4 ms·

> the companies that own the content would never be willing to relicense them for DRM-free streaming. Don't be so sure. People were saying exactly this several

> the companies that own the content would never be willing to relicense them for DRM-free streaming. Don't be so sure. People were saying exactly this several years ago about music. We owe it to Jobs that he realized it's stupid idea, and put an end to it. > they'd develop their own proprietary application for it instead of providing DRM-free streaming (think of how Netflix has applications for mobile OS's and even consoles, both living room consoles and handheld consoles). That seems better to me, than poisoning a whole standard just to get their way, or the highway.

wodenokoto 12y ago
That's purchased music. You don't rent out stuff and let people keep it after they stop renting. > That seems better to me, than poisoning a whole standard just to get their way, or the highway. The open web has been losing a lot of traction to a closed competitor on iOS and Android. Businesses in China are on WeChat long before they are on the web. Giving up streamed music and video completely to apps would damage the world wide web immensely by shifting more user to over to closed app systems. The web would go the way of the newsgroup.
- copsarebastards 12y ago
  > The open web has been losing a lot of traction to a closed competitor on iOS and Android. The open web lost a lot of traction to a closed competitor when it integrated EME. Your argument here is basically "companies won't use the open web, so we shouldn't have an open web".
ris 12y ago
"We owe it to Jobs that he realized it's stupid idea, and put an end to it." Don't buy into this nonsense Jobs sainthood. He was a person who went whichever way the wind was blowing.
eridius 12y ago
> Don't be so sure. People were saying exactly this several years ago about music. Music and video have always been very different markets. Among other things, music has always been available in high quality form without DRM (on CDs). And the consumer habits around music are different than those of video. And as wodenkoto said, we're talking here about streaming video, not purchased music
nsgi 12y ago
Does support for plugins poison web standards?

wodenokoto 12y ago

That's purchased music. You don't rent out stuff and let people keep it after they stop renting. > That seems better to me, than poisoning a whole standard just to get their way, or the highway. The open web has been losing a lot of traction to a closed competitor on iOS and Android. Businesses in China are on WeChat long before they are on the web. Giving up streamed music and video completely to apps would damage the world wide web immensely by shifting more user to over to closed app systems. The web would go the way of the newsgroup.

copsarebastards 12y ago
> The open web has been losing a lot of traction to a closed competitor on iOS and Android. The open web lost a lot of traction to a closed competitor when it integrated EME. Your argument here is basically "companies won't use the open web, so we shouldn't have an open web".

ris 12y ago

"We owe it to Jobs that he realized it's stupid idea, and put an end to it." Don't buy into this nonsense Jobs sainthood. He was a person who went whichever way the wind was blowing.

eridius 12y ago

> Don't be so sure. People were saying exactly this several years ago about music. Music and video have always been very different markets. Among other things, music has always been available in high quality form without DRM (on CDs). And the consumer habits around music are different than those of video. And as wodenkoto said, we're talking here about streaming video, not purchased music

nsgi 12y ago

Does support for plugins poison web standards?