Again we return to my initial argument: Particular needs has to be paid with particular money. If the studios want DRM, they must do it their way and their own place. The W3C is or should be a place to talk about general needs. Users don't require DRM to watch movies. We've stated several times how everybody hates DRM. So I get the majority of the world's people is against DRM. You cannot deny it. I've read it a lot of times from a lot of different people in both sides. So why are we discussing about DRM here? I see two reasons: 1. Legitimacy: Even if the W3C standards are just recommendations and no one is forced to implement it, it gives legitimacy to companies that may have implemented EME already. 2. Spread: And there's a chance that others will follow and implement EME as well; so EME implementations will spread, thus reaching more and more users. The conclusion is that, to comply with the studios, you need the W3C. Now it's clear to me why companies are ready to sacrifice a great extend of time and effort to push EME forward. 2013/10/21 Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de> > Henri Sivonen: > > Well, it's known that the major studios require DRM. The exact line of > > thought behind the requirement is less clear, since they don't need to > > explain themselves. > > It is not even clear what they really demand from Netflix and others. > > Cheers, > Andreas > >
Received on Monday, 21 October 2013 15:28:16 UTC