Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

W3C Considers DRM in HTML Standard

posted by mattie_p on Tuesday February 18 2014, @02:30AM   Printer-friendly
from the if-you-can't-beat-'em dept.

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."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
W3C Considers DRM in HTML Standard | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 103 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1) by dilbert on Tuesday February 18 2014, @03:26PM

    by dilbert (444) on Tuesday February 18 2014, @03:26PM (#1650)

    If the DRM was open source, it would be like if the box had neon lines leading to where the key and lock are.

    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

    by githaron (581) on Tuesday February 18 2014, @05:09PM (#1710)

    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

    by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Tuesday February 18 2014, @06:29PM (#1781) Homepage Journal

    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

      by crutchy (179) on Tuesday February 18 2014, @08:44PM (#1895) Homepage Journal

      It sounds to me like cruchy doesn't have a clue about how computers work

      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