SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An anonymous coward writes:
"In March, 2013 Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web, proposed adopting DRM into the HTML standard, under the name Encrypted Media Extensions (EME). Writing in October 2013, he said that "none of us as users like certain forms of content protection such as DRM at all," but cites the argument that "if content protection of some kind has to be used for videos, it is better for it to be discussed in the open at W3C" as a reason for considering the inclusion of DRM in HTML.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has objected, saying in May of last year that the plan 'defines a new "black box" for the entertainment industry, fenced off from control by the browser and end-user'. Later, they pointed out that if DRM is OK for video content, that same principle would open the door to font, web applications, and other data being locked away from users.
public-restrictedmedia, the mailing list where the issue is being debated, has seen discussion about forking HTML and establishing a new standard outside of the W3C."
(Score: 0) by crutchy on Tuesday February 18 2014, @10:26AM
with closed source proprietary drm that's true, but it may not have to be that way... it could use something like encrypted handshaking or something (there are no doubt much more creative folk working on projects like openssl that could respond more intelligently regarding more open alternatives to these concerns).
(Score: 1) by githaron on Tuesday February 18 2014, @02:43PM
OpenSSL and other encryption projects work as open source because they are only trying to hide information from unauthorized users, not everyone but the sender. In other words, if Alice is talking to Bob, Bob and understands the conversation but Eve just hears a gambled mess.
With DRM, it is the equivalent of Alice talking into a box, giving the box to Bob. Bob has to hold the box up to his ear and push the button to hear the message. He tries to do anything unauthorized, the box will try to detect it and not play the message. The only thing that is keeping Bob from hacking the box to get it to do what he wants is the box's undocumented complexity. Being box-savvy, Bob knows that there is a key hidden in the box that if he puts it in the right place the box will do what he wants but he doesn't know where the key and lock are or what they look like. Also, the inside of the box looks like a miniature city with a few miniature nukes dropped in for good measure. If the DRM was open source, it would be like if the box had neon lines leading to where the key and lock are.
(Score: 1) by dilbert on Tuesday February 18 2014, @03:26PM
It sounds like you are saying that open source DRM would be ineffective (at least for the tech savvy). If this is the case, why would a corporation who thinks DRM is a good idea opt for an ineffective DRM?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by githaron on Tuesday February 18 2014, @05:09PM
I think they are only considering standardizing an external API so that you don't need a browser plugin per DRM platform. The propriety DRM engine of choice would probably be downloaded on the fly based an HTML tag and its properties. In essense, you would be moving from a browser plugin to a HTML plugin. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
(Score: 1) by mcgrew on Tuesday February 18 2014, @06:29PM
It sounds to me like cruchy doesn't have a clue about how computers work. As to "effective DRM", well, I think unicorns and leprechans have bags full. There is no such thing.
One minute... how long do I have to wait, guys? It still says it's been a minute and I have to wait.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 0, Troll) by crutchy on Tuesday February 18 2014, @08:44PM
sounds to me like you're deaf
it also doesn't take a computer genius to figure out that open standards are better than proprietary ones