Encrypted Media Extensions DRM Proposed to Become New Web Standard

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,070
Here is one that is certain to become controversial. W3C, the World Wide Web Consortium has formally put forward the Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) as a proposed standard. The standard aims to help protect copyrighted streaming media content online, and by becoming a web standard, can likely achieve much broader adoption than current DRM techniques that don't work on all systems or devices. On the other hand critics are sure to point out the risk of further harming fair use, and limiting the playback capabilities on less common platforms, especially since an annual fee of $2,250 for smaller organizations, and $77,000 for larger corporations is proposed for those wanting to utilize the standard.

$77,000 per year is nothing for the Googles and the Apples of the world, for a little open source media center project which relies on volunteer programmers, $2,250 per year could be completely over the top prohibitive.

Member organizations will have until April 19th to register their opinions on the proposal. The W3C has received three formal objections to date:

  • It does not provide adequate protection for users
  • It will be hard to include in free software
  • It doesn't legally protect security researchers

It has been a long and winding road getting to the point where the W3C has formally proposed a standard that allows controls to be placed on content – something that many internet engineers remain philosophically opposed to. But despite the lengthy efforts to address a plethora of concerns, the formal notice still goes out of its way to note that "publication as a Proposed Recommendation does not imply endorsement by the W3C membership."
 

Madoc

Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
944
'Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity.'
 

Ur_Mom

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
20,560
Uh, uh... Pirates find a way.

This is NOT the way to fight piracy. If someone can't rip it for playback on their own, then they'll pirate it. Go the way it is now, and people will consume, and pay for it. Those that pirate for other reasons - chalk it up as a loss. You're not going to stop those people. You can stop the legit people from seeking out illegitimate ways, though.

For the cost, I'd like to bet within the first 6 months, an application is released that bypasses the encryption and allows the user to view/copy/play the content as they desire.
 

Shotglass01

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
1,960
This is probably used to protect, and I use that term very loosely, live streams like PPV fights, concerts, ete. But there's nothing preventing someone almost simultaneously broadcasting the same stream once it's in the clear. They can try all the DRM schemes they want. None of them work.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,372
I choose the player
I choose the time and place
I want to save it for later consumption, and that means up to but not limited to 10+ years

If any of those three things are not met I'm out. Even if it's for free.
 

Teenyman45

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,779
'Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity.'
Did you prefer the original or the remake? If you liked the remake was it before or after all of Showtime's partial frontal nudity was removed?
 

chenw

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
3,977
It's alllll about the money. Protection for users isn't even on their radar.
It about what they THINK it's money.

I always wonder if, instead of spending all this money into DRMs, actually put effort into platforms and distribution methods that made it a hassle to pirate the damn thing than to pay for it legit, that they'll end up with more or less money than they do now.

But one thing that has always been very oxymoronic about media streams are region locks, as in W... T... F...? Are you not trying to broaden your consumer base so they can increase your revenue on those products?
 

Shotglass01

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
1,960
But one thing that has always been very oxymoronic about media streams are region locks, as in W... T... F...? Are you not trying to broaden your consumer base so they can increase your revenue on those products?

Not at all. They're launch windows, distribution methods, and legal options are state of the art if you're living in 1980. :D
 

MV75

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
1,025
Here come the unblockable ads with no restrictions.

Every marketer everywhere just creamed their shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madoc
like this

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,372
But one thing that has always been very oxymoronic about media streams are region locks, as in W... T... F...? Are you not trying to broaden your consumer base so they can increase your revenue on those products?
The rights holder refuses to grant worldwide rights to any media provider. Because they want to twist the arm of every provider in every region locally to get the best possible deal out of them.
And the think if the thing gets streamed worldwide they won't be able to resell it to every small tv station in every small country around the world.
 

Cyraxx

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,111
When can we kill off the entertainment industry? They are essentially just the distributors of the content, CMON tech junkies, make a way to eliminate them quicker and easier.

I mean with the likes of iTunes and such for distribution, how in the hell is there still a RIAA? What role do they play? The artist and producer make the music in digital form and upload it to iTunes - How the hell does the RIAA deserve money from that?
 

InorganicMatter

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
15,464
I'm actually sort of okay with this. Yes, DRM is bad, doesn't work, and shouldn't exist.

However, here in the real world, DRM does exist, DRM is here to stay, and a major problem with DRM is that there is a severe lack of standardization. Standardizing DRM for web content delivery will severely cut back on the headaches caused by Flash, SIlverlight, and the like.

The EFF's points about security researchers is taken, but that seems to be an issue with bad laws from Congress, not bad standards from the W3C.
 

Madoc

Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
944
Did you prefer the original or the remake? If you liked the remake was it before or after all of Showtime's partial frontal nudity was removed?
Wait. What's this about frontal nudity? Well... it's not like I can adjust it or anything...

And I liked both of them well enough. I suppose I prefer the remake a bit more, but both versions were pretty good.
 

Teenyman45

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,779
In the original airings of Showtime's reboot of the Outer Limits, several of the Season 1 episodes had partial nudity that was removed for syndication. Same thing happened with Stargate SG-1.
 

Madoc

Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
944
In the original airings of Showtime's reboot of the Outer Limits, several of the Season 1 episodes had partial nudity that was removed for syndication. Same thing happened with Stargate SG-1.
Now that's a damned shame... :p

Also, the early Stargate SG-1 was really good. But eventually it became stale. Wish they could've found a good ending point somewhat earlier than they did.
 
Top