-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I guess we do all agree that DRM are a nuisance.
I'm just not sure whether using Mozilla Foundation willingness to support them is the right place to raise such debate.
We shouldn't fight so that FOSS actors don't implement DRM support, but we'd rather fight so that DRM disappear. Which is already a work-in-progress, as your next mail shows.
Regarding the paid-for services using DRM (and HTML5 - work-in-progress here as well), I can quote France where we have two major services competing: Netflix & CanalPlay. Both are using DRMs and are about to switch to HTML5. They recommend using Google Chrome at the moment and up to date libnss, hence the recent upgrade of such library on Ubuntu recently (through security channel).
This is indeed a market loss for Firefox, but at least, in France it's hard to know how big it is. We don't really know about the amount of users of such services.
On 05/10/2014 22:50, Hugo Roy wrote:
Yes, for users who do not want to install DRM, this will not affect them. But this will affect everyone else who will simply follow the default reccomendation and end up supporting DRM.
Mozilla argue they do this because they cannot go against the trend in the market to impose DRM on HTML5 videos and thus, in order not to lose market shares because of this, they will support it.
I think this analysis is wrong, because the Firefox market is wider than just the US and the biggest video website in the world does not have DRM at all (except for the paid-for service, which I never heard of and is probably again only used in the US).
DRM are a nuisance and their costs should not be a shared burden for Mozilla and Firefox users worldwide.
Just my personal opinion
Best,
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
- -- Pierre Schweitzer <pierre at reactos.org> System & Network Administrator Senior Kernel Developer ReactOS Deutschland e.V.