2013/10/9 Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> > > > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Duncan Bayne <dhgbayne@fastmail.fm> wrote: > >> > >> Yes, indeed, and that's great. But it's not all content creators >> that >> > >> can or are willing to go that way. >> > > >> > > Obviously. But it's not the W3Cs job to break the WWW to accommodate >> > > those who aren't willing. >> > >> > well, nor is it the W3C's position to break them -- insist that they go >> > bankrupt -- in order to satisfy some idea of purity, either. >> >> No-one is suggesting that the W3C force anyone to go bankrupt. All >> we're saying is that it's not the W3Cs job to help prop up their >> business models at the expense of their mission. >> >> There are already DRM 'solutions' based upon Silverlight, Flash and many >> other proprietary plugins and app-store apps. Those won't go away if >> the W3C refuses to play ball. >> > > True enough. And users who want to watch DRM-protected content, despite > the DRM, will be worse off for it. Users who reject DRM will see no > difference either way. > > That is not true. To have browsers which have implemented CDM will affect all the users, not only the ones who chose to watch DRMed content. And depending on how CDM is implemented, that can compromise the privacy of many users worldwide. > ...Mark > > > >> >> -- >> 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. >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 00:27:02 UTC