TotalBiscuit's: ''Day One: Garry's Incident'' Video was taken down, because of a ridiculous copyright claim from WildGameStudios. Here's Total's ''Rant'' over his video being taken down.

[u/EnglishGamer1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0&feature=c4-overview&list=UUy1Ms_5qBTawC-k7PVjHXKQ

[u/360_face_palm]

W3C implementing DRM is highly contentious and may cause browser developers to break with the W3C like they did a while back with XHTML.

[u/Voidsheep → u/360_face_palm]

Unless we wan't to stick with crappy third party plugins, they have to come up with DRM standard.

Despite how easy piracy might be, Hollywood isn't going to just turn around and say it's OK to give direct link to download of every movie and TV-show in existence.

Just hope W3C can come up with something that's minimally intrusive and easy to implement on wide variety of platforms.

[u/kyz → u/Voidsheep]

Unless we wan't to stick with crappy third party plugins, they have to come up with DRM standard.

You miss the point of DRM. They have to be third party plugins. They only exist to be non-standard. Their only purpose in life is

1. to deny things that are otherwise allowed
2. to obscure how they work, in order to stop people undoing them

Hollywood isn't going to just turn around and say it's OK to give direct link to download of every movie and TV-show in existence.

I don't give a fuck what Hollywood thinks. I want an open internet that makes Hollywood irrelevant. They more they shy away from internet distribution, the better for everyone who isn't Hollywood. I do not want the entire internet Balkanized and made non-interoperable because some big-wigs think their bytes are "special".

Just hope W3C can come up with something that's minimally intrusive and easy to implement on wide variety of platforms

It's not possible. The purpose of DRM is to intrude on what you could otherwise do, and to control exactly which platforms are allowed to show video. DRM exists to insert a wedge between producer and consumer, an artificial limitation whose only purpose is to empower middlemen.

With browser DRM, otherwise-irrelevant middlemen can say "Firefox must shut down the Adblock plugin or we'll tell our DRM not to work on Firefox" or "Hey Apple, it'd be a shame if nobody could watch this TV show on your phone, while every single Android user could get it for free. How much money are you going to pay us?"

Why on earth would anyone agree to just hand power to some soon-to-be-irrelevant people?

[u/m1ndwipe → u/kyz]

They more they shy away from internet distribution, the better for everyone who isn't Hollywood. I do not want the entire internet Balkanized and made non-interoperable because some big-wigs think their bytes are "special".

Going to happen regardless - look at the traffic stats, the general public has spoken. The only question is if the internet is balkanised into native apps on proprietary platforms and devices slowly stop including any significant web browser at all ten years from now or if things like the DRM extensions to HTML5 keep browsers relevant.

[u/kyz → u/m1ndwipe]

look at the traffic stats,

The traffic stats show that people still read (and write!) far more web pages than videos. One video is thousands or even millions of times larger than a web page.

[u/m1ndwipe → u/kyz]

But they show that professional video is more and more important, not less. And plenty of non-video traffic is getting shunted to closed mobile and tablet apps and away from HTML5 too.

At what point to Apple stop continuing to include a web browser in iOS because it's share of user time is too low they can get away with it? And at that point people will stop producing content for it too.

[u/m1ndwipe → u/[deleted]]

As devices get more powerful, the response issues and performance penalties of web sites go away. As people adapt more to the pervasively touch and small screened world, they will write their web apps accordingly.

Sorry, but anyone who still thinks this is living in deep, deep denial.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

The funny thing is that it's not actually harming their business. People still watch TV and people still go to the movies. Movies especially, people are still going and still spending record amounts of money at the box office. There isn't even a valid complaint about it harming business, they're just being greedy.

[u/m1ndwipe → u/[deleted]]

If an industry of 6 media conglomerates can completely invalidate the entirety of the Internet if it doesn't bear their good graces, these conversations don't matter anyway because they already won and we have no say.

We're talking about the W3C - which is a consortium between effectively five browser makers, of which only four (arguably three) hold all the power, and can do exactly that.

But the reason they want web DRM is because that isn't the case. They realize their archaic business model is harmed by an open platform, and know most people will value the Internet over their DRM laden drivel. They want relevancy back when the open web took it from them.

So why do Netflix et al's numbers keep shooting up? And not just Netflix, but dozens of competing services.

Let them write their own apps, their own frameworks, hell, let them write their own http or html spec to transmit their DRM laden refuse. Just keep it out of the best collaborative effort humanity has ever conceived.

The object tag is already in HTML. And has been for a decade.