Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> W3C implementing DRM is only an extension of W3C implementing encryption.

why do you think so? Encryption is good for every interested party (except NSA, perhaps) while DRM means at least someone is being screwed.

It's like saying that "fast lanes" are only an extension of TCP.

(I don't have a strong opinion on whether DRM should be standardized by W3C or not, but I disagree with this reasoning)




In the scenario "Now you can watch Netflix" (which entails implementation of DRM), who is being screwed?


to continue the simile, that is like asking

    in the scenario of "you can get more bandwidth" who is being screwed?
And the answer is: the same person, if you just look at the whole issue instead of the single positive angle.

Of course, if you think that DRM is a good thing (i.e. inability to have open source implementations, need to load binary blobs, limiting use of content to what the provider decides etc) then yes, DRM is exactly like encryption for you.

Yet, since there is a substantial number of people who do _not_ believe it, this still makes the two things different.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: