5 ms·
Remember, though: this is the FSF talking. There's no such thing as a shade of gray to them; you're either Free, as they define Free, or you're not. That's not
by rosser 13y ago
Remember, though: this is the FSF talking. There's no such thing as a shade of gray to them; you're either Free, as they define Free, or you're not.
That's not to say they're always wrong, but you have to remember to evaluate everything they say through that lens...
- muyuu 13y agoTheir main problem is that Netflix are pushing for DRM to be in the HTML5 standard. This is indeed a complicated issue and could end up badly for the internet as a whole.
- dubcanada 13y agoSomeone hasn't even read the spec, it allows you to implement DRM. But it in itself is NOT DRM.
- muyuu 13y agoAnd that's what they are apparently pushing for, to be implemented in the spec (maybe so it cannot be blocked? I'm not up to date with the details).
- wmf 13y agoThe entire purpose of EME is DRM, and EME plugins (that are actually used) will only be used to implement DRM. I believe the spec is deliberately obfuscated to try to defuse opposition, but that only worked for so long.
- dubcanada 13y agoYou're right, but people don't even read the spec. No where in that spec does it say DRM... This specification does not define a content protection or Digital Rights Management system. Rather, it defines a common API that may be used to discover, select and interact with such systems as well as with simpler content encryption systems. Implementation of Digital Rights Management is not required for compliance with this specification: only the simple clear key system is required to be implemented as a common baseline. 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...
- rpicard 13y agoI'd like to read that. Do you have a link to the spec in question?