- From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 06:55:14 -0700
- To: cobaco <cobaco@freemen.be>
- Cc: "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
Sent from my iPhone On Oct 9, 2013, at 2:28 AM, cobaco <cobaco@freemen.be> wrote: > On 2013-10-08 16:18 Mark Watson wrote: >> Because something is successful does not mean it's reasonable to demand >> that it be the only way. Other things can be successful too. All of the >> above models are great - I hope they all flourish. > >> But I also hope we can agree we should defer to the general population to >> decide what models they wish to patronize rather than proscribing from on >> high which are and are not "acceptable". > > funny, that's exactly what DRM does Not at all. DRM-protected services are offered as products to the general population and they can decide whether to accept them or not. This is what I mean. What you are asking is for a committee of unelected engineers to decide what is acceptable or not for the web. > >> In fact it's imperative that we do encourage as many >> different models as possible, because it is only through diversity and >> experimentation that we discover what works . > > DRM attempts to prevent that: preventing non-sanctioned use (i.e. > experimentation) is the explicit goal of DRM The different models listed were all different ways that the creators of content could offer it to the public. Having technical solutions for DRM doesn't force any product offer to use them. All the other models can still be used by those to choose to. It is only you who is arguing that certain models should not be supported by the technology, not even available to content creators as an option on the web. ...Mark > -- > Cheers >
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 13:55:42 UTC