HTML5 adds support for DRM

The W3C announced that it would publish its DRM standard with no protections and no compromises at all.

More at
eff.org/deeplinks/2017/07/amid-unprecedented-controversy-w3c-greenlights-drm-web

Other urls found in this thread:

w3.org/2017/07/eme-rec-draft.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Jeez. Are we really going to live in a such dystopian future?

What's so wrong with not using it? They don't want you to see it so spend your time on things that other creators are happy to share.

For what purpose though?

The web is the ultimate DRM, you cannot use it without connecting to some kind of server. With webassembly you can even distribute your stupid scripts as unreadable machine code.

What more is there to be gained with "drm"?

Since 'mirricans are retarded and allow corporations to pass laws, they have this little law called the DMCA. Under the DMCA it is illegal to circumvent DRM.
Right now you can share a piece of media under Fair Use (academic purposes, historical purposes, archival, etc.), but thanks to the DMCA doing that would be illegal if the media has DRM since you would need to circumvent it in order to share it.
This gives corporations a little bit more control of what is shared online, to put simply.

At first I thought it's about direct rendering manager.

That doesn't sound like it's respecting my freedoms.

bye bye adblockers

This. the web by design already has all the bad parts of DRM
corporate check boxes

Just because it's bad now, doesn't mean we want it to get worse. We don't want more DRM.

Please explain!

What stops me from using /etc/hosts-based ad blocking?

When they start demanding you always use windows as a operating system. What stops you from spoofing if your using windows? When they start demanding you have (((certain hardware))) to use windows. What stops you from spoofing hardware statistics? That DRM that is compiled to run for a (((certain architecure))) that's what. Currently you could be using any architecure and any webbrowser with the right combination of adblock and others. With DRM your fucked.

EME is DRM done correctly. EME runs on Windows, GNU/Linux, and everywhere else. Gone are the days of Silverlight and other such garbage.

DRM in general is a very bad thing, and I'll push against it. But I won't push against EME, because EME is an open standard.

...

I'm so glad the EFF stopped jacking each other off to stop this.

They felt we needed a reminder of how worthless and out of touch they are, since nobody remembers clusterfucks like XHTML2 or the CSS3 release schedule these days.

A bullet in Chris Dodd's head is DRM done correctly.

Fuck you Mozilla. You could have stopped this.

DRM is explicitly at odds with FOSS since if you control the code that handles the restrictions, there are no restrictions. That's why you get more invasive hardware DRM such as Intel's PAVP or Insider, or Tivoization.

webasm

just the casualization of the internet

Let's just go back to Gopher then.

w3.org/2017/07/eme-rec-draft.html

Does anyone understand how exactly this will work? It seems to me there are multiple ways of accessing the DRM'd content, varying in malice and difficulty to decipher.

What I don't get is: Mozilla obviously provides the source for Firefox. People obviously need to compile it. Won't that source include a CDM (Content Decryption Module) which anyone can copy?

they can just do like google

fucking botnet fucked up my sage. seriously, though, the solution is obviously blobs or just 'you can't go to that site with that browser'
maybe we can go back to the good old days when sites would only work if you had IE 5.6.1 installed

with kike-drm mossad blobs = premium 4k experience, drm powered ads
without kike-drm = 360x240, "burn-in ads"