Cory replied here:
Apparently there’s a confidentiality risk, so we’re not likely to see any back and forth.
There are a few things at play. First is the W3C standard itself, which I’m all for. Between leaving things all proprietary with no standards, DMCA still applying, and patents galore applying but individually to a sea of crap, or having a standard to better manage that morass, the latter seems preferable. It appeared Cory was against that in earlier posts, but this post’s not really about that.
With the W3C approach there’s a separate issue re anti-circumvention rights (DMCA and other abominations), which boils down to whether we’ll still have the same very absolutely hideous anti-circumvention regime we’re in now, or whether that can be improved. This is still under discussion by the W3C, so the latest is just a request in an ongoing internal discussion of a committee. If I’m understanding this correctly, the request is one I’d like to see respected, and I think Cory’s approach is reasonable (leave most of the crap in, but prevent threats and chilling effects to protect security research). So unless I’m misunderstanding things (totally possible, I’m exhausted) I’m onboard with this one.
