RE: W3C HTML Fork without Digital Restriction Management

> To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 08:40:06 +0000
> From: rah@settrans.net
> Subject: RE: W3C HTML Fork without Digital Restriction Management
> 
> On 2014-01-15 20:37, Fred Andrews wrote:
> 
> > We need to defend the *contemporary* web
> 
> Why?

That is the legal advice I received.  There are precedents in which the *contemporary* environment justified outcomes in court cases.  We may well have a similar case: a contemporary open web ecosystem without DRM or mis-features into which some business interests have gate crashed the conversation, kicked in the walls, and claim it's theirs, and they might attempt to use laws in bad faith to persecute.  Why give up this defense.   Control the rhetoric to support our position: the W3C has recently changed their HTML WG charter and their interpretation of the principles of the web looks very weak to me - lets just dispute their decisions, make a case that the open web conversation is not compatible with their principles, and continue with the open web conversation without them.    A 'fork' of their recently changed charter and principles might give it more credibility than it deserves.

cheers
Fred