3 ms·

For certain decisions that seems like a false choice. For example, no amount of contribution would have stopped Netflix et al from pushing through EME as a web

• colejohnson66 9y ago
  As bad as DRM is, EME is a good step towards killing Flash. And because of that, Netflix needs a replacement, and the studios aren’t just going to remove DRM requirements because Netflix says they won’t support DRM. I’m almost certain that if Netflix tried to remove DRM, the studios would balk and pull their content.
  • gsnedders 9y ago
    Or Netflix could take the route they took on iOS and just make native apps for everything. Or, perhaps more likely, browser vendors would continue to not kill Flash until 2020 (at the earliest) when Adobe ends support, and then browsers would drop support for the insecure plugin and then Netflix would go the native apps route.
  • jancsika 9y ago
    That goes against what throwaway284534 was implying. If everyone is a "peer" and an enormous number of those peers make a succinct, persuasive argument that EME is incompatible with W3C's mission statement of "Web for All" and "Web for Rich Interaction"[1], one would think that would make a difference in the direction the W3C takes. Instead I'm eating popcorn watching players with deep pockets choose tactics in their battle to control an industry. And that battle is what shapes this web API. So the claim of, "your peers are listening and they value your feedback," is about as convincing as a hold message from Comcast. [1] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/mission https://www.w3.org/Consortium/mission
• KyeRussell 9y ago
  It's called pragmatism.