Re: W3C HTML Fork without Digital Restriction Management

On 1/15/2014 1:20 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:
>
>> And, again, we are interested in getting a good technical
>> specification that is interoperably implemented as widely as
>> possible, and not in getting some kind of political statement from
>> the W3C about DRM. Can we have one without the other ? Given it's
>> membership, getting such a statement - in either direction - seems
>> unlikely and is IMO unnecessary.
> Well when the Internet governance ecosystem is such that the Internet
> governance institutions are unwilling or unwilling to make political
> any decisions --not even political decision that are in fact logical
> consequences of their own principles--

I think this means that W3C is unwilling to make decisions about EME.

I don't think this is accurate.

W3C has made a decision that content protection is within scope for HTML.

W3C has not made a decision about the EME spec because it is still an 
early draft.  When the WG completes its work it will come to the 
Director for approval and we will make a decision (one way or the other).

The phrase "not even political decision that are in fact logical 
consequences of their own principles" I think means that W3C is 
unwilling to revoke its decision that content protection is within scope 
even though it must - based on its principles.

But the W3C Director has argued in a blog post why content protection is 
not opposed to W3C principles.

http://www.w3.org/blog/2013/10/on-encrypted-video-and-the-open-web/

It is not that W3C is unwilling to make decisions or be consistent with 
its principles, it is just that W3C interprets its principles 
differently than others do.

>   that will tend to serve the
> interests of those who are economically powerful just fine, while
> advocates for other perspectives, including public interest
> perspectives, are effectively sidelined.
>
> This is not how things are supposed to work in democratic societies.
>
> Greetings,
> Norbert
>   
>

Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2014 18:35:16 UTC