NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] [IP] DRM in HTML5 - something brewing in W3C
----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> -----
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:14:47 -0400
From: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: [IP] DRM in HTML5 - something brewing in W3C
Reply-To: dave@farber.net
To: ip <ip@listbox.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Christian de Larrinaga*
Date: Sunday, April 21, 2013
Subject: [Chapter-delegates] DRM in HTML5 - something brewing in W3C
To: "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" <apisan@unam.mx>
Cc: "chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org" <chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org>
W3C have noted the controversy and have responded at
http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/03/drm_and_the_open_web.html
There's been lots of buzz about the proposed addition of "Encrypted Media
Extensions<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html>"
to HTML5, and the related extension of the HTML5 Working Group
charter<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/charter/2012/>
to include support for "protected content." In the wake of the
announcement<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Feb/0122.html>
that these are "in-scope" for HTML, we wanted to explain what this means
-- and doesn't mean -- for W3C and the Open Web.
W3C is not developing a new DRM system, nor are we embracing DRM as an
organization. We do acknowledge that some in industry demand content
protection and that DRM use is currently widespread. We also know that
others find DRM anathema to the Open Web. In building the Open Web, we do
not equate "open" content with material that must be available free of
charge.
Given these competing demands, W3C is convening people with a range of
viewpoints to investigate how to keep the Web maximally open (for instance,
consistent with the W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy) and to help us
determine how content protection can interact with the Open Web. We invite
those who are interested in the technical discussions about Encrypted Media
Extensions to monitor or participate in the HTML Working
Group<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#who>,
which is open to all. That specification will undergo the same technical
review and interoperability testing as other W3C specifications on the
Recommendation Track.
To help crystallize the technical discussions around Encrypted Media and
DRM, we're opening a new Restricted Media Community Group specifically to
consider the paired challenges of openness and access-restriction. As a
growing number of industries with current requirements related to content
protection are embracing the Open Web Platform, we seek a solution that
considers both today's business and technical realities and the long-term
health of the Web. The Web and TV Interest Group<http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/>
is another place where these conversations happen, in task
forces<http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page#Task_Forces>
producing requirements documents. The CG does not intend to develop
specifications, although it might approach requirements documents from a
user perspective.
Join us at restrictedmedia <http://www.w3.org/community/restrictedmedia> to
continue the discussion.
Observationally this could be interpreted as an attempt to square a circle.
But that view is hopefully unfair.
Christian
Christian de Larrinaga <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'cdel@firsthand.net');>
19 April 2013 09:33
This is worth unpicking.
I am only involved as a user in this area (developing media services and
sites). I am not involved in W3C activities around this myself. I am not
planning to implement browser based DRM.
As I understand the background at this time and hoping somebody will
speak up who is involved in the w3C working groups who can guide on the
implications of how this is being implemented.
HTML5 is adding some media features such as audio and video tags. The
idea is as you design your webpage you can insert these tags around a
media object and this will provide a player for the user to directly
access the content (video or audio) without calling in a third party
plug in such as Flash or Silverlight in the browser. This simplifies as
it standardises access to digital media in web browsers.
The DRM issue being complained about is separate from the codecs that
process the media (play). The choice of a codec or codecs has been
highly contentious in terms of patent coverage so that playing content
can be open (free to all). Google has assured use of a codec and there
has been much negotiations going on behind the scenes to make this
possible. This covers Rights to the 'means' to play content
But for managing the rights to the content itself some content providers
(mainly distributors like NetFlix) are saying they will not use HTML5
media tags for their content unless they can impose DRM on their content.
W3C is discussing this in the context of supporting DRM in the browser.
The implications of this would appear to impose DRM on content that is
presented via the browser directly.
I would prefer myself, that any DRM functionality that content
distributors wish to implement is managed via a plug in architecture
rather than intrinsic to the browser functionality. Otherwise free
content which is the vast bulk of content as I understand it today
should not be defaulted through a DRM filter intended for some
(significant) commercial corner cases.
This would add some extra complexity and cost for those businesses that
wish to impose DRM on content but presumably the cost is worth the
effort. By implementing in the browser it would seem the cost is being
passed on to the browser (in added complexity and processing). I'm not
clear why the cost of doing business for a few should be passed on to
users and content providers not interested in DRM. That is the many.
best
Christian
Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'apisan@unam.mx');>
18 April 2013 21:02
Hi,
I have received a call to join a protest in
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/no-drm-in-html5
This would be against some goings-on in the W3C that the authors of the
protest calls "Hollyweb".
Can anyone more knowledgeable help understand what this is and whether we
should try to intervene?
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
_______________________________________________
As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
----- End forwarded message -----
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org/pfir-info
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com/privacy-info
- Data Wisdom Explorers League: http://www.dwel.org
- Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://vortex.com/g+lauren / Twitter: http://vortex.com/t-lauren
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
_______________________________________________ nnsquad mailing list http://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad