6 ms·

I think if your intention is to encrypt your video content then you really have no business being on the web in the first place. Just build a native app and do

I think if your intention is to encrypt your video content then you really have no business being on the web in the first place. Just build a native app and do whatever you want, and stop trying to bend open standards to be compatible with your business.

whatsup 13y ago
@djstein9, agree but seems like encryption is demanded by Hollywood, in time Hollywood and others (e.g., people who believe in patents) will see the stupidity of trying to block content, but this seems like a bridge to that path.
jonknee 13y ago
They're are many legit reasons to encrypt video (CCTV, video chats, etc). The web is the platform of the near future, I'd rather support this stuff natively than need multiple closed source desktop or mobile apps.
- dannyobrien 13y ago
  this isn't about encrypting it to prevent others from seeing it. It's about encrypting it so the viewer can't control it.
- __david__ 13y ago
  Encryption != DRM. All of that stuff you can do now with SSL. No one cares about video streams over SSL. It's what happens after the SSL layer that matters.
JeremyBanks 13y ago
Indeed, but you're not going far enough. I never buy from any website that uses HTTPS! The idiots running them don't appreciate the open way the web is meant to be used.
rayiner 13y ago
Or, people get to use the web however they want without rigid "open everything" extremism. Netflix is the best business model on the internet right now: you pay them $X a month, get great content, everyone gets paid. DRM makes that possible. I find it far preferable to the advertising/spyware-based monetization model, which seems to be the only other viable business model for content on the internet. The internet standards should be flexible enough to accommodate both and let consumers choose.
- greggman 13y ago
  > DRM makes that possible O'RLY? That seems like a big jump of logic there. It's just as possible that with zero DRM they'd still do fine given playing back a movie in Netflix is far nicer than searching for the movie on some ad-ridden virus infested download site and then waiting several minutes to hours for it to be available.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    So the content producers are in the clear, right up until someone comes up with a user-friendly interface for doing Netflix -> DVD rips. The point of DRM isn't to make it impossible for some people to copy the content. It's to make it inconvenient for ordinary people to copy the content. That's what the big problem with Napster was (after all, people have been copying content on Usenet since the dawn of time).
    - hugoc 13y ago
      With the current scheme house of cards was outside netflix within a week (if not the same day) So content producers are already doomed, why saddle html5 with DRM and binary blobs?
      - rayiner 13y ago
        Well Netflix has less of an incentive for DRM on their own content, since they don't have any DVD/Blu-Ray sales to protect. But to the extent that unencrypted streams make it easier for unsophisticated users to rip DVDs from streams, it's a relevant consideration for the big media companies that offer content on Netflix. In the long run, content producers will survive because the general purpose PC will be marginalized as a platform. The future is not people watching torrent-ed rips of movies on their laptops, it's people watching Netflix and similar services on their Apple TVs and iPads. At that point it doesn't matter if the content is encrypted or not, since it won't be convenient for your typical user to watch a ripped copy.
bluthru 13y ago
I love Netflix being a separate app on my mobile devices. Going through the browser seems hacky.
- jonny_eh 13y ago
  What if Apple decides to ban Netflix from the store due to a perceived slight, or because Apple decides to compete directly?
  - munificent 13y ago
    Switch to an Android phone?
  - WiseWeasel 13y ago
    Apple won't support this browser encryption extension scheme on iDevices in any case.
  - Aissen 13y ago
    Then it's a very good thing so people understand that you cannot rely on a platform where one company has all the power on what can run and what can't. Maybe it'd spring see nice anti-competitive trials. Results being irrelevant, as long as people understand that locked platforms are bad.
  - Terretta 13y ago
    Native player supports AES 128 encrypted video. Earlier iOS supports encrypted chunks, iOS 6 and up supports encryption of audio and video samples as well.
  - speleding 13y ago
    The HTML5 based DRM would require a binary blob for the browser so that's not likely to happen for the iPad/iPhone anyway.

whatsup 13y ago

@djstein9, agree but seems like encryption is demanded by Hollywood, in time Hollywood and others (e.g., people who believe in patents) will see the stupidity of trying to block content, but this seems like a bridge to that path.

jonknee 13y ago

They're are many legit reasons to encrypt video (CCTV, video chats, etc). The web is the platform of the near future, I'd rather support this stuff natively than need multiple closed source desktop or mobile apps.

dannyobrien 13y ago
this isn't about encrypting it to prevent others from seeing it. It's about encrypting it so the viewer can't control it.
__david__ 13y ago
Encryption != DRM. All of that stuff you can do now with SSL. No one cares about video streams over SSL. It's what happens after the SSL layer that matters.

JeremyBanks 13y ago

Indeed, but you're not going far enough. I never buy from any website that uses HTTPS! The idiots running them don't appreciate the open way the web is meant to be used.

rayiner 13y ago

Or, people get to use the web however they want without rigid "open everything" extremism. Netflix is the best business model on the internet right now: you pay them $X a month, get great content, everyone gets paid. DRM makes that possible. I find it far preferable to the advertising/spyware-based monetization model, which seems to be the only other viable business model for content on the internet. The internet standards should be flexible enough to accommodate both and let consumers choose.

greggman 13y ago
> DRM makes that possible O'RLY? That seems like a big jump of logic there. It's just as possible that with zero DRM they'd still do fine given playing back a movie in Netflix is far nicer than searching for the movie on some ad-ridden virus infested download site and then waiting several minutes to hours for it to be available.
- rayiner 13y ago
  So the content producers are in the clear, right up until someone comes up with a user-friendly interface for doing Netflix -> DVD rips. The point of DRM isn't to make it impossible for some people to copy the content. It's to make it inconvenient for ordinary people to copy the content. That's what the big problem with Napster was (after all, people have been copying content on Usenet since the dawn of time).
  - hugoc 13y ago
    With the current scheme house of cards was outside netflix within a week (if not the same day) So content producers are already doomed, why saddle html5 with DRM and binary blobs?
    - rayiner 13y ago
      Well Netflix has less of an incentive for DRM on their own content, since they don't have any DVD/Blu-Ray sales to protect. But to the extent that unencrypted streams make it easier for unsophisticated users to rip DVDs from streams, it's a relevant consideration for the big media companies that offer content on Netflix. In the long run, content producers will survive because the general purpose PC will be marginalized as a platform. The future is not people watching torrent-ed rips of movies on their laptops, it's people watching Netflix and similar services on their Apple TVs and iPads. At that point it doesn't matter if the content is encrypted or not, since it won't be convenient for your typical user to watch a ripped copy.

bluthru 13y ago

I love Netflix being a separate app on my mobile devices. Going through the browser seems hacky.

jonny_eh 13y ago
What if Apple decides to ban Netflix from the store due to a perceived slight, or because Apple decides to compete directly?
- munificent 13y ago
  Switch to an Android phone?
- WiseWeasel 13y ago
  Apple won't support this browser encryption extension scheme on iDevices in any case.
- Aissen 13y ago
  Then it's a very good thing so people understand that you cannot rely on a platform where one company has all the power on what can run and what can't. Maybe it'd spring see nice anti-competitive trials. Results being irrelevant, as long as people understand that locked platforms are bad.
- Terretta 13y ago
  Native player supports AES 128 encrypted video. Earlier iOS supports encrypted chunks, iOS 6 and up supports encryption of audio and video samples as well.
- speleding 13y ago
  The HTML5 based DRM would require a binary blob for the browser so that's not likely to happen for the iPad/iPhone anyway.