On 14/05/2014 19:10, Rubén Martín wrote:
Hi,
I've just found these two articles with the announcement:
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-mission-and-w3c-eme/
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/05/14/drm-and-the-challenge-of-serving-users/
And since I can't find where the discussion about this took place, I
would like to open discussion here.
There was a town hall about this earlier today. Did the invite not reach
you? A lot of this was already discussed.
I'm still shocked and don't understand what's going on:
* It's not the first time we take decisions because everyone else is
doing it, and we want to keep being relevant.
I wouldn't say "because everyone else is doing it", but I agree with the
need for our being relevant motivating this decision.
o This worries me the most looking at the future, we are
going to be always the only ones with completely different
values to the rest of the players in the browser ecosystem.
I don't agree with this. Here is why:
- When it comes to the values that dictate the space here, this isn't
about the browser ecosystem, it's about "big content". Very few people
there have our values at all. Very few people understand the technical
details. We're not in that space ourselves. There's a big difference
with some of the other questions we face when it comes to influence.
- My impression has been that many of the other implementers that work
with us on various standards bodies to a certain degree share our view
on the web, even if their employers at large might not. The tiny bits of
the discussions on EME that I did read at the time also reflected this.
- Besides that, I don't think we should say it's "always" us going to be
the "only" ones. :-)
o Have we lost hope to be enough relevant to avoid these situations?
No, but this particular ship has sailed in terms of what is implemented
in other browsers. Our choices were (1) implement, or (2) don't
implement. There wasn't a realistic (3) argue about ways and means and
how this isn't right.
* We want to get rid of plugins but we implement something that always
depends on an external and proprietary module.
o It won't be impossible to access the full web using open source
Double negatives? I guess you mean it won't be possible? (I will also
note that as much as possible of this implementation *is* open source -
but the CDM itself never can be, because of the content industry
dictating the requirements there)
bits, since if we also agree on this, even people not using DRM
right now are going to switch to it eventually.
This assumes a slippery slope which I don't think is fair. We will
continue to push for alternative and better solutions. If those are more
compelling than DRM, I don't think "they" (who, who aren't already using
it?) will necessarily switch to DRM "eventually".
During the town hall it was also noted how we have good hope that
discussions about the other slippery-sloping, namely to DRM-ify more
than video/audio, will be more discussions than "do or die" decisions
like this one, and we will have more of a fighting chance to have our
way there.
Gijs
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
