Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

The content providers will refuse to serve the video to you without DRM, attestation, HDCP, whatever new crap some MBA came up with to justify a paycheck to some other MBA…


sort by: page size:

This kind of DRM will turn honest people in to pirates when the video doesn't play properly.

Everyone hates DRM but one day DRM will be the only way to verify a video is legit.

And it's only going to get worse now that EME/DRM is a standard spec of HTML. Video platforms will only work on certain DRM platforms.

DRM’d video is the one exception.

Not enough Restrictions Management in the <video> tag, so this won't happen. Clearly, without DRM, I am going to pirate low-rez Hulu feeds instead of the un-DRM'd over-the-air HDTV stream. Right...

And through all this effort to "protect their content", they still haven't managed to stop people from bypassing the DRM and giving the videos away for free in torrents.

I have a hard time seeing how implementing DRM provides any value to media companies, other than a false sense of security.


If you don't want such kind of mess, demand DRM-free video. There is no valid reason for media execs to oppose it.

...and which no-one will download.

To be clear: if DRM is not implemented in browsers, Netflix and the like will just make native apps, which are far larger vectors of malware attack than the locked down EME standard is.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, but "people should just not watch DRMed video" is not an actual answer to the problem at hand.


DRM-free video is yet to emerge.

This is why the only real way to keep copies of media for future viewing is to have them in a completely DRM-free format that can be viewed using any open-source player software. Don't settle for anything less.

Agreed.

Looks like they know they cannot offer a video platform without providing DRM, because the media industry demands it, and they also know that trying to implement unbreakable DRM is futile. Therefore, they just need to implement the minimum needed to convince the media suppliers that their content is really DRM'd.


DRM video

That’s DRM’d video, the one exception.

I'm still baffled by the reasoning that leads to all the DRM theater. It does nothing. the moment a piece of content reaches streaming apps, it's on every torrent and free streaming platform.[1]

All it does is that it makes the user experience of paying customers worse. Can't use their preferred video player. Can't use a frontend that puts all the content together. Can't save it for later to watch online, unless the platform has that functionality built in, usually in a restrictive and clunky way.

[1] I'm, of course, talking about platforms that aren't as aggressive about getting rid of copyrighted content as youtube.


It’s a Widevine DRM thing, not a browser video thing.

And then be limited to 720p because you don't have the right DRM because Linux.

> support modern video

There's nothing particularly modern about DRM.


And Amazon's downloadable videos aren't? All online video "purchasing" services are DRM-laden crap. Blame the publishers.

> Noone will force you to browse websites that use DRM.

If you want to stay legal and watch their content, you bet they will. Major networks will require their distributors to use this DRM. Sure, you don't have to use their content, but the point of fighting it is that we want to use their content and are trying to prevent them from this step.

next

Legal | privacy