3 ms·

Apple is, and has been participating in EME. Apple employees are active on the W3C EME-WG ML and they are regularly scheduled to attendance of Telephoneconferen

by pyalot2 13y ago

Apple is, and has been participating in EME. Apple employees are active on the W3C EME-WG ML and they are regularly scheduled to attendance of Telephoneconferences by Microsoft, to which they appear and comment. Microsoft has become the main lobbying party in pushing EME forward, with google mostly taking a passive role. There is no standard that W3C or WhatWG develop that was pursued as aggressively by Microsoft as EME. The last time similar levels of "standards activism" by Microsoft are documented is when they corrupted an international standardization process to push the Open XML document standard trough. I would be very worried if the EFF, Cory Doctorow, RMS, FSF, CCC, defective by design, WhatWG and a long list of other organizations agree against a standard, but Microsoft, Apple, Google and Netflix are closely cooperating to make it happen.

gsnedders 13y ago
The (eventual) AC vote on progression is a simple majority vote — where there is one vote per AC representative (and one AC rep per Member). (The vote technically only happens if an appeal is launched with 5% of the AC in support, which requires one or more Formal Objections — but will almost certainly happen in this case.) The EFF is the only person/org in that list of people who are Members. The rest — effectively — have no say. The Director practically cannot go against the majority of the AC (as they can just amend the Process to remove the Director's veto). You'll need to convince a lot more Members to vote against it. I see no evidence of MS having done anything underhand here — this is simply a case of a lot (quite possibly a majority) of Members wanting something a lot of people disagree with.
azakai 13y ago
Thanks for the info! Are there any public links I could read more about this on? (specifically Apple's involvement and commitment)

by pyalot2 13y ago

gsnedders 13y ago

The (eventual) AC vote on progression is a simple majority vote — where there is one vote per AC representative (and one AC rep per Member). (The vote technically only happens if an appeal is launched with 5% of the AC in support, which requires one or more Formal Objections — but will almost certainly happen in this case.) The EFF is the only person/org in that list of people who are Members. The rest — effectively — have no say. The Director practically cannot go against the majority of the AC (as they can just amend the Process to remove the Director's veto). You'll need to convince a lot more Members to vote against it. I see no evidence of MS having done anything underhand here — this is simply a case of a lot (quite possibly a majority) of Members wanting something a lot of people disagree with.

azakai 13y ago

Thanks for the info! Are there any public links I could read more about this on? (specifically Apple's involvement and commitment)