Very Unlikely
Yeah, I don’t expect to be rich enough either.
WAIT WHAT??? If you know this then WHY do you keep saying that the W3C EME contains DRM every single piece you post about it? How many times have we had to post to correct this miss-statement by yourself? How many times have people from the W3C pointed this out as well in these threads? If you know this then why the dishonesty?
It is true, the W3C EME contains ZERO DRM. The W3C EME doesn’t contain any DRM so it can’t decode any DRM, that can only be done by the third party CDMs. They are separate from the W3C standard. The only thing EME provided is auto discovery of third party CDMs, added security around what third party CDMs can do on your system, added user privacy around what third party CDMs can report. All DRM is third party same as it always has been. This is just an improved yet identical separation to what we’ve always had with third party plugins.
nope. Flash is a plugin and has always been separate from the HTML spec, it has never been an API. Browser plugin APIs were never standardized or part of the HTML spec, if that’s what you mean it is also incorrect.
nope. DRM is still not standardized. Multiple proprietary CDMs are still required, and the DRM is still proprietary, third party, and NOT part of the browser or spec.
nope. DRM is not a part of the browser. CDMs that contain the DRM are completely separate from the browser. the only risk is if they try and crack into the CDM which is the exact same risk as if they cracked into a plugin, and completely separate from the browser. Also, what the W3C is doing is making EME an official standard. EME has already been a part of browsers for years, and during all that time has not affected security researchers one iota.
nope. as someone who works with ADA accessible content, i can tell you that it isn’t ever hard coded into the DRMed content, EVER. That is a massive misunderstanding of how it is done. The ability to attach accessible assistive information is greatly improved in EME over all previous ways of delivering this content and the W3C went to extra lengths to ensure this would not be an issue.
nope. the web is not getting standardized DRM. standardizing the discovery and interface to CDMs actually vastly improves the landscape for small new players. They can now participate whereas before they were mostly locked out. The reality is the exact opposite of this claim. Standards level the playing field, which is why we have them. That is the entire point and their main goal. The W3C has addressed and answered this misconception multiple times, i don’t know how anyone who had even the most basic understanding of tech and this subject could have any confusion about this let alone come to the exact opposite conclusion.
I’d bet all my money that you would have gotten a lot farther with the W3C if you’d listened to their replies, understood what they are doing, and understood where the impacts are and where they most certainly are not. I think they eventually gave up on reaching the obstructionists because the obstructionists weren’t even engaging in the conversation and were proposing ridiculous unprecedented amendments to their member agreement without even really bothering to understand the details of what they were doing or why.
4 Likes
yet you are able to comment right now
perhaps we should revisit both what a 'proposal/will do in future’’ is, and what a '“trollish comment about people and not ideas” is?
I hope you find someone else to have your pissing contest with soon.
See, that one is in the latter category, and I don’t need the last word on it. Got the idea?
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
