4 ms·
Still, must they push for DRM in Html5? Why don't they just make a binary client ?
by mtarnovan 13y ago
Still, must they push for DRM in Html5? Why don't they just make a binary client ?
- talmand 13y agoWouldn't that still go against the FSF statement? The binary client would still require DRM of some sort.
- untog 13y agoWe already have those, in the form of Flash and Silverlight. It would be good to move to technologies that work on all platforms.
- jlgreco 13y agoWhat makes you think this will? This standard would still require proprietary binary blobs to be built for every platform that the DRM creator cares to support.
- greg5green 13y agoBecause the onus to create it is suddenly in the streamers hands instead of Microsoft or Adobe's. Netflix has a hell of a lot more reasons to make their DRM bit work in Linux than Adobe and way, way more reasons than Microsoft.
- jlgreco 13y agoHow many more Linux users do you think that they could actually add too their user list if they supported Linux? I mean, I am a Linux user and I give them my money anyway. I expect most others do as well.
- Silhouette 13y agoWhy don't they just make a binary client ? How does that help the situation at all? Either data is DRM-encumbered or it's not. The basic issues of rights of creators vs. rights of distributors vs. rights of consumers are exactly the same. All you're doing by arguing against a standardised way of using DRM on web sites is leaving lots of little walled gardens. Having all the data you want, in an unencumbered format, in a nice open field where anyone can play, isn't an option that's on the table right now. It won't magically become an option just because you force all the distributors to develop custom schemes for their DRM instead.
- jlgreco 13y agoIt helps because the barrier to entry to creating your own binary client is high. I don't have to worry about my local news station going coo-coo and DRMing their entire site because "Hey, it's easy so why not? Gotta stop those dastardly copy-pasters."
- cheald 13y agoWhy exactly do you care if your local news station DRMs their content?
- jlgreco 13y agoIs this a serious question? Are you trolling? Because I like to read it..
- cheald 13y agoIt's a serious question. DRM doesn't prevent you from consuming the content they provide under their terms, does it? The classic argument against DRM is that you don't really own something that you've purchased. But...you aren't purchasing your local news channel's broadcasts. You don't own them, you don't have any claim on them. What's wrong with the owner deciding what can be done with them?
- jlgreco 13y agoThe terms are not my primary concern. The capability to read it is. I want to be able to read it. Right now I cannot use Netflix on my primary operating system. I can read the news because without strong incentive to DRM it (as Netflix has, their licensing terms require it) it is not worth implementing DRM.
- Silhouette 13y agoRight now I cannot use Netflix on my primary operating system. I can read the news because without strong incentive to DRM it (as Netflix has, their licensing terms require it) it is not worth implementing DRM. You appear to have made a poor choice of operating system. Perhaps you should try a better one for your needs? There are lots of choices, and many of them would let you use Netflix if that's what you want to do.