4 ms·

> This system, "Encrypted Media Extensions" (EME) uses standards-defined code to funnel video into a proprietary container called a "Content Decryption Module."

by hsod 10y ago

> This system, "Encrypted Media Extensions" (EME) uses standards-defined code to funnel video into a proprietary container called a "Content Decryption Module." For a new browser to support this new video streaming standard -- which major studios and cable operators are pushing for -- it would have to convince those entertainment companies or one of their partners to let them have a CDM, or this part of the "open" Web would not display in their new browser. Isn't this just a standardization of the status quo, with Flash/Silverlight? Why is it that I always feel like I'm being sold a bill of goods when I read EFF pieces?

wmf 10y ago
In theory a new browser could load the existing Flash NPAPI plugin without help from Adobe, but it's much more work for new browsers to support EME. And plugins (read: Flash) are being phased out, so if EME could be killed then DRM would also be phased out from the Web.
gshulegaard 10y ago
I am a little confused by this comment. What status quo? Silverlight is deprecated. Flash is (at least seems to me) taking its final breaths. HTML5 pushed many web native standards for open media: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/HTML/Using_HTML5_audio_and_video https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/HTML/Usin.... In fact, the HTML5 video/audio was so open that YouTube had to kill a Chrome extension that allowed users to use YouTube as a music source without advertisements or video: http://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed-an-extension-with-300000-users/#gref http://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed-.... (Side note: the history of what went on with Streamus is woefully simplified in this article...but let's just say the Streamus dev was open from Day 1 with Google but only after his extensions started getting traction they shut it down.) Anyway, moral of the story is this would be a standardization that steps _back_ (in many ways) to the days of Flash/Silverlight dominance...not standardization of the status quo (at least IMO).
- dtech 10y ago
  Problem is that Netflix & co are stuck with Flash or similar because content owners will not allow it to be streamed/provided without DRM. So currently it's Flash with no alternative. EME is not the ideal situation from the consumer's PoV, but it's on par with flash (maybe a bit better) and preferable to nothing* . It would be a net loss if previously unencrypted content would now become encrypted, but I don't think that's likely as a host like say Youtube already had access to DRM/encryption in their Flash player even before HTML5 video was a thing but never used it. I thus expect it to be mostly a net gain/neutral. * If you personally think nothing is preferable over watching content with EME: great, don't use it. But forcing that choice upon others is not better.
  - tremon 10y ago
    Problem is that Netflix & co are stuck with Flash or similar because content owners will not allow it to be streamed/provided without DRM That's the content owners' problem, not Netflix&co. Let others produce open content that does work with an open web, and let's see how long the content owners will stay unmoved.
    - nemothekid 10y ago
      >Let's see how long the content owners will stay unmoved. They won't - Netflix isn't the only platform, just the largest - and compared to its competition its being rather altruistic in this situation. The content owners will more likely decide to license less content to Netflix (to Netflix's credit, they are trying to depend less on other's people content) - but will license that will play ball. And the content owners do have a place to go, HBO GO/Now's platform being the first I can think of.
  - gshulegaard 10y ago
    This whole area is a little murky but I want to point out that Netflix has supported HTML5 video for a while: https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23742 https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23742. Using EME no less (http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/12/html5-video-is-now-supported-in-firefox.html http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/12/html5-video-is-now-suppo...) I was mostly trying to point out that the previous comment was referring to Flash and Silverlight as if they weren't fading/phased out technologies (which they are as I understood it). As far as DRM goes, the whole thing is sticky, but I am mostly against this adoption to W3 since in its current purposed state, it seems too far counter to the open ideals of what the W3 should embody. To clarify: I am not against DRM, I am against DRM that allows publishers to dictate consumer behavior (such as what browser can play the content) and I think EME puts too much power unrelated to DRM back in the hands of the publishers. But I might be wrong.

by hsod 10y ago

wmf 10y ago

In theory a new browser could load the existing Flash NPAPI plugin without help from Adobe, but it's much more work for new browsers to support EME. And plugins (read: Flash) are being phased out, so if EME could be killed then DRM would also be phased out from the Web.

gshulegaard 10y ago

I am a little confused by this comment. What status quo? Silverlight is deprecated. Flash is (at least seems to me) taking its final breaths. HTML5 pushed many web native standards for open media: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/HTML/Using_HTML5_audio_and_video https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/HTML/Usin.... In fact, the HTML5 video/audio was so open that YouTube had to kill a Chrome extension that allowed users to use YouTube as a music source without advertisements or video: http://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed-an-extension-with-300000-users/#gref http://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed-.... (Side note: the history of what went on with Streamus is woefully simplified in this article...but let's just say the Streamus dev was open from Day 1 with Google but only after his extensions started getting traction they shut it down.) Anyway, moral of the story is this would be a standardization that steps _back_ (in many ways) to the days of Flash/Silverlight dominance...not standardization of the status quo (at least IMO).

dtech 10y ago
Problem is that Netflix & co are stuck with Flash or similar because content owners will not allow it to be streamed/provided without DRM. So currently it's Flash with no alternative. EME is not the ideal situation from the consumer's PoV, but it's on par with flash (maybe a bit better) and preferable to nothing* . It would be a net loss if previously unencrypted content would now become encrypted, but I don't think that's likely as a host like say Youtube already had access to DRM/encryption in their Flash player even before HTML5 video was a thing but never used it. I thus expect it to be mostly a net gain/neutral. * If you personally think nothing is preferable over watching content with EME: great, don't use it. But forcing that choice upon others is not better.
- tremon 10y ago
  Problem is that Netflix & co are stuck with Flash or similar because content owners will not allow it to be streamed/provided without DRM That's the content owners' problem, not Netflix&co. Let others produce open content that does work with an open web, and let's see how long the content owners will stay unmoved.
  - nemothekid 10y ago
    >Let's see how long the content owners will stay unmoved. They won't - Netflix isn't the only platform, just the largest - and compared to its competition its being rather altruistic in this situation. The content owners will more likely decide to license less content to Netflix (to Netflix's credit, they are trying to depend less on other's people content) - but will license that will play ball. And the content owners do have a place to go, HBO GO/Now's platform being the first I can think of.
- gshulegaard 10y ago
  This whole area is a little murky but I want to point out that Netflix has supported HTML5 video for a while: https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23742 https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23742. Using EME no less (http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/12/html5-video-is-now-supported-in-firefox.html http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/12/html5-video-is-now-suppo...) I was mostly trying to point out that the previous comment was referring to Flash and Silverlight as if they weren't fading/phased out technologies (which they are as I understood it). As far as DRM goes, the whole thing is sticky, but I am mostly against this adoption to W3 since in its current purposed state, it seems too far counter to the open ideals of what the W3 should embody. To clarify: I am not against DRM, I am against DRM that allows publishers to dictate consumer behavior (such as what browser can play the content) and I think EME puts too much power unrelated to DRM back in the hands of the publishers. But I might be wrong.