- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi>
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 08:37:13 +0300
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org List" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 9:50 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote: > > On Oct 16, 2013, at 10:46 , Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi> wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 7:47 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote: >>>> So far, we haven't seen a deployed CDM that is like a plug-in in terms >>>> of the distribution model. >>> >>> >>> True, but I would expect that if OMA PDCF ever got traction, >> >> What's OMA PDCF and why would it lead to plug-in-like EME CDM distribution? > > OpenMobileAlliance. Oh, I'm familiar with the OMA acronym. It is PDCF that I'm on not familiar with and didn't find anything definitive by searching on the Web. > It's a protection format that's intended to be multi-vendor usable (they include key-exchange, and so on). It has not got much traction since publication, I admit. My understanding has been that the RAND licensing maneuvering that happened around OMA DRM version 2 made OMA DRM version 2 not offer any advantages over other DRM schemes--especially Marlin. Is my understanding correct? Why do you think OMA PDCF would lead to plug-in-like EME CDM distribution if OMA PDCF got traction? > I am not going to comment on whether Ultraviolet has a good model, etc., I merely note it exists. There is quite a logic gap between noting that UltraViolet exists and its leading to plug-in-like EME CDM distribution. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@hsivonen.fi http://hsivonen.fi/
Received on Thursday, 17 October 2013 05:37:41 UTC