4 ms·

This should really be at the top of every HTML DRM discussion: HTML DRM will not give you plugin-free or standardized playback. It will simply replace Flash/Si

by Daiz 13y ago

This should really be at the top of every HTML DRM discussion: HTML DRM will not give you plugin-free or standardized playback. It will simply replace Flash/Silverlight with multiple custom and proprietary DRM black boxes that will likely have even worse cross-platform compatibility than the existing solutions. In other words, giving in to HTML DRM will only make the situation worse. Some vendors will keep pushing for it, but at the very least we should not officially sanction what they are doing.

xyjztr 13y ago
Hey Guys, can somebody create a simple guide, FAQ or something similar for non-tech people to understand what is going on with HTML and DRM? It will help to spread the word.
talmand 13y ago
But that's the solution you would want, a plugin. That way the DRM is not part of every browser being made, it's an add-on that individuals can decline to install. Content providers want this and they will eventually get it, one way or another. If they don't get their plugin then they'll go with their deep pockets to demand laws that require all browsers to have this tech by default, without your choice. Which would lead to browsers either complying or removing the media elements.
- fafner 13y ago
  What you are saying is just ridiculous. Adding DRM to HTML5 will destroy the open web and not preserve it. First of all the DRM proposal does NOT talk about plugins. The DRM support won't be plugins. Microsoft already implements the spec in their latest IE and it doesn't work with plugins at all. They ship Microsoft's DRM technology as the one and only available DRM. Which is perfectly fine according to the spec. So do you understand? This moves DRM into the browser and not into a plugin. The plugin thing was what we had with Flash and Silverlight. Those things were plugins which are not part of the browser (well except Google decided to make Flash part of Chrome). There could be no law to force browser vendors to ship DRM. It would not be legally possible. It is silly to think so. And if it gets proposed we can fight it then. We don't have to bend over backwards now to take the DRM bullshit that vile companies like Google are proposing. If content providers want DRM then they can develop their own crappy DRM plugins and applications. But they should under no circumstances be allowed to ruin the open web.
  - talmand 13y ago
    That's the initial proposal that I was aware of so if it's changed since then I suppose I'm no longer up to date. That's fine. But it is not ridiculous thought for this to plugin based, especially if your only example is Microsoft. I suppose Apple and Google will build it into their browsers since they support this. I suppose it's ridiculous that I said it but it's the solution you support by your very own words? If the content providers make their own crappy plugins the browser needs a way to communicate to that crappy plugin, which is exactly what I've always understood this proposal to be and exactly what I stated. You don't think that an industry with the backing that the entertainment industry can't get this done? It's silly to think that? Where do you think the DMCA came from in the first place? Now, I'm only talking about DRM for video and audio elements. If you're talking about DRM across the board for every aspect of what makes a web page, then I'm with you.
greyfade 13y ago
For this reason, I would advocate abandoning the W3C (which is now socially toxic) and creating a new set of standards (I'd love to see a replacement for HTML) which we can advance freely.

by Daiz 13y ago

xyjztr 13y ago

Hey Guys, can somebody create a simple guide, FAQ or something similar for non-tech people to understand what is going on with HTML and DRM? It will help to spread the word.

talmand 13y ago

But that's the solution you would want, a plugin. That way the DRM is not part of every browser being made, it's an add-on that individuals can decline to install. Content providers want this and they will eventually get it, one way or another. If they don't get their plugin then they'll go with their deep pockets to demand laws that require all browsers to have this tech by default, without your choice. Which would lead to browsers either complying or removing the media elements.

fafner 13y ago
What you are saying is just ridiculous. Adding DRM to HTML5 will destroy the open web and not preserve it. First of all the DRM proposal does NOT talk about plugins. The DRM support won't be plugins. Microsoft already implements the spec in their latest IE and it doesn't work with plugins at all. They ship Microsoft's DRM technology as the one and only available DRM. Which is perfectly fine according to the spec. So do you understand? This moves DRM into the browser and not into a plugin. The plugin thing was what we had with Flash and Silverlight. Those things were plugins which are not part of the browser (well except Google decided to make Flash part of Chrome). There could be no law to force browser vendors to ship DRM. It would not be legally possible. It is silly to think so. And if it gets proposed we can fight it then. We don't have to bend over backwards now to take the DRM bullshit that vile companies like Google are proposing. If content providers want DRM then they can develop their own crappy DRM plugins and applications. But they should under no circumstances be allowed to ruin the open web.
- talmand 13y ago
  That's the initial proposal that I was aware of so if it's changed since then I suppose I'm no longer up to date. That's fine. But it is not ridiculous thought for this to plugin based, especially if your only example is Microsoft. I suppose Apple and Google will build it into their browsers since they support this. I suppose it's ridiculous that I said it but it's the solution you support by your very own words? If the content providers make their own crappy plugins the browser needs a way to communicate to that crappy plugin, which is exactly what I've always understood this proposal to be and exactly what I stated. You don't think that an industry with the backing that the entertainment industry can't get this done? It's silly to think that? Where do you think the DMCA came from in the first place? Now, I'm only talking about DRM for video and audio elements. If you're talking about DRM across the board for every aspect of what makes a web page, then I'm with you.

greyfade 13y ago

For this reason, I would advocate abandoning the W3C (which is now socially toxic) and creating a new set of standards (I'd love to see a replacement for HTML) which we can advance freely.