2 ms·

Not at all, your browser does not need to be sanctioned. Anybody can build a browser that speaks HTTP and can send HTML pages around. There is no mandate that

by jiggy2011 13y ago

Not at all, your browser does not need to be sanctioned. Anybody can build a browser that speaks HTTP and can send HTML pages around. There is no mandate that you integrate DRM to be standards compliant, it's perfectly valid to write a browser that simply says "no" to any requests to perform DRM functions. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-med... You can simply implement a "clear key" system which does not require any CDM.

belorn 13y ago
That misses the point. While anybody can built partial web-browsers, they can't build competitive alternatives to those sanctioned by DRM-vendors. Just speaking HTTP and partially parsing HTML pages does not a web-browser make.
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  Yes, you can. You are free to support whichever content protection systems you want to support. The only DRM mechanism which is part of the standard is clearkey which is DRM in the same way that SSL is DRM, i.e not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5791579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5791579
  - josteink 13y ago
    You mean you are free to implement a second class citizen on this new, closed down and Hollywood-driven web. Yeah. That sounds really sexy. That sounds like the pinnacle of achievements for open standards.
    - jiggy2011 13y ago
      Hollywood does not have jurisdiction over the majority of web. They cannot force you to use DRM.
      - vetinari 13y ago
        They can lock you out, when you are not using DRM.
        jiggy2011 13y ago
        They can only lock you out of their content (as they are already doing). They can't lock you out of HN for example.
        vetinari 13y ago
        This is problem for you, if you are browser creator: "your browser sucks, I cannot watch Hulu".
  - makomk 13y ago
    You are free to implement whatever content protection systems the developers of the content protection systems allow you to implement, so long as it doesn't conflict with their contracts with content providers (which it probably will in many cases). The HTML5 ECE spec is intended to make sure it's a criminal offence to implement any "content protection" scheme without permission. In the eyes of both W3C and its proponents, that's a non-negotiable feature.
    - jiggy2011 13y ago
      How is it a criminal offence to implement a content protection scheme? Who's permission does one need? If I write a content protection scheme that runs everything through ROT13 I don't understand why anyone would care.
      - Daiz 13y ago
        Because if you don't have a permission to do so, you're basically 'circumventing' DRM which is illegal under copyright laws in many countries around the world.
        jiggy2011 13y ago
        Why would I need permission to implement my own CDM? I would not be circumventing unless I attempted to reverse engineer someone elses.
        vetinari 13y ago
        Is for implementing someone's other CDM. It's the "your browser is great, but I cannot watch Hulu in it, therefore it is unusable" scenario.
        jiggy2011 13y ago
        Why would you implement it yourself? Just integrate this standard and now your browser can talk to Hulu's CDM.
- beeneto 13y ago
  > While anybody can built partial web-browsers, they can't build competitive alternatives to those sanctioned by DRM-vendors. That's true, but it's not connected to the w3c inclusion in the spec. People hosing DRM encrypted video could stop your third-party browser from consuming their video with or without the w3c spec provision.

belorn 13y ago

That misses the point. While anybody can built partial web-browsers, they can't build competitive alternatives to those sanctioned by DRM-vendors. Just speaking HTTP and partially parsing HTML pages does not a web-browser make.

jiggy2011 13y ago
Yes, you can. You are free to support whichever content protection systems you want to support. The only DRM mechanism which is part of the standard is clearkey which is DRM in the same way that SSL is DRM, i.e not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5791579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5791579
- josteink 13y ago
  You mean you are free to implement a second class citizen on this new, closed down and Hollywood-driven web. Yeah. That sounds really sexy. That sounds like the pinnacle of achievements for open standards.
  - jiggy2011 13y ago
    Hollywood does not have jurisdiction over the majority of web. They cannot force you to use DRM.
    - vetinari 13y ago
      They can lock you out, when you are not using DRM.
      - jiggy2011 13y ago
        They can only lock you out of their content (as they are already doing). They can't lock you out of HN for example.
        vetinari 13y ago
        This is problem for you, if you are browser creator: "your browser sucks, I cannot watch Hulu".
- makomk 13y ago
  You are free to implement whatever content protection systems the developers of the content protection systems allow you to implement, so long as it doesn't conflict with their contracts with content providers (which it probably will in many cases). The HTML5 ECE spec is intended to make sure it's a criminal offence to implement any "content protection" scheme without permission. In the eyes of both W3C and its proponents, that's a non-negotiable feature.
  - jiggy2011 13y ago
    How is it a criminal offence to implement a content protection scheme? Who's permission does one need? If I write a content protection scheme that runs everything through ROT13 I don't understand why anyone would care.
    - Daiz 13y ago
      Because if you don't have a permission to do so, you're basically 'circumventing' DRM which is illegal under copyright laws in many countries around the world.
      - jiggy2011 13y ago
        Why would I need permission to implement my own CDM? I would not be circumventing unless I attempted to reverse engineer someone elses.
        vetinari 13y ago
        Is for implementing someone's other CDM. It's the "your browser is great, but I cannot watch Hulu in it, therefore it is unusable" scenario.
        jiggy2011 13y ago
        Why would you implement it yourself? Just integrate this standard and now your browser can talk to Hulu's CDM.
beeneto 13y ago
> While anybody can built partial web-browsers, they can't build competitive alternatives to those sanctioned by DRM-vendors. That's true, but it's not connected to the w3c inclusion in the spec. People hosing DRM encrypted video could stop your third-party browser from consuming their video with or without the w3c spec provision.