W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2010

[whatwg] More YouTube response

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 12:04:52 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTingBrnyJAWnNBQX8IsJqHlrgAx3B2JY5WsCol4f@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au> wrote:
> On 2010-07-02 13:56, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> On 02.07.2010 13:38, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:13:00 +0200, Shane Fagan
>>> <shanepatrickfagan at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well this isnt really a list where we should talk about the dos and
>>>> donts of web content distribution. DRM content can be embedded in the
>>>> video tag and decoded using installable plugins so its not really an
>>>> issue for this list I dont think. We cant dictate how the specs are used
>>>> so try to keep the conversation technology neutral.
>>>
>>> Whether playing video requires a plugin is very much an issue for this
>>> list, I think. What Henri explained -- not having lock-in to a
>>> particular platform because of proprietary plugins -- is a large part of
>>> the reason why we have <video> in the first place.
>>
>> That may be true.
>>
>> But there's nothing in the spec that actually disallows adding support
>> for plugin-based DRM, right? (Just clarifying)
>
> Correct. Vendors can theoretically implement any codec or container they
> like, with any features or limitations they like.
>
> MP4 already has various DRM schemes in use. ?Apple, for example, could
> support FairPlay protected videos, though the use of such content with
> <video> would effectively be limited to within iTunes.
>
> Even Matroska has elements that can be used for general purpose encryption
> and DRM purposes, though these features were not included within WebM. ?But
> theoretically, those features could be added and implemented with some
> agreed upon encryption scheme.
>
> I would still, however, argue against anything of the sort being added to
> WebM because DRM doesn't do anything to protect content, but is rather used
> as a way for content providers to control the market by blocking unwanted
> innovation and competition that they don't like, including open source
> software.

Indeed.

Also compare to the recent battle that was fought over font formats.
Some parties where heavily pushing for DRM formats, however ultimately
we were able to persuade them that this wasn't needed, and we ended up
with a format that everyone is happy with.

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 2 July 2010 12:04:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:24 UTC