Re: Cory Doctorow: W3C green-lights adding DRM to the Web's standards, says it's OK for your browser to say "I can't let you do that, Dave" [via Restricted Media Community Group]

On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Mhyst <mhysterio@gmail.com> wrote:

> Subscription and rental were thought for physical objects. Digital copies
> are quite different animals. You cannot perpetuate the same model with
> digital copies. And if you want to do it, then you have to give digital
> copies users the same rights that with physical objects.
>

These are statements, not explanations. Do you have any explanations ?



>
>
> 2013/10/4 Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Emmanuel Revah <stsil@manurevah.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Bonjour Karl,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2013/10/04 16:38, Karl Dubost wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let's try to reply. Making questions to hide affirmation is never a
>>>> good way to have peaceful discussion ;)
>>>>
>>>> Emmanuel Revah [2013-10-04T09:10]:
>>>>
>>>>> Why is that finding a better "thing" is considered as the only way to
>>>>> avoid W3C's recommendation of EME ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So basically, content owners currently uses a business model that is
>>>> working for them. I'm not judging if it's a good or a bad business
>>>> model at that point. It's just a fact.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually, I would tend to think it's yes and no. Yes it works for them,
>>> up to now it's been working great. But no, it's probably not a good
>>> business model for the near future. (In short, they need to move the web,
>>> and fast, or risk extinction.)
>>
>>
>> Could you elaborate on exactly what business models you think fall into
>> the category and why ? Particularly, I'm wondering if you think
>> subscription and rental models are obsolete and if so why ?
>>
>> ...Mark
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Received on Friday, 4 October 2013 21:04:41 UTC