Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion

[Dave Lane <dave AT egressive.com>]

Hi Paul,

On 09/05/13 07:53, Sutherland, Paul wrote:
> Like it or not the global economy has and needs Digital Rights
> Management standards to manage Digital Rights - so what would your
> alternative standard be.

Digital Restrictions Management is an aberration. It is true that
attempted instances of it exist, which are generally not fit for
purpose, but your assertion that the global economy "needs" it is very
debatable, and what evidence I'm aware doesn't support it. I agree with
Hamish's point. The sooner DRM - and the industries who think it will
prolong their economically unjustified existences - go away, the better
the global economy will be.

> Is there an IEEE one that you would prefer - or something else

I can't imagine any form of DRM that would be preferable.

Cheers,

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cc-nz-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:cc-nz-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Danyl Strype
> Sent: Wednesday, 8 May 2013 3:37 PM
> To: Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion
> Subject: [Cc-nz] Keep crippleware (DRM) out of HTML5 standards
> 
> Kia ora koutou
> 
> A group of companies, including Microsoft, Google, NetFlix and the BCC,
> are attempting to build what I call crippleware ("DRM" or "Digital
> Rights Management") into HTML5 - the open standards which define the Web
> - with a proposal called EME (Encrypted Media Extensions). It's very
> important that the W3C (the World Wide Web Consortium, who govern the
> HTML standards) hear strong opposition from everyone who cares about an
> "open and upcapturable internet" (to quote InternetNZ).
> 
> Having standards defined by a non-commercial public body like the W3C is
> what we mean by the phrase "open standards". In contrast, "proprietary
> standards" exist when commercial products like Adobe Flash become de
> facto standards by doing something first, giving one company power to
> change the standard on a whim, in ways that privilege them and their
> commercial partners. One of the main goals of defining
> HTML5 was to replace de facto standards (like Flash and MS
> Silverlight) with open standards for multimedia on the web.
> 
> Peter Eckersley and Seth Schoen of the Electronic Frontier Foundation:
> "W3C is there to create comprehensible, publicly-implementable standards
> that will guarantee interoperability, not to facilitate an explosion of
> new mutually-incompatible software and of sites and services that can
> only be accessed by particular devices or applications. But EME is a
> proposal to bring exactly that dysfunctional dynamic into HTML5, even
> risking a return to the "bad old days, before the Web" of deliberately
> limited interoperability."
> 
> The HTML standards (currently at version 5, thus HTML5) are what allow
> developers to be sure that web browsers and websites speak the same
> language. This is important for web developers, because they can make a
> website which supports the standards, confident that people will be able
> to to use it no matter which web browser they like to use. Also,
> programmers who work on web browsers can improve their software with
> confidence, knowing that as long as their browser supports the
> standards, it will work properly with any website. While it's true that
> not all browsers or websites have full support for HTML5 yet, it's in
> the best interests of everyone that the majority of developers continue
> to work towards that goal.
> 
> Broad support for HTML5 will make it hard for any one browser to
> monopolize the web, simply by being the only one whose proprietary
> standards all websites work with (yes, I'm looking at you MS Internet
> Explorer). It will make it hard for a handful of websites to dominate
> the web, simply by being the only ones that works well with all browsers
> (yes, I'm looking at you Google, and FaceBook too). Letting DRM
> crippleware requirements in through the back door, under the cover of
> EME, risks allowing a handful of giant companies to achieve monopoly
> power and dominance over the web anyway.
> 
> Let's be clear, the EME proposal is not about privacy or security for
> users. There are plenty of open standards for making sure your email is
> private (eg OpenPGP), and your online banking is secure (eg SSL).
> This is about "encrypted media", online music and video that audiences
> can't enjoy unless they allow their computer to be compromised by
> EME-enabled crippleware. As Cory Doctorow points out, people have
> rejected such DRM crippleware at every opportunity, and its proponents
> must not be allowed to hijack public standards to force it on them.
> 
> Doctorow says:
> "The W3C has a duty to send the DRM-peddlers packing, just as the US
> courts did in the case of digital TV. There is no market for DRM, no
> public purpose served by granting a veto to unaccountable, shortsighted
> media giants who dream of a world where your mouse rings a cash-register
> with every click and disruption is something that happens to other
> people, not them."
> 
> Please the support Defective By Design, and help build a broad public
> campaign for a web infrastructure that serves the public good, and
> creates a level playing field amongst companies who work on the web.
> You can sign their petition here:
> http://www.defectivebydesign.org/no-drm-in-html5
> 
> More info:
> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/defend-open-web-keep-drm-out-w3c-s
> tandards
> 
> Feel free to forward this email to anyone you think might be supportive.
> Please help us spread the word.
> 
> He mihi nui
> 
> --
> Danyl Strype
> Community Developer
> Disintermedia.net.nz/strype
> 
> "Geeks are those who partake in our culture."
> - .ISOcrates
> 
> "Uncomfortable alliances are not just necessary; they reflect and speak
> to the tremendous possibility of our political moment."
> - Harmony Goldberg and Joshua Kahn Russell
> http://www.nationofchange.org/new-radical-alliances-new-era-1337004193
> 
> "Both Marxists and Chicago-school libertarian economists can agree that
> free software is the best model."
> - Keith C Curtis
> http://keithcu.com/wordpress/?page_id=407
> _______________________________________________
> cc-nz mailing list
> cc-nz AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-nz
> Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand
> http://www.creativecommons.org.nz/
> **********************************************************************
> This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended 
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> 
> The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender
> and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Christchurch City Council.
> 
> If you are not the correct recipient of this email please advise the
> sender and delete.
> 
> Christchurch City Council
> http://www.ccc.govt.nz
> **********************************************************************
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cc-nz mailing list
> cc-nz AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-nz
> Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand
> http://www.creativecommons.org.nz/
> 

-- 
Dave Lane, Catalyst IT, South Island Office
e: dave.lane AT catalyst.net.nz  w: http://catalyst.net.nz
p: +64 3 963 3733 x 7801  m: +64 21 229 8147

-- 
Dave Lane, Egressive Ltd dave AT egressive.com m +64212298147 p +6439633733
http://egressive.com  Free/OpenSourceSoftware: because to share is human
Software Patents kill innovation. Get a Fair Deal http://fairdeal.net.nz