World Wide Web Consortium abandons consensus, standardizes DRM with 58.4% support, EFF resigns - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Mitsuma;52703179]To fuck you over as a regular customer, the only purpose DRM ever had and will ever have really. It will mostly be used to "secure" video files you view online. Prevent simple ripping via right click - download as for example. In the end it does nothing against simply screen recording the content. So basically it will do nothing in terms of protection and just be a hassle for paying customers. With this it will already mean the possible degradation of any browser that doesn't stick 100% to their standards. Granted it is made a standard so it can be implemented easier but still, sometimes browsers deviate from those for better reasons. Ultimately just look on how the latest DRM on 4K BluRay works right now. Want to watch 4K on a PC? There are only a handful of actual 4K BluRay players for PC out, on top of that you will need Win10, a Intel Processor of the 7th Generation (KabyLake), a Display with HDMI 2.0a (HDCP 2.2 compatible) and paying for a license of a BluRay software player as those need special encryption keys (sometimes that software comes with the drive though). All because of the DRM they use. Don't have one of those listed (4-6th Gen Intel CPU or AMD CPU , 4K screen but no HDCP 2.2), well fuck you and paying for a 4K BluRay. (In the meanwhile pirates just download a 4K Rip and watch it. 4K Rips are still rare but they already happened.) Will this end up as bad the 4K BluRay example? Probably not but it is another unnecessary thing that literally does nothing. It just adds limitations and potential for abuse and harm via third parties.[/QUOTE] Again, if this is being implemented at the web-browser, there'll be absolutely nothing stopping me from running FireFox under xvbf-run and dumping the video coming from the window compositor to a file. Or even simpler, using screen capture software.

I believe there is a DRM method where [I]every single part[/I] between the video and the viewer's eyes is involved. The screen must be certified with something to allow the media player to work. I don't recall a name or anything else, but this better not be related to the web standard.

[QUOTE=Darkwater124;52704795]I believe there is a DRM method where [I]every single part[/I] between the video and the viewer's eyes is involved. The screen must be certified with something to allow the media player to work. I don't recall a name or anything else, but this better not be related to the web standard.[/QUOTE] The screen needs to be HDCP (High-Definition Copy Protection) certified, meaning if you use VGA, DVI or even some DisplayPort monitors, you can't watch the content. I know Netflix uses it.

[QUOTE=Darkwater124;52704795]I believe there is a DRM method where [I]every single part[/I] between the video and the viewer's eyes is involved. The screen must be certified with something to allow the media player to work. I don't recall a name or anything else, but this better not be related to the web standard.[/QUOTE] HDCP? That's already in wide use. Also doesn't work either, but at least you can get told when watching netflix that your screen is too old and to go fuck yourself. edit: W O w

[QUOTE=Mitsuma;52703179][...] There are only a handful of actual 4K BluRay players for PC out, on top of that you will need Win10, a Intel Processor of the 7th Generation (KabyLake), a Display with HDMI 2.0a (HDCP 2.2 compatible) and paying for a license of a BluRay software player as those need special encryption keys [...][/QUOTE] And to add insult to injury, if only one link in the chain is compromised, the whole content is vulnerable and can be dumped leaving everybody unhappy, except maybe the pirates. Which means going back to the drawing board, throwing out another round of standards with newest DRM technologies only available on newer, most expensive BluRay Drives, Monitors, Processors, OS and Software and sometimes even bloody HDMI cables. Beginning the cycle anew.