- From: H <holyfsm0@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 13:08:02 -0700
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
Assuming that a particular browser does implement the EME specification, is it expected that real-world CDMs will work with it? It has been suggested that this spec will improve the situation of open source browsers by allowing them to integrate with the small proprietary DRM modules easier than it currently does (with e.g. flash, silverlight, etc.). This sounds great in theory, but looking at what is actually happening, I'm wondering, was that the actual plan? Right now on Linux we have two browsers that support EME (that I'm aware of; please correct me if there are more). One of them is the open source Chromium browser and the other is the proprietary / closed-source Chrome browser, which is based on Chromium and adds a few extra bits. One of these extra bits is a CDM that is actually useful for something, that being Widevine for playing Netflix content. Interestingly (or perhaps as expected?) the open source version (Chromium), while fully supporting the EME spec and otherwise being able to run the same plugins that Chrome can (including proprietary plugins like Flash), cannot run the Widevine CDM. At first, it may seem that there may be some technical incompatibility that would be resolved in the near future, but upon further inspection, it appears that the CDM is actively refusing to load on the open source version of the browser. And, to my knowledge, all other browsers on other platforms supporting Netflix-compatible CDMs are also completely proprietary. Is that a temporary state, or is it what we have to look forward to? And if this is the future, was it the plan all along to only allow actually useful CDMs to run only on fully-closed browsers and not on open-source browsers that implement the EME interface (and are thus willing to interface with closed CDMs)?
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2014 14:00:13 UTC