Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have two weeks to appeal

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by agentdrtran on Friday July 07, 2017 @11:17PM (#14723877)

> i want DRM to be a difficult and cumbersome stack to use. More specifically, i want the end user to go through hassle to obtain the proprietary plugins, so that the end user feels the hurt from DRM.

so you want to make stuff like netflix as much of a PITA as possible? why? why be this vindictive?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by izacus on Friday July 07, 2017 @11:27PM (#14723909)

No, we want to make Netflix pushing DRM as PITA as possible. Video streaming without DRM works just fine.

(And please don't come back with "Netflix has no choice BS", they're happily doing all the nasty DRM crap for their own production as well.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by hopeaboutthis on Saturday July 08, 2017 @01:19AM (#14724199)

i agree with netflix, straight up. they invest quite a lot in infrastructure and production to provide these videos, and making it simpler for average folks to get their protected videos in a profitable manner is a win for everyone except idealistic pirates. i don't get why i'd care about the needs of the people who want to ruin a fertile ecosystem for some abstract principle.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by CuriousSkeptic on Saturday July 08, 2017 @06:33AM (#14724914)

With DRM+streaming as default the world will be relying on rights holders and streaming services to preserve an archive of cultural works. A situation that invariably will result in loss of a lot of those works once they stop caring or go out of business.

Consider f.ex. the situation with the missing Dr. Who episodes. BBC is still hopping it can recover copies from the public. Had they'd been aired with DRM at the time they would be lost without hope, now at least there is hope.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by josteink on Saturday July 08, 2017 @02:10AM (#14724346)

> you want to make stuff like netflix as much of a PITA as possible?

Not op but yes, using DRM in a browser should be hard.

Netflix should just make a native app, like everyone else who needs drm do.

This clearly scopes what is open and webby and what is closed and DRMy.

Nobody has issues installing Spotify to stream music. What makes Netflix special?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by hsivonen on Saturday July 08, 2017 @12:14PM (#14725904)

> Netflix should just make a native app, like everyone else who needs drm do.

The native app security model on desktop (i.e. can do anything) doesn't make the notion of letting streaming services run native apps look so great.

Do you really prefer giving streaming services (not just Netflix but others too) fully-privileged code execution instead of having an operating system or browser vendors exercise some oversight?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by icebraining on Saturday July 08, 2017 @04:52AM (#14724689)

Nobody has issues installing Spotify to stream music.

Spotify does have a web player using web DRM (Widevine) and a lot of people use it exclusively.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tim Berners-Lee approves Web DRM, but W3C members have tw... by librarian42 on Saturday July 08, 2017 @08:00AM (#14725107)

Netflix chooses to use DRM. That's completely on them.

[ Parent | on HN ]