[yarrel]

You should be ashamed of doing the work of adding EME to Firefox.

Please don't add it to other platforms. Remove it from Windows.

If the work will be long and hard there are better uses of your time than working to ensure that "streaming providers" can oppose Mozilla's vision of an open web.

[chimeracoder]

> If the work will be long and hard there are better uses of your time than working to ensure that "streaming providers" can oppose Mozilla's vision of an open web.

Your criticism is misguided; as soon as the W3C endorsed EME, it was all but a done deal that Firefox would have to support it. Microsoft and Google have no interest in keeping proprietary software out of their browsers, and the only alternative is for Firefox to fall behind in both standards compliance and market share. That serves nobody's interest.

If what you want is Firefox but without EME, then the answer is: Firefox. (Firefox doesn't require you to use EME). If you really want Firefox but without EME even available by default, then use Iceweasel[0].

[0] which is what I'm using to type this comment, FWIW.

[acdha]

It wasn't even a question of the W3C endorsing it as much as Apple, Google and Microsoft making it clear that they were going to implement what Netflix, YouTube, etc. needed, producing the situation exactly as you described it. The W3C simply let more of that happen in the open rather than at private meetings.

[JohnTHaller]

Don't criticize Mozilla. The users have spoken and the vast majority don't care about DRM on streaming media. They just want to watch YouTube, Vimeo, Netflix, etc in their browser and have it work. Google, Apple et al put their full weight behind DRM and patent-encumbered formats, so Mozilla has to go along with it to stay relevant.

If you don't want EME on principle, an alternate version of Firefox without EME is available.

[contingencies]

The users have spoken and the vast majority don't care about DRM on streaming media.

{{citation-needed}}

They just want to watch YouTube, Vimeo, Netflix, etc in their browser and have it work.

YouTube works fine now. Netflix is a temporary aberration most of the world has never heard of or used. It's not the browser's job to support broken, predatory businesses. We spent 15+ years waiting and just achieved flashless and open video... let's use it.

Google, Apple et al put their full weight behind DRM and patent-encumbered formats, so Mozilla has to go along with it to stay relevant.

{{citation-needed}}

Edit (out of posts): Yes, pay per view is a broken model. You are correct that Mozilla sticking to its guns risks a reduced user base. However, Mozilla blindly following other browser vendors removes its fundamental value and USP. The reality is that the internet wants not just 'open', but also meaningful choice. Many of us believe that Mozilla has, in this case, missed the boat.

[cpeterso]

> YouTube works fine now.

YouTube cat videos work fine without DRM, but YouTube is expanding into pay-per-view content that relies on Google's own Widevine DRM.

> Google, Apple et al put their full weight behind DRM and patent-encumbered formats, so Mozilla has to go along with it to stay relevant.

Mozilla tried to hold out on H.264, waiting for Google to fulfill their promise to drop H.264 from Chrome. Google broke their promise and Firefox lost many users in the meantime. If Netflix doesn't work in Firefox or YouTube is "best viewed in Chrome", then Mozilla will lose users and relevance in guiding future web standards and privacy.

[socceroos]

That same 'vast majority' also don't seem to care about the erosion of liberty in western countries, but that doesn't make it right or good, does it.