Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by stinkytaco 3392 days ago
I truly don't know what to feel about this. On one hand I think this is bad for the future of content and users and even the web. On the other, I feel that Google, Apple and MS would proceed regardless of the spec, meaning that "the web" becomes a content delivery platform much like cable TV was, controlled by a small, wealthy few. Either than or users migrate to where the content is and leave the web behind.

This at least standardizes the process. Perhaps that's a bit like standardizing the roads we drive on: it gets people around and enables commerce, but the long term trade-off might be too much.
2 comments
BinaryIdiot 3392 days ago
This echos my original feelings. But if I understand correctly if you find a vulnerability in the extension and report it, you can be sued. There is no protection from users doing anything with EMEs other than letting them run.

I believe that is the case, anyway.

link
azakai 3392 days ago
It's more like standardizing a road that only Google, Microsoft and Apple and their partners can drive on.

An open standard is one that anyone can implement. EME is not open in that way - it just standardizes a small part, the interface. The DRM itself remains completely nonstandard, and Google, Microsoft, Adobe etc. all have their own proprietary DRM products. So a browser that actually wants to show EME content must partner with them. That's the opposite of an open standard.

link