[Chapter-delegates] DRM in HTML5 - something brewing in W3C

Sun Apr 21 00:35:47 PDT 2013

W3C have noted the controversy and have responded at
http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/03/drm_and_the_open_web.html

There's been lots of buzz about the proposed addition of "Encrypted
Media Extensions
<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html>"
to HTML5, and the related extension of the HTML5 Working Group charter
<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/charter/2012/> to include support for
"protected content." In the wake of the announcement
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Feb/0122.html> that
these are "in-scope" for HTML, we wanted to explain what this means --
and doesn't mean -- for W3C and the Open Web.

W3C is not developing a new DRM system, nor are we embracing DRM as an
organization. We do acknowledge that some in industry demand content
protection and that DRM use is currently widespread. We also know that
others find DRM anathema to the Open Web. In building the Open Web, we
do not equate "open" content with material that must be available free
of charge.

Given these competing demands, W3C is convening people with a range of
viewpoints to investigate how to keep the Web maximally open (for
instance, consistent with the W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy) and to
help us determine how content protection can interact with the Open Web.
We invite those who are interested in the technical discussions about
Encrypted Media Extensions to monitor or participate in the HTML Working
Group <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#who>, which is open to all. That
specification will undergo the same technical review and
interoperability testing as other W3C specifications on the
Recommendation Track.

To help crystallize the technical discussions around Encrypted Media and
DRM, we're opening a new Restricted Media Community Group specifically
to consider the paired challenges of openness and access-restriction. As
a growing number of industries with current requirements related to
content protection are embracing the Open Web Platform, we seek a
solution that considers both today's business and technical realities
and the long-term health of the Web. The Web and TV Interest Group
<http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/> is another place where these
conversations happen, in task forces
<http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page#Task_Forces> producing
requirements documents. The CG does not intend to develop
specifications, although it might approach requirements documents from a
user perspective.

Join us at restrictedmedia
<http://www.w3.org/community/restrictedmedia> to continue the discussion.

Observationally this could be interpreted as an attempt to square a
circle. But that view is hopefully unfair.

Christian

> Christian de Larrinaga <mailto:cdel at firsthand.net>
> 19 April 2013 09:33
> This is worth unpicking.
>
> I am only involved as a user in this area (developing media services and
> sites). I am not involved in W3C activities around this myself. I am not
> planning to implement browser based DRM.
>
> As I understand the background at this time and hoping somebody will
> speak up who is involved in the w3C working groups who can guide on the
> implications of how this is being implemented.
>
> HTML5 is adding some media features such as audio and video tags. The
> idea is as you design your webpage you can insert these tags around a
> media object and this will provide a player for the user to directly
> access the content (video or audio) without calling in a third party
> plug in such as Flash or Silverlight in the browser. This simplifies as
> it standardises access to digital media in web browsers.
>
> The DRM issue being complained about is separate from the codecs that
> process the media (play). The choice of a codec or codecs has been
> highly contentious in terms of patent coverage so that playing content
> can be open (free to all). Google has assured use of a codec and there
> has been much negotiations going on behind the scenes to make this
> possible. This covers Rights to the 'means' to play content
>
> But for managing the rights to the content itself some content providers
> (mainly distributors like NetFlix) are saying they will not use HTML5
> media tags for their content unless they can impose DRM on their content.
>
> W3C is discussing this in the context of supporting DRM in the browser.
> The implications of this would appear to impose DRM on content that is
> presented via the browser directly.
>
> I would prefer myself, that any DRM functionality that content
> distributors wish to implement is managed via a plug in architecture
> rather than intrinsic to the browser functionality. Otherwise free
> content which is the vast bulk of content as I understand it today
> should not be defaulted through a DRM filter intended for some
> (significant) commercial corner cases.
>
> This would add some extra complexity and cost for those businesses that
> wish to impose DRM on content but presumably the cost is worth the
> effort. By implementing in the browser it would seem the cost is being
> passed on to the browser (in added complexity and processing). I'm not
> clear why the cost of doing business for a few should be passed on to
> users and content providers not interested in DRM. That is the many.
>
>
> best
>
>
>
>
> Christian
>
>
>
>
>
> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch <mailto:apisan at unam.mx>
> 18 April 2013 21:02
> Hi,
>
> I have received a call to join a protest
> in http://www.defectivebydesign.org/no-drm-in-html5
>
> This would be against some goings-on in the W3C that the authors of
> the protest calls "Hollyweb".
>
> Can anyone more knowledgeable help understand what this is and whether
> we should try to intervene?
>
> Yours,
>
> Alejandro Pisanty
>
>  
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
>      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> Facultad de Química UNAM
> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
>
>  
>
> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
>
> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
> http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20130421/fe3a33b8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: compose-unknown-contact.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 770 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20130421/fe3a33b8/attachment.jpg>