DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

51 点作者 dzine大约 11 年前

12 条评论

gergles大约 11 年前

This is incredibly shameful. It's now only a matter of time before images, CSS, JavaScript, hell, even the text, are delivered through OS-specific, locked down CDMs. It will start with pissant sites nobody cares about (like the ones who are currently fighting AdBlock), but eventually a large site will demand it - most users will be using a device that handles this, and we will literally never have the Open Web ever again. (If you can't imagine how this would be done, go look at a restaurant website without Flash. Replace Flash with a gigantic EME-required media element. It's closer than you'd think.)I get that slippery slope arguments are often problematic, but DRM has always been something where we've slid down as much as is allowable as soon as it is allowable. The broadcast flag, Macrovision on DVDs, SCMS, Cinavia, etc. are just a few examples of this.Highly recommended reading is also this post, which discusses how Mozilla will implement EME: <a href="https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-mission-and-w3c-eme/" rel="nofollow">https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-missi...</a>I also don't feel the 'open source sandbox' will be permissible by most developers of CDMs. My opinion is that mozilla will waste countless cycles implementing EME that won't be acceptable to the content mafia. Adobe is not the only player in this space.

评论 #7744896 未加载

评论 #7745169 未加载

评论 #7744899 未加载

shmerl大约 11 年前

> . We face a choice between a feature our users want and the degree to which that feature can be built to embody user control and privacy.It can't be said for all users. I don't want it. No DRM junk in the browser please. I understand that she probably means some estimated majority, which is unfortunate (i.e. majority accepting unethical practice like DRM).> Firefox users would need to use another browser every time they want to watch a controlled videoIrrelevant for many users of DRM-free OSes (like Linux) who won't have any DRM backend for EME anyway. I.e. it really sounds like "users would need another OS".> Each person will be able to decide whether to activate the DRM implementation or to leave it off and not watch DRM-controlled content.I hope there will be a switch for disabling the whole EME altogether. Even better, I'd prefer builds of Firefox free of any DRM sickness. It's very unfortunate that this garbage is finding its way into the open source browser which always stood for the users' rights more than many others.

评论 #7744865 未加载

cwyers大约 11 年前

The handwringing over this strikes me as extreme. Mozilla already ships with the ability for users to enable closed-source, proprietary DRM schemes to view web content -- the Flash and Silverlight plugins. Moving from the current regime of Flash/Silverlight to the EME is a move towards openness, not away from it -- the DRM scheme is still closed, but the content itself is more open and standard than before, as you're no longer tying yourself to Flash's implementation of video streaming.

评论 #7745041 未加载

higherpurpose大约 11 年前

> Each person will be able to decide whether to activate the DRM implementation or to leave it off and not watch DRM-controlled content.At first glance this may seem pretty "reasonable", but it really isn't. It's like putting a backdoor in every Intel chip (such as say through TPM 2.0), and then just telling people "look, if you don't want the backdoor activated, you can disable it - Now here's the list of 10 instructions to do so..."It's an illusion of choice, and nothing more. While some may be content that this option exists, the reality is that DRM is now getting pushed to billions of users out there through the web, as the default for soon most video platforms.I don't fully blame Mozilla for this. In fact I blame Netflix first, and Google and Microsoft second. This Gang of Three is the one that made it happen in the first place. But I am saying that Mozilla's attempts to alleviate our concerns aren't very effective or particularly useful.

评论 #7744850 未加载

noonespecial大约 11 年前

A number of content owners (in particular film and TV studios) require technical mechanisms to reduce the ways in which people can use that contentDrm is the opposite of serving users. By definition. The "challenge" is actually to select which privileged users you still want to serve in spite of the not-serving default.

cjkaminski大约 11 年前

I wish I could be against all DRM. Like many things in life, it's not that simple. I'm proud of Apple for successfully taking DRM out of the equation from music sales. But what about non-sales interactions?We don't get DRM-free copies of all our music from Spotify, nor should we reasonably expect that. We are subscribing to a service that allows us access to music so long as we are paying customers. Why shouldn't there be light-touch DRM in place to keep us from flagrantly abusing the system and retaining all copies of the music after if/when we cancel our subscription?Should we reasonably expect to be able to keep a copy of a television show that we streamed from abc.go.com? ABC makes far less money from showing us ads than if we purchased a copy from iTunes. They do this, part and parcel, because we don't get to keep a copy of the show after we're done watching.From my perspective, DRM has no place in a "sales" relationship. We should have full usage rights whenever we buy a book, movie, or song.DRM should exist for subscription services and ad-supported streaming. DRM should essentially serve to enforce the social and legal contract that says we are "borrowing" the books, movies, or songs for long as we have that relationship. Once that relationship is over, we can't use that stuff any more.I suggest that we create an open-source DRM system designed to fairly protect the content creator in cases where the audience is "borrowing" the creative work (whether ad-supported or subscription).

评论 #7746007 未加载

davexunit大约 11 年前

Mozilla should have done the right thing and stood by their beliefs that DRM is harmful to the free web. Instead, they folded to the media corporations and implemented EME. I understand the tremendous pressure they must have been under, but it was the wrong decision. Mozilla is not serving the users by allowing Netflix, Amazon, and others to trample their freedom for the sake of watching TV shows.Mozilla, please remove this anti-feature. Do the right thing.

评论 #7745300 未加载

chimeracoder大约 11 年前

> It will be easier for Firefox users to play DRM-enabled videos because they will not have to download Flash or Silverlight first. Firefox users will be able to choose whether to activate the new DRM system before it is accessed.Why not have this downloaded upon first use, the way that Flash and Silverlight have been?Also, isn't this what users on many Linux distros (e.g. Iceweasel on Debian) will have to do anyway?

评论 #7745120 未加载

评论 #7745157 未加载

jordigh大约 11 年前

So... how long until we reverse-engineer the CDM and write a free decryptor? Is there any indication that reverse-engineering the CDM would be technologically unfeasible?<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_cow_problem" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_cow_problem</a>

评论 #7745538 未加载

评论 #7745138 未加载

fixermark大约 11 年前

Is it part of the nature of the DRM technology that it can't be walled off in an XPI? I find myself thinking the change would be significantly more palatable for those who care deeply about the division of open and closed source if Mozilla could implement this by building a video-supporting XPI that users can choose to not install (thereby verifying that no closed-source blobs are living in their browser, spying on them or whatever closed-source blobs do that is so undesirable).Edit: Ah, I see. <a href="https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-mission-and-w3c-eme/" rel="nofollow">https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-missi...</a> clarifies the intent to remove plugins from the web altogether.

jejones3141大约 11 年前

With that title, a Damon Knight story leaps to mind...

ademarre大约 11 年前

Mozilla should implement the closed-source portion as an official addon. They can give the user a choice to include it or not during the installation. Maybe this is what they're doing; their post wasn't completely clear on that.