4 ms·

Reconciling Mozilla’s Mission and W3C EME

43 points by cleverjake 12y ago

agapos 12y ago
Guess that makes bug #923590 a RESOLVED WONTFIX. Edit: right on the spot...
- manveru 12y ago
  To save others the search: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=923590 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=923590
mccr8 12y ago
This is a separately published version of the article being discussed in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7744771 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7744771
davexunit 12y ago
>We have come to the point where Mozilla not implementing the W3C EME specification means that Firefox users have to switch to other browsers to watch content restricted by DRM. Then so be it. If Mozilla's mission is to improve and defend the "open" web, then EME should never have been considered for implementation. We shouldn't sacrifice our goals for the sake of market share.
- batmansbelt 12y ago
  I've been using mozilla since forever. I believe in The Mission. If I went to view media and a message told me it wouldn't work because of DRM, I wouldn't switch browsers to view it. "The medium is the message," and the message you get from DRMed media is rude and uninviting.
  - technomancy 12y ago
    > If I went to view media and a message told me it wouldn't work because of DRM Not that I'm defending their actions, but I think it's worth pointing out that out of the box, this is exactly what will happen when you try to view DRM'd content. The Adobe decoding crap is a separate download that won't ship with Firefox; Mozilla is neither implementing nor distributing closed-source code. The hilarious thing is that they are trying to avoid having the decrypted content "fall into the wrong hands" whatever that means, but it still has to pass through user-modifiable code before the user sees it anyway; they even show it in this diagram: https://andreasgal.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/cdm-graphic_620x920.png https://andreasgal.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/cdm-graphic_6... It almost makes you wonder whether they acknowledge that what they're doing is futile and absurd, and they just hope those in charge of licensing won't notice.
  - cpeterso 12y ago
    You might not mind missing out of Netflix streaming visors, but 99% of Netflix users will just switch to Chrome or IE.
- shkkmo 12y ago
  How can Mozilla accomplish their goals if they don't have market share? As I understand it, Mozilla is not creating or distributing software that supports DRM. Mozilla is creating and distrubuting a tool that allows their uses to choose to install and use DRM in a way that is more secure and private than alternative implementations. Continuing to single-mindedly strive to accomplish goals that are no longer reasonably achievable is not admirable. This doesn't mean that Mozilla is no longer fighting against DRM, but Mozilla is now ALSO fighting to make the security and privacy of DRM more open.
  - erikpukinskis 12y ago
    Which goals are you referring to? There's nothing in their manifesto about market share: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/ They talk about providing a platform for building stuff in an open way. You don't need market share to provide a platform.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- shkkmo 12y ago
  Since DRM won't work without installing an Adobe plugin, why can't you just use Mozilla and never install the plugin?
jevinskie 12y ago
> There is also a silver lining to the W3C EME specification becoming ubiquitous. With direct support for DRM we are eliminating a major use case of plugins on the Web, and in the near future this should allow us to retire plugins altogether. The Web has evolved to a comprehensive and performant technology platform and no longer depends on native code extensions through plugins. That sure is some spin there after they just finished describing the plugin architecture of the binary-blob CDM.
- Shebanator 12y ago
  I also thought it was an odd thing to say, since the CDM itself is a plugin.
Paul_S 12y ago
Very good short term decision (possibly inevitable) but rather risky long term. They might end up digging their own grave. They were the only (slim) hope of scuppering this platform. Now they are at the mercy of whoever controls it and no contract will save them once the platform is the only game in town and they are expendable. ...I'll get my tinfoil hat.

43 points by cleverjake 12y ago

agapos 12y ago

Guess that makes bug #923590 a RESOLVED WONTFIX. Edit: right on the spot...

manveru 12y ago
To save others the search: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=923590 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=923590

mccr8 12y ago

This is a separately published version of the article being discussed in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7744771 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7744771

davexunit 12y ago

>We have come to the point where Mozilla not implementing the W3C EME specification means that Firefox users have to switch to other browsers to watch content restricted by DRM. Then so be it. If Mozilla's mission is to improve and defend the "open" web, then EME should never have been considered for implementation. We shouldn't sacrifice our goals for the sake of market share.

batmansbelt 12y ago
I've been using mozilla since forever. I believe in The Mission. If I went to view media and a message told me it wouldn't work because of DRM, I wouldn't switch browsers to view it. "The medium is the message," and the message you get from DRMed media is rude and uninviting.
- technomancy 12y ago
  > If I went to view media and a message told me it wouldn't work because of DRM Not that I'm defending their actions, but I think it's worth pointing out that out of the box, this is exactly what will happen when you try to view DRM'd content. The Adobe decoding crap is a separate download that won't ship with Firefox; Mozilla is neither implementing nor distributing closed-source code. The hilarious thing is that they are trying to avoid having the decrypted content "fall into the wrong hands" whatever that means, but it still has to pass through user-modifiable code before the user sees it anyway; they even show it in this diagram: https://andreasgal.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/cdm-graphic_620x920.png https://andreasgal.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/cdm-graphic_6... It almost makes you wonder whether they acknowledge that what they're doing is futile and absurd, and they just hope those in charge of licensing won't notice.
- cpeterso 12y ago
  You might not mind missing out of Netflix streaming visors, but 99% of Netflix users will just switch to Chrome or IE.
shkkmo 12y ago
How can Mozilla accomplish their goals if they don't have market share? As I understand it, Mozilla is not creating or distributing software that supports DRM. Mozilla is creating and distrubuting a tool that allows their uses to choose to install and use DRM in a way that is more secure and private than alternative implementations. Continuing to single-mindedly strive to accomplish goals that are no longer reasonably achievable is not admirable. This doesn't mean that Mozilla is no longer fighting against DRM, but Mozilla is now ALSO fighting to make the security and privacy of DRM more open.
- erikpukinskis 12y ago
  Which goals are you referring to? There's nothing in their manifesto about market share: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/ They talk about providing a platform for building stuff in an open way. You don't need market share to provide a platform.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

shkkmo 12y ago
Since DRM won't work without installing an Adobe plugin, why can't you just use Mozilla and never install the plugin?

jevinskie 12y ago

> There is also a silver lining to the W3C EME specification becoming ubiquitous. With direct support for DRM we are eliminating a major use case of plugins on the Web, and in the near future this should allow us to retire plugins altogether. The Web has evolved to a comprehensive and performant technology platform and no longer depends on native code extensions through plugins. That sure is some spin there after they just finished describing the plugin architecture of the binary-blob CDM.

Shebanator 12y ago
I also thought it was an odd thing to say, since the CDM itself is a plugin.

Paul_S 12y ago

Very good short term decision (possibly inevitable) but rather risky long term. They might end up digging their own grave. They were the only (slim) hope of scuppering this platform. Now they are at the mercy of whoever controls it and no contract will save them once the platform is the only game in town and they are expendable. ...I'll get my tinfoil hat.