3 ms·

I would prefer a DRM-enabled HTML than a proprietary embedded video player.

• mwcampbell 13y ago
  I think it's better for DRM, which is proprietary by nature, to remain obviously so, and to keep it at arm's length from HTML and other open Web standards. Why should the desires of the American entertainment industry have such influence over the standards of the World Wide Web?
• ihsw 13y ago
  Your preference is your own, but should you be able to impose it on everybody? Personally I respect your preferences but I cannot in good conscience support the unilateral imposition of your preferences on everybody else.
  • chc 13y ago
    Can you in good conscience support the unilateral imposition of your preferences on everybody else?
    • ihsw 13y ago
      Of course not, that is why we need to work together on this issue. High-powered lobbyists have always been at the reins of the W3C but it wasn't until now that the DRM maximalists started paying their salaries.
• jlgreco 13y ago
  "DRM-enabled HTML" is not what is on the table. The proposal is for a standardized interface for proprietary DRM modules to use. If you are not blessed with the creation of a DRM module for your particular platform then you will be left high and dry, even if your browser fully implements the standard.