On 2014-05-15 11:38, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Rubén Martín
<nukea...@mozilla-hispano.org> wrote:
* It's not the first time we take decisions because everyone else is
doing it, and we want to keep being relevant.
o This worries me the most looking at the future, since we are
going to be always the only ones with completely different
values to the rest of the players in the browser ecosystem.
o Have we lost hope to be enough relevant to avoid these
situations?
It's not a question of absolutes. We don't have anywhere near as much
marketshare that we can call all the shots all the time. But that
doesn't mean that we don't have any influence.
But there was a lot of pressure on the various actors here. And sadly
we don't have enough influence to prevent the badness in this
situation. And we didn't receive enough help from the larger internet
community.
The community received no support from Mozilla. Mozilla have supported
the W3C and the EME all the way, and are still a member of the W3C. Even
when W3C employees started joking about assassinating EME dissenters
Mozilla was silent. Mozilla have a representative on the W3C TAG and the
TAG produced a draft document on the EME that is a complete joke, just
ask Henri. Mozilla has made no formal objection to the EME at the W3C.
Mozilla sold out for fear of losing market share. You didn't even try to
make a case to users to stick with Firefox if they were forced to use an
alternative browser to view some media content. Windows users already
have IE installed and you could have just deferred to IE for content
requiring EME - users have already chosen to use Firefox over IE so see
value in Firefox. There was a proposal made at the W3C that would have
further mitigated concerns of losing market share but Mozilla was not
interested.
You might all be surprised that the EME is not even about DRM, it's
purpose is to lock users into using proprietary web based media players.
The EME is just a JS API, it is not a media decoder and can not play
content without proprietary JS downloaded from the content distributors
website. Mozilla understood this and insisted on this design.
Where was the internet outrage when Microsoft and Google implemented
this in their browsers? Where was the outrage towards Hollywood
studios asked for this? The fact that people at large simply let them
get away with this silently is ultimately what is forcing our hand
here.
The average web user might not understand how evil this decision is.
This is not that different from that we were ultimately forced to ship
h264 due to the very developers that we were trying to protect were
the ones that yelled at us for going our own way.
It's very different. Mozilla has sold out yet again, and this time in a
very big way. Who's going to explain to those children what you have
done?
We can't do everything ourselves. As much as I wish that wasn't the
case.
Selling out on users control over their own computer is not the right
decision.
And remember, just like with the video codec issue, just because we
lost in this instance doesn't mean that we've given up. We haven't yet
gotten all browsers to follow standards all the time, and all
developers to write user friendly websites all the time. But we
continue to make improvements.
You've sold out on the contemporary operation of the web. Your evil.
However as someone working with other browser vendors on a very
regular basis, I can definitely say that we do have enough marketshare
that we have a lot of influence. We are definitely able to make the
web a better place on a very regular basis. As an example, just the
other day we were able to negotiate a more standardized approach to
push notifications where other browser vendors were happy to do
proprietary solutions. This would not have been possible without the
influence that we have, and the hard work we put in.
I don't see any contribution that you made to the EME discussions?
The decision today is an improvement over the NPAPI-based DRM
solutions that currently exist.
Wrong, just ask Henri.
This is the wrong decision. The Mozilla leadership has failed and I
believe is irredeemable. For all those who think Brendan would have done
differently, he was just as spineless on this issue.
The question for the Mozilla community is what to do now. Will the
Mozilla leadership go quietly if they are voted out? Or do we need to
fork off development to a separate organization?
Jim
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
