Adding DRM to HTML5

TheWindBringeth · Mar 12, 2013

I came across another article about this today. I can't recall, or find, discussion of it here. Thought I'd post a few links.

http://codeflow.org/entries/2013/feb/16/no-to-drm-in-html-and-broken-audio-video/

The W3C is taking input from Netflix, Microsoft, Google, Apple and BBC to add DRM to HTML.
Click to expand...

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-02/13/drm-for-the-web

The W3C's HTML Working Group recently decided that a proposal to add DRM to HTML media elements -- formally known as the Encrypted Media Extensions proposal -- is indeed within its purview and the group will be working on it.
Click to expand...

http://boingboing.net/2013/03/10/ti..._campaign=Feed: boingboing/iBag (Boing Boing)

During a post-talk Q&A, he (Tim Berners-Lee) defended proposals to add support for "digital rights management" usage restrictions to HTML5 as necessary to get more content on the open Web: "If we don't put the hooks for the use of DRM in… people will just go back to using Flash."
Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2013/mar/12/tim-berners-lee-drm-cory-doctorow

Adding DRM to the HTML standard will have far-reaching effects, incompatible with the W3C's most important policies
Click to expand...

FWIW, I don't think it is just the music/video industry pushing DRM Blocking ads/tracking = DRM circumvention = crime would be a nice equation from their POV.

safeguy · Mar 13, 2013

Pardon me for I've not really read much on the subject but more crap to come? I hope not so...

P.S. In wait of reading smarter comments than mine.

TheWindBringeth · Mar 21, 2013

Defend the Open Web: Keep DRM Out of W3C Standards
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/defend-open-web-keep-drm-out-w3c-standards

The EME proposal suffers from many of these problems because it explicitly abdicates responsibilty on compatibility issues and let web sites require specific proprietary third-party software or even special hardware and particular operating systems (all referred to under the generic name "content decryption modules", or CDMs, and none of them specified by EME). EME's authors keep saying that what CDMs are, and do, and where they come from is totally outside of the scope of EME, and that EME itself can't be thought of as DRM because not all CDMs are DRM systems. Yet if the client can't prove it's running the particular proprietary thing the site demands, and hence doesn't have an approved CDM, it can't render the site's content. Perversely, this is exactly the reverse of the reason that the World Wide Web Consortium exists in the first place. W3C is there to create comprehensible, publicly-implementable standards that will guarantee interoperability, not to facilitate an explosion of new mutually-incompatible software and of sites and services that can only be accessed by particular devices or applications. But EME is a proposal to bring exactly that dysfunctional dynamic into HTML5, even risking a return to the "bad old days, before the Web" of deliberately limited interoperability.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Adding DRM to HTML5

TheWindBringeth Registered Member

safeguy Registered Member

TheWindBringeth Registered Member

Log in or Sign up

Adding DRM to HTML5

TheWindBringeth Registered Member

safeguy Registered Member

TheWindBringeth Registered Member

Useful Searches