Web DRM standard moves to next phase of development, FSF's Defective by Design campaign to continue
106 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Despite dedicated resistance by tens of thousands of Web users and civil society groups, Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee allowed Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) to move to the next phase of development within the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) yesterday.
EME ([URL="https://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted-media"]full text[/URL]) is a proposed technological standard for Web-based [B][URL="https://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restrictions_management"]Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)[/URL][/B], digital handcuffs that video-streaming services use to micromanage users' access to legitimately obtained media. As Web users asserted while [URL="https://www.defectivebydesign.org/from-the-web-to-the-streets-protesting-drm"]protesting the W3C's meeting this March[/URL], DRM is coercive, disempowering and insulting to users. It also causes broad collateral damage to the health of our digital society. DRM's dark history — from the [URL="https://www.defectivebydesign.org/ten-years-after-sony-rootkit"]Sony rootkit malware[/URL] to [URL="https://www.defectivebydesign.org/end-DMCA-anti-circumvention-provisions"]draconian anti-circumvention laws[/URL] — demonstrates that integrating it into Web standards would be nothing but bad for the Web's users. It is predicted to stymie security research, curtail privacy, freedom, and accessibility, and set back the interoperability that is necessary for innovation on the Web. There is considerable dissent about EME within the W3C — staff member Harry Halpin has [URL="https://www.defectivebydesign.org/blog/w3c_staff_member_pledges_resignation_if_drm_added_web_standards"]pledged to resign[/URL] if it becomes an official standard.
[/QUOTE]
[URL]http://www.fsf.org/news/web-drm-standard-moves-to-next-phase-of-development-fsfs-defective-by-design-campaign-to-continue-opposition[/URL]
the FSF as a news source is so horribly biased.
Free software foundation, how biased can a source get. Obviously they wouldn't want DRM anywhere.
[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50732201]Free software foundation, how biased can a source get. Obviously they wouldn't want DRM anywhere.[/QUOTE]
I don't see how the defective by design campaign is "biased" it's just against something that's obviously bad for everyone.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50732244]I don't see how the defective by design campaign is "biased" it's just against something that's obviously bad for everyone.[/QUOTE]
I don't get it isn't this just basic DRM for copyright content which basically means for Netflix, Crunchyroll and other intellectual property sites.
I mean HTML5s' been criticized for not having proper DRM for a while, so this is a good step in that direction.
[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50732258]I don't get it isn't this just basic DRM for copyright content which basically means for Netflix, Crunchyroll and other intellectual property sites.
I mean HTML5s' been criticized for not having proper DRM for a while, so this is a good step in that direction.[/QUOTE]
DRM is never a good step.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50732264]DRM is never a good step.[/QUOTE]
Mhmn, its' a good step if the video content providers stop using Flash due to thinking anything else is insecure.
[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50732266]Mhmn, its' a good step if the video content providers stop using Flash due to thinking anything else is insecure.[/QUOTE]
Sure, it's a good step for them, but not for their users.
[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50732266]Mhmn, its' a good step if the video content providers stop using Flash due to thinking anything else is insecure.[/QUOTE]
When the core problem is region locked or region delayed content, or the DRM inevitably fucking up in one way or another, then it is.
Buuut they'd rather rest on the laurels after petitioning for DRM, instead of stepping up and actually offering a good and worldwide identical service so it isn't worth the hassle to :yarr:
it really doesnt matter
wasn't there some company who spent years developing some DRM for games just for it to be cracked in a manner of days?
the same thing will happen here anyways. its just inconvenient.
[QUOTE=da space core;50732948]it really doesnt matter
wasn't there some company who spent years developing some DRM for games just for it to be cracked in a manner of days?
the same thing will happen here anyways. its just inconvenient.[/QUOTE]
An inconvenience designed to attack your basic freedoms, and in some places it's illegal to break DRM.
what's so inherently evil about drm?
would you be against it if it didn't impede the service given to a customer in any way?
you've been giving these [I]of COURSE it's bad![/I] responses but you're not really explaining to anyone why they should agree with you
[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50732266]Mhmn, its' a good step if the video content providers stop using Flash due to thinking anything else is insecure.[/QUOTE]
It's a shitty gimmick to sell to organizations under the guise it will protect their content. While it might be cracked anyways it means there's money to be made.
It's like those expensive anti-aging creams that use hard to understand science so say they work but the science itself is really dodgy and you run into shit like the cream is neutralized by natural skin oils and the company cannot be liable for it not working because it's something supposedly out of their control.
Same applies for most herbal supplements. All you need is someone stupid enough to think it works to invest.
[QUOTE=bitches;50733435]what's so inherently evil about drm?
would you be against it if it didn't impede the service given to a customer in any way?
you've been giving these [I]of COURSE it's bad![/I] responses but you're not really explaining to anyone why they should agree with you[/QUOTE]
DRM restricts what you can do with your file, it's not about distribution, it's about post-distribution access.
The idea that DRM is benefitial for rental is not correct, as DRM does not prevent copyright infringement, it just prevents you from accessing your content however you want.
Sure, DRM can be broken, but when you are using a device that is locked to the core like iOS devices, that becomes much more hard.
[QUOTE=bitches;50733435]what's so inherently evil about drm?
would you be against it if it didn't impede the service given to a customer in any way?
you've been giving these [I]of COURSE it's bad![/I] responses but you're not really explaining to anyone why they should agree with you[/QUOTE]
The idea of restricting access to software that you have on your own computer seems convenient for publishers. Postpones piracy, so more profit for us, right? However, it does not postpone it for long. Having DRM as a defined standard sounds even less useful. DRM is only efficient at giving incentive for pirates to buy the real product when they can't get it to work for the first couple of weeks. It never succeeds to eliminate piracy, just make it more challenging.
It is ineffective in the long run, and a lot of times is an annoyance to legitimate users. Also there is the moral debate of whether you should have total control of software you have on your own devices or whether companies should be able to legally threaten you if you, for example, try to reverse engineer a piece of software.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50733529]DRM restricts what you can do with your file, it's not about distribution, it's about post-distribution access.
The idea that DRM is benefitial for rental is not correct, as DRM does not prevent copyright infringement, it just prevents you from accessing your content however you want.
Sure, DRM can be broken, but when you are using a device that is locked to the core like iOS devices, that becomes much more hard.[/QUOTE]
a service like Netflix that digitally distributes its content advertises itself and structures itself as a rental service; to continue watching you're supposed to continue paying, even for future watching
it isn't intended for ripping the files to keep watching after cancelling your account
the fact that the data was streamed to you doesn't mean you have the right to keep it any more than you're allowed to film a theatre movie with your phone because the light from the screen belongs to you
these are a modernly convenient form of pay-per-view; you agree to these terms via a TOS before having access to the content in the first place
so regardless of how ineffective DRM is: why is it a [I]bad[/I] thing?
[QUOTE=bitches;50733578]a service like Netflix that digitally distributes its content advertises itself and structures itself as a rental service; to continue watching you're supposed to continue paying, even for future watching
it isn't intended for ripping the files to keep watching after cancelling your account
the fact that the data was streamed to you doesn't mean you have the right to keep it any more than you're allowed to film a theatre movie with your phone because the light from the screen belongs to you
these are a modernly convenient form of pay-per-view; you agree to these terms via a TOS before having access to the content in the first place
so regardless of how ineffective DRM is: why is it a [I]bad[/I] thing?[/QUOTE]
Because DRM restricts your freedoms while being extremely ineffective.
Don't I have the right to play movies I bought online (not necessarily netflix) in any device I wish? that's impossible with DRM.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50733615]Because DRM restricts your freedoms while being extremely ineffective.[/QUOTE]
that isn't an answer
i specifically said aside from being ineffective (which isn't a reason that DRM itself should be considered bad or immoral)
i also explicitly explained how it is not your right or freedom to own something you streamed from netflix
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=eirexe;50733615]Don't I have the right to play movies I bought online (not necessarily netflix) in any device I wish? that's impossible with DRM.[/QUOTE]
i specifically asked about netflix, not inconvenient device-limiting options
i asked you specifically about digital convenience
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
we can debate how specific implementations of DRM are bad all day; but i'm only asking about what makes it INHERENTLY immoral
Why not fight piracy with something that's known to work, rather than bullshit DRM that is based on arbitrary copyright law that hardly works? Such as providing a really good service. Netflix and steam have harmed piracy a lot, but even still every time I subscribe to netflix I unsub within a month because there's nothing to watch. And I'm a privileged American when it comes to that!
[QUOTE=bitches;50733636]that isn't an answer
i specifically said aside from being ineffective (which isn't a reason that DRM itself should be considered bad or immoral)
i also explicitly explained how it is not your right or freedom to own something you streamed from netflix
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
i specifically asked about netflix, not inconvenient device-limiting options
i asked you specifically about digital convenience
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
we can debate how specific implementations of DRM are bad all day; but i'm only asking about what makes it INHERENTLY immoral[/QUOTE]
I never said it was my right or freedom to own something I streamed from netflix, I said that it's my right to be able to play the stuff I rented in my devices, which is impossible without DRM, DRM forces me to run a piece of software I don't know what it's doing in my machine to play the content I paid for, how could such a thing not be immoral?, It's not about owning the content, it's about owning my device.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;50733705]Why not fight piracy with something that's known to work, rather than bullshit DRM that is based on arbitrary copyright law that hardly works? Such as providing a really good service. Netflix and steam have harmed piracy a lot, but even still every time I subscribe to netflix I unsub within a month because there's nothing to watch. And I'm a privileged American when it comes to that![/QUOTE]
It costs money. They don't like to spend money to improve their service when it impacts their overall profits and makes the shareholders throw a fit. So instead you make it look like you are aggressively trying to stomp out piracy completely and actively giving a damn about major pirating sites to keep yourself busy.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;50733705]Netflix and steam have harmed piracy a lot[/QUOTE]
Citation needed, I haven't seen any real change in the amount of piracy over the last decade or so.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50733726]I never said it was my right or freedom to own something I streamed from netflix, I said that it's my right to be able to play the stuff I rented in my devices, which is impossible without DRM, DRM forces me to run a piece of software I don't know what it's doing in my machine to play the content I paid for, how could such a thing not be immoral?, It's not about owning the content, it's about owning my device.[/QUOTE]
Asking "how such a thing could not be immoral" isn't an argument to explain that it is so.
Netflix works on pretty much any internet-connected device you can think of, beyond BS like handheld videogame consoles with their terrible browsers. Complaining about software doing ~unknown spookiness in the computer~ isn't an argument either, it's just scaremongering.
[QUOTE=bitches;50734018]Asking "how such a thing could not be immoral" isn't an argument to explain that it is so.
Netflix works on pretty much any internet-connected device you can think of, beyond BS like handheld videogame consoles with their terrible browsers. Complaining about software doing ~unknown spookiness in the computer~ isn't an argument either, it's just scaremongering.[/QUOTE]
It's not scaremongering, it's a legitimate concern over knowing exactly what my computer is doing, sometimes reverse-engineering software is illegal.
It working on most devices is not an argument, this is not about convenience, this is about freedom.
[QUOTE=Chryseus;50733952]Citation needed, I haven't seen any real change in the amount of piracy over the last decade or so.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://torrentfreak.com/online-piracy-drops-in-australia-netflix-151014/[/url]
[url]http://www.pcgamer.com/gabe-newell-on-piracy-and-steams-success-in-russia/[/url]
this one doesn't quite give numbers, but essentially gabe does say that making things easily accessible to Russians has helped a lot.
[QUOTE=eirexe;50734036]It's not scaremongering, it's a legitimate concern over knowing exactly what my computer is doing, sometimes reverse-engineering software is illegal.
It working on most devices is not an argument, this is not about convenience, this is about freedom.[/QUOTE]
if you find out that some DRM software is doing something it shouldn't be, then you have cause for concern
but i asked you why DRM is INHERENTLY bad, something you keep avoiding to answer
"freedom" has nothing to do with it; you understand exactly what TOS you're agreeing to and what devices your content is available for when you step into an agreement with Netflix
it is an AGREEMENT; it is Netflix's right to demand whatever they want (which is incidentally very little)
your argument would hold more weight if we were talking about one-time payment to watch a movie forever, like many services offer where you buy a particular film but then have DRM preventing your usage of it
but i'm not asking about those, i'm asking about Netflix
[QUOTE=Chryseus;50733952]Citation needed, I haven't seen any real change in the amount of piracy over the last decade or so.[/QUOTE]
It's a pretty well accepted train of thought that availability is the #1 cause of piracy. I mean who the hell pirates music anymore? Or porn?
[QUOTE=bitches;50734111]if you find out that some DRM software is doing something it shouldn't be, then you have cause for concern
but i asked you why DRM is INHERENTLY bad, something you keep avoiding to answer
"freedom" has nothing to do with it; you understand exactly what TOS you're agreeing to and what devices your content is available for when you step into an agreement with Netflix
it is an AGREEMENT; it is Netflix's right to demand whatever they want (which is incidentally very little)
your argument would hold more weight if we were talking about one-time payment to watch a movie forever, like many services offer where you buy a particular film but then have DRM preventing your usage of it
but i'm not asking about those, i'm asking about Netflix[/QUOTE]
Then the terms of service themselves are evil, i'm going to quote the FSF itself, since you seem to be unable to get why:
[QUOTE]DRM is incompatible with free software. DRM is only possible by keeping some parts of a computer secret from users and unmodifiable, which is a direct attack on users's freedom. DRM cannot function while being free software as this would allow the antifeatures enforced by DRM to be undone.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=eirexe;50734223]Then the terms of service themselves are evil, i'm going to quote the FSF itself, since you seem to be unable to get why:[/QUOTE]
jesus christ, i guess anticheat is "evil" too!
not letting people just break the DRM easily isn't an argument that it somehow harms anyone
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
those gosh darned evil terms of service telling you that they want money in exchange for their service that relies on money
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
just cut to the chase where you reveal how utterly entitled you think you are to free shit
[QUOTE=bitches;50734284]jesus christ, i guess anticheat is "evil" too!
not letting people just break the DRM easily isn't an argument that it somehow harms anyone
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
those gosh darned evil terms of service telling you that they want money in exchange for their service that relies on money
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
just cut to the chase where you reveal how utterly entitled you think you are to free shit[/QUOTE]
You are being very aggressive and stubborn over something really stupid.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.