Re: RE : Trust

On 2013-10-18 17:34, DANET PIERRE wrote:
> We need rationale discussion, arguments and not religious proclamations.

I can agree with this much.

> The fact that content protection is needed as their authors, creators request it is the first reality.

Well, that didn't go very far, I'm afraid. This is not a fact, but a 
(your) belief. That is not a fact, is evidenced by the fact that I, a 
photographer with a keen interest in web standards and (yes) the Open 
Web, contest that "content protection" is needed at all. The "reality" 
is that only *some* authors and creators want to "protect" their content 
from being seen/heard/read by anyone who is interested - and that other 
authors and creators want to "protect" their work from ever being 
"protected" *against* people who want to see/hear/read it.

- The music industry has (largely, though not yet completely) learned 
this, and no longer uses any DRM ("protection").
- The photography "industry" (read: stock agencies and similar 
distribution models) have learned this a long time ago: even so-called 
"rights managed" licenses are just that: a license, based on mutual 
trust. Some independent photographers are still learning this, and how 
to use new business models, but there is progress.
- It is - in particular - the movie "industry" that still desperately 
tries to hold on to an old business model, and trying to influence the 
W3C standards process in order to rescue this already dying business 
model. But web standards are not the place for a business model 
emergency room - the model is dying anyway.

The "reality" is that creators can (and do) earn without any DRM - and 
often better than when DRM was still being used.

> The fact that Open web plaform is used to access these contents is also another reality.

Another "belief" rather than "reality". The "open web platform" is not 
used to access "protected" content - but something quite separate from 
it. Your browser is not the "open web" even if you use it to access 
rights-restricted content: the actual restrictions are outside of your 
browser, even if/when the browser enables this and/or the hardware and 
operating system enforces it. It's not the Open Web or your browser that 
"allows" you to consume content - or denies you from using it as you 
want to use it.

> So how to make it compatible and happen ? That's the object of the discussion.

Sorry, wrong again. The first object of the discussion is whether we 
want (let alone need) EME (and DRM, and CDM) at all. We should only 
discuss HOW "to make it compatible and happen" when we have already 
decided it's needed. But we haven't. Many otyhers have alrteady argues=d 
that no, we do not need it at all.

So we're first (and foremost) discussing how to make it NOT happen:
Culture is what should be allowed to happen - and "protection" hinders that.

-- 
Marjolein Katsma Photography
http://www.artflakes.com/en/shop/marjoleink
http://marjoleink.photoshelter.com/
http://marjoleink.redbubble.com/

Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 16:32:20 UTC