. Do you think this is the definition of "open web"?
I don't think so.

We were all happy with HTML5 because it would kill Flash and Silverlight
and all related bloadware and switch it for an open standard that anybody
could implement so it worked everywhere, why we are going back again (and
in a worst way) adding binary closed propietary blobs on such an open
ecosystem just to view some content? This is definitelly a wrong way.

And before you ask for it: yes, there was versions of Adobe Flash for Linux
but they sucked, and the open implementations like Gnash were build doing
reverse ingeniering over (at least...) an easily readable and partially
documented file format. If a company doesn't want to add drivers for Linux
for his EME-based DRM system, how could it be done? Linux (or FreeBSD, or
Haiku, or MinuetOS...) users are outside Netflix and Hollywood interest?
There's a whole new world at the outside of the Windows... ;-)