On 04/25/13 01:11, John Sullivan wrote:
Dear Sir Tim Berners-Lee and the World Wide Web Consortium,
Attached please find a joint letter from a coalition of twenty-seven
organizations condemning Encrypted Media Extensions (EME). The letter is
also readable online at
<http://www.defectivebydesign.org/sign-on-against-drm-in-html>.
Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) restricts the public's freedom,
even beyond what overzealous copyright law requires. Ratifying EME would
be an abdication of W3C's responsibility; it would harm
interoperability, enshrine nonfree software in W3C standards and
perpetuate oppressive business models. It would fly in the face of the
principles that the W3C cites as key to its mission and it would cause
an array of serious problems for the billions of people who use the Web.
The W3C can't *stop* companies from pushing DRM, but it can join us in
condemning it, and it can refrain from making it easier for companies to
work against the principles of the Web.
We implore the World Wide Web Consortium to reject the Encrypted Media
Extensions proposal.
Sincerely,
John Sullivan
Executive Director
Free Software Foundation
If they reject it there'll be some other propitiatory plugin which'll
not be a standard and not cross platform (you know for what 2 platforms
it'll be made for). It'll harm free software instead.
Companies want money and they can do anything for it, even destroy lives
forget squashing people's right. If it's not implemented in HTML it'll
be implemented by Adobe in some way.
Besides, if people don't like DRM, they wont buy/see DRM protected stuff
and there'll always be plenty of competition providing media without DRM
protection. And the'll always be ways to extract the video content
despite the protection. If anything can be displayed on screen, it can
also be extracted and saved to disk. I dont think there's anything to
worry at all.
