6 ms·

First of all, making a bug-ticket for something that doesn't exists yet isn't going to solve anything. Second of all, why do you oppose DRM? It's been around fo

First of all, making a bug-ticket for something that doesn't exists yet isn't going to solve anything. Second of all, why do you oppose DRM? It's been around for years. Games, DVDs... Nobody really had troubles with it until the bad (not so user-friendly) implementations came around. But, with W3 standardizing the spec for it, we get a win-win: We can watch all our (streaming) video without Flash (which was previously used for DRM), and content providers can be sure that the content we're watching is payed for.

PhasmaFelis 13y ago
> why do you oppose DRM? It's been around for years. So has syphilis.
- ozh 13y ago
  coffee laugh-barfed all over keyboard, thanks :)
- ProNoob13 13y ago
  Haha, good point. But my idea behind that argument was that it won't hurt anything more than it does already.
  - RobAley 13y ago
    And it already hurts things enough.
  - shiven 13y ago
    By making it a part of a "standard", you help spreading the disease. Right now, the fact that DRM is implemented via Flash paints it as 'painful-to-use'. Once you implement it without the pain that is Flash, you have removed the barrier that is slowing the spread of DRM.
    - aaronem 13y ago
      Yes. Because heaven forfend anyone should get paid. One cannot serve both God and Mammon.
      - darklajid 13y ago
        Right. Because without DRM, people don't get paid? Your argument (here) is not better than the STD comparison: Apples, oranges, no relevant content. Isn't most of the (digital!) music market DRM free by now? How does that EVEN WORK?
      - chris_wot 13y ago
        Actually, DRM systems prevent me from seeing content I'm willing to purchase. I tried to buy the Dragon Book on Kindle some time ago, but I couldn't because I live in Australia. What was that about getting paid again?
        curiousdannii 13y ago
        Or any active content! Why would Amazon sell apps in only North America?!
        chris_wot 13y ago
        It's called geoblocking. The Australian Senate held hearings into it. Fun fact: I was looking to buy Cowboy Bebop and Star Trek: The Next Generation on iTunes. Not available, but definitely available in the U.S. App Store.
        mmagin 13y ago
        Even before streaming, the media publishing industries have been into segmenting the world into different markets for the same product: For example: books separately published in the US and the UK, DVDs and Blu-Ray disks with region codes that prevent playing on the other region players (providing they're players which obey this flag.)
  - chris_wot 13y ago
    Except it will hurt things a great deal. DRM already causes a great deal of harm, helping to propagate it into a standard to make it more widespread will cause a great deal of harm.
- aaronem 13y ago
  Well, hey, if you don't have an argument...
  - chris_wot 13y ago
    The argument that as something has been around for long time makes it acceptable was neatly deflated by a counter example of something awful that has been around for ages that is definitely not desirable. Plus, it was funny. Absurdity often highlights problems in arguments.
    - aaronem 13y ago
      Who could disagree that the cavil is the highest form of debate?
      - chris_wot 13y ago
        Try argumentum ad absurdum.
pgeorgi 13y ago
We can only watch the streaming video if the DRM provider wants to provide a plugin (following the EME spec) for your platform. That will make Firefox on Haiku less functional than Firefox on Windows. (and if the plugin were able to run everywhere, it would be trivial to work around: Just run on a system without a protected AV path)
- lucid00 13y ago
  But if content providers refuse to not use DRM anyways, won't Haiku users still lose out regardless? If you can't use HTML5 DRM with Netflix your other options are either Silver light or a native app and Haiku has neither. I'd say HTML5 DRM is the far lesser evil in this case.
  - pgeorgi 13y ago
    They're all equally evil, since they're all equally useless on non-Win/OSX platforms (which are the only ones providing a reliable protected AV path), and since they're all very similar in that they need a plugin. IMHO If anything EME is more evil than the other options in that it standardizes (and this way implicitely mandates) a special plugin interface for DRM purposes only. Users still have to install plugins, and now browser vendors get the blame if things fail (since the user will be hard pressed to identify plugin issues in "that website doesn't work"). I fail to see where it's the W3C's, browser vendors' or web users' responsibility to make the DRM vendors' lifes easier. And that's all EME does.
    - ProNoob13 13y ago
      Good point. On the other hand, DRM will come to HTML5 anyway, whatever we try. So, I think it's better to give it a spec, and have one, unified and well-known way for the DRM to operate, instead of 20 different implementations.
      - pgeorgi 13y ago
        Specs are supposed to make things simple. I'd rather have DRM vendors struggle with the problem individually at every step (and that includes browser integration) For one, because they'll fail in the most hilarious ways (and each one separately), so there will be backdoors, or at least a good laugh or two. But also because it drives up the cost of DRM, hopefully making it less attractive. Should DRM manage to get hold even despite such problems and Amazon notices that they can reduce the price of their media package by 1$/month if they drop the DRM, the resulting massacre will be great to watch.
surrealize 13y ago
I had a problem with it years ago when I couldn't watch DVDs on linux (until the DRM was cracked). More recently I had a problem with it when flash DRM broke on linux (if you didn't have HAL installed and tried to use amazon's video for certain DRMed shows). And in the future I expect more pain with proprietary, closed-source, non-interoperable (and, almost certainly, non-linux-supporting) CDMs, which are where the meat of the DRM will be implemented under the W3C EME proposal but which themselves are not being proposed for standardization.
ethanhunt_ 13y ago
This is fundamentally opposed to personal computing. The goal of this DRM plugin is to stop your computer from doing what you tell it to do, in favor of doing what a corporation tells it to do. If this is given to them in the W3C spec, they will demand more in the future, until a PC is nothing more than a cable box that only allows the user to do what has been explicitly outlined as acceptable.
- alkonaut 13y ago
  Well I'm not really trying to do personal computing, I'm just watching TV on my screen really. I want to watch a game that there is no chance in hell that the rightsholders will will release on the internet without DRM. They'd rather just not air it and opt for just using the normal outlets like cable/satellite if that was the case. This would mean I couldn't see it at all. You could argue that letting DRM into html is evil, and I agree, but I don't really care about evil if I can get rid of the current crap implementation which is flash on one site and silverlight on the next.
gizzlon 13y ago
DRM has shackled the content and the industry for years. Who know where we would be without it? Who knows what cool, innovative solutions never saw the light? Who knows all they ways they could have made money had they taken another attitude..

PhasmaFelis 13y ago

> why do you oppose DRM? It's been around for years. So has syphilis.

ozh 13y ago
coffee laugh-barfed all over keyboard, thanks :)
ProNoob13 13y ago
Haha, good point. But my idea behind that argument was that it won't hurt anything more than it does already.
- RobAley 13y ago
  And it already hurts things enough.
- shiven 13y ago
  By making it a part of a "standard", you help spreading the disease. Right now, the fact that DRM is implemented via Flash paints it as 'painful-to-use'. Once you implement it without the pain that is Flash, you have removed the barrier that is slowing the spread of DRM.
  - aaronem 13y ago
    Yes. Because heaven forfend anyone should get paid. One cannot serve both God and Mammon.
    - darklajid 13y ago
      Right. Because without DRM, people don't get paid? Your argument (here) is not better than the STD comparison: Apples, oranges, no relevant content. Isn't most of the (digital!) music market DRM free by now? How does that EVEN WORK?
    - chris_wot 13y ago
      Actually, DRM systems prevent me from seeing content I'm willing to purchase. I tried to buy the Dragon Book on Kindle some time ago, but I couldn't because I live in Australia. What was that about getting paid again?
      - curiousdannii 13y ago
        Or any active content! Why would Amazon sell apps in only North America?!
        chris_wot 13y ago
        It's called geoblocking. The Australian Senate held hearings into it. Fun fact: I was looking to buy Cowboy Bebop and Star Trek: The Next Generation on iTunes. Not available, but definitely available in the U.S. App Store.
        mmagin 13y ago
        Even before streaming, the media publishing industries have been into segmenting the world into different markets for the same product: For example: books separately published in the US and the UK, DVDs and Blu-Ray disks with region codes that prevent playing on the other region players (providing they're players which obey this flag.)
- chris_wot 13y ago
  Except it will hurt things a great deal. DRM already causes a great deal of harm, helping to propagate it into a standard to make it more widespread will cause a great deal of harm.
aaronem 13y ago
Well, hey, if you don't have an argument...
- chris_wot 13y ago
  The argument that as something has been around for long time makes it acceptable was neatly deflated by a counter example of something awful that has been around for ages that is definitely not desirable. Plus, it was funny. Absurdity often highlights problems in arguments.
  - aaronem 13y ago
    Who could disagree that the cavil is the highest form of debate?
    - chris_wot 13y ago
      Try argumentum ad absurdum.

pgeorgi 13y ago

We can only watch the streaming video if the DRM provider wants to provide a plugin (following the EME spec) for your platform. That will make Firefox on Haiku less functional than Firefox on Windows. (and if the plugin were able to run everywhere, it would be trivial to work around: Just run on a system without a protected AV path)

lucid00 13y ago
But if content providers refuse to not use DRM anyways, won't Haiku users still lose out regardless? If you can't use HTML5 DRM with Netflix your other options are either Silver light or a native app and Haiku has neither. I'd say HTML5 DRM is the far lesser evil in this case.
- pgeorgi 13y ago
  They're all equally evil, since they're all equally useless on non-Win/OSX platforms (which are the only ones providing a reliable protected AV path), and since they're all very similar in that they need a plugin. IMHO If anything EME is more evil than the other options in that it standardizes (and this way implicitely mandates) a special plugin interface for DRM purposes only. Users still have to install plugins, and now browser vendors get the blame if things fail (since the user will be hard pressed to identify plugin issues in "that website doesn't work"). I fail to see where it's the W3C's, browser vendors' or web users' responsibility to make the DRM vendors' lifes easier. And that's all EME does.
  - ProNoob13 13y ago
    Good point. On the other hand, DRM will come to HTML5 anyway, whatever we try. So, I think it's better to give it a spec, and have one, unified and well-known way for the DRM to operate, instead of 20 different implementations.
    - pgeorgi 13y ago
      Specs are supposed to make things simple. I'd rather have DRM vendors struggle with the problem individually at every step (and that includes browser integration) For one, because they'll fail in the most hilarious ways (and each one separately), so there will be backdoors, or at least a good laugh or two. But also because it drives up the cost of DRM, hopefully making it less attractive. Should DRM manage to get hold even despite such problems and Amazon notices that they can reduce the price of their media package by 1$/month if they drop the DRM, the resulting massacre will be great to watch.

surrealize 13y ago

I had a problem with it years ago when I couldn't watch DVDs on linux (until the DRM was cracked). More recently I had a problem with it when flash DRM broke on linux (if you didn't have HAL installed and tried to use amazon's video for certain DRMed shows). And in the future I expect more pain with proprietary, closed-source, non-interoperable (and, almost certainly, non-linux-supporting) CDMs, which are where the meat of the DRM will be implemented under the W3C EME proposal but which themselves are not being proposed for standardization.

ethanhunt_ 13y ago

This is fundamentally opposed to personal computing. The goal of this DRM plugin is to stop your computer from doing what you tell it to do, in favor of doing what a corporation tells it to do. If this is given to them in the W3C spec, they will demand more in the future, until a PC is nothing more than a cable box that only allows the user to do what has been explicitly outlined as acceptable.

alkonaut 13y ago
Well I'm not really trying to do personal computing, I'm just watching TV on my screen really. I want to watch a game that there is no chance in hell that the rightsholders will will release on the internet without DRM. They'd rather just not air it and opt for just using the normal outlets like cable/satellite if that was the case. This would mean I couldn't see it at all. You could argue that letting DRM into html is evil, and I agree, but I don't really care about evil if I can get rid of the current crap implementation which is flash on one site and silverlight on the next.

gizzlon 13y ago

DRM has shackled the content and the industry for years. Who know where we would be without it? Who knows what cool, innovative solutions never saw the light? Who knows all they ways they could have made money had they taken another attitude..