W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2013

Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Is <object classid="[flash]"...> the relevant precedent?

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 11:26:19 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnb78ikuYn3eEQ7AY1fezYS9PJkU4p+t12CQWXMhushBvhYUw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Cc: "www-tag.w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> This parallel does beg the question as to whether the difference
> between the freely-available Adobe and Apple plugins for use with the
> <object> tag, and the presumably restricted-to-customers CDM plugins
> which will be necessary for use with EME changes the overall picture
> in important ways.  Until this question is confronted and addressed,
> I'm not sure the above justification for EME in HTML5 holds up.

>From reading

  http://hsivonen.fi/eme/
  https://brendaneich.com/2013/10/the-bridge-of-khazad-drm/
  https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla.dev.planning/4-svns_uEjA/Gk6iehrttmkJ

it seems they are not comparable.


However, even ignoring that such an argument seems unsatisfactory.
Plugins are a real problem for the web as well. E.g. the Nintendo Wii
came out with an inferior version of Flash (and I suppose a deal had
to be made with Adobe for that, I don't know any specifics). That is a
far cry from the web we should be developing. A web whose clients can
be independently implemented from standards written in English
(without the involvement of lawyers).


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2013 10:26:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:22 UTC