Re:W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns
by nindalf on Tuesday September 19, 2017 @09:16AM
(#15284303)
> It makes it more expensive to use DRM.
This misses my point. No one cares about DRM - not the streaming service, or the browser vendors or most importantly, the users. Consumers have voted with their wallets on this - they'd rather watch Netflix than torrent.
Maybe I'm being callous, but I don't care much about "the ethical problem of pushing DRM". Nor do I care much about MIPS and SPARC. How many end users are running MIPS and SPARC anyway? And I especially don't care about it being difficult to use DRM. All of this sounds like ideological purity, which in my opinion, is a waste of time.
Re:W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns
by icebraining on Tuesday September 19, 2017 @11:00AM
(#15285228)
You asked for benefits, I listed them. I don't care that you don't care :)
Re:W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns
by nindalf on Wednesday September 20, 2017 @02:07AM
(#15291190)
That's fair. I'm the first to admit that my personal opinion is irrelevant. I made the mistake of saying "I don't care", hoping you'd understand I meant "the vast majority doesn't care".
Could you list some benefits that would be appreciated by more than 0.1% of society?
1. It avoids the ethical problem of pushing DRM onto people who just want a browser. (Firefox does offer a EME-free version, but you have to look for it, when you might not even know what EME is). If a CDM module installed automatically by Firefox becomes an exploit vector, they are ethically responsible, in my opinion.
2. It preserves browser competition. CDM modules only work in approved browsers, so people building new browsers are at a disadvantage. They may be able to use Firefox's sandboxed component, but it's not clear yet.
3. It avoids having second-class OSs for those browsers. For example, Firefox runs on MIPS and SPARC, but the CDM modules don't.
4. It makes it more expensive to use DRM.