Controversial HTML DRM Scheme Sponsored by Google, Microsoft & Netflix

ArsTechnica reports that a controversial DRM scheme proposed by Google, Microsoft & Netflix is getting criticism.

A new Web standard proposal authored by Google, Microsoft, and Netflix seeks to bring copy protection mechanisms to the Web. The Encrypted Media Extensions draft defines a framework for enabling the playback of protected media content in the Web browser. The proposal is controversial and has raised concern among some parties that are participating in the standards process.

In a discussion on the W3C HTML mailing list, critics questioned whether the proposed framework would really provide the level of security demanded by content providers. Mozilla asked for clarification from the authors about whether it would be possible to implement the proposal in an open source Web browser. Google's Ian Hickson, the WHATWG HTML specification editor, called the Encrypted Media proposal "unethical" and said that it wouldn't even fulfill the necessary technical requirements.

I don't think Netflix wants DRM since it only complicates things, but the studios probably require Netflix to have industry-standard copy protection in place to protect movies & TV shows. I hate DRM because it doesn't slow down the pirates and only causes grief for people that legitimately pay for content.

Comments

[Kenny Johnson]

I don't like DRM on digital products I purchase -- but honestly, I have no problem with it when used with services like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, etc. These are subscription services.

[Daniel L]

Can someone describe in detail how this DRM would work and how it would negatively affect the viewing on streaming content by Netflix subscribers? I am just curious, since I know very little about streaming technology.

[Ellie]

You say you don't think Netflix wants DRM on its licensed content, and I'd be inclined to agree with you. It's not their property and it'd be easier and cheaper for them not to have to worry about copy protection. I'm sure they're going to be very concerned with securing their original content, though. Arrested Development, for example, has a built-in audience, many of whom do not subscribe to Netflix and either could not or would not sign up for the forthcoming new season. Right there you've got a number of potential pirates, and if Netflix picks up more canceled cult favorites and/or manages to score must-see hits with any of their new series, they're going to want to make sure there's no easy, safe way to see the shows without paying.

[FearNo1]

As long as the DRM does not add too much overhead to the stream, I don't mind it. One day the idiotic studios will learn that any DRM will be [email protected] by the [email protected], so it really is an exercise in futility.

[Judy_]

Most security measures take a lot of resources and those resources are not always pulled legitimately from one's computer system. iTunes recently had a few weeks of crashing their own program on most PCs even when the content thereon was totally legal. It doesn't make legitimate customers to jump up and down with glee to be locked out of using what they have legitimately paid for.

[Nate]

Slysoft sees stories like this and smile... new customers.

[moviegeek]

"Slysoft sees stories like this and smile... new customers."

Slysoft(and DVDFab) only works on discs not streaming content. I do agree that for every copy-protection invented there will be someone who finds a way around it.

MS Silverlight is software we already have to have to view Netflix on our PC, I could be wrong but I thought it was copy proof. The other online VOD services use Flash which is easier to copy.

[Nate]

That was my point, there is going to be somebody out there that makes a business out of circumventing it. Same old song different dance with this guys. Louis CK's lesson apparently taught them nothing.

[CJ]

Sounds like a good idea if the content providers want to protect their original content in streaming only format (i.e. no DVDs planned). As it is now, only a very few people know how to copy protected streaming titles, and furthermore they really have incentive to do so if they can just copy the title in DVD Standard or Blu-ray formats.

As has been pointed out, however, if the demand arises for protected streaming copying software, then someone will make it happen. History tends to repeat itself.

[CJ]

Oops, I missed a word in my prior comment - I meant "NO incentive" not "incentive" in the 4th line of first paragraph.

[Peter Davenport]

The bigger the fence, the higher the ladder :)

[anon-e-mouse]

What about HDCP-style DRM on other platforms? Netflix PC/Mac is only a small part of this arena.

[Crow550]

Netflix or well Studio content is not gonna come on any format without DRM.

Even if DRM can easily be cracked they will not offer it on a platform without DRM period.

So until they find a way to offer HTML5 with DRM we won't see Netflix adapt to it.

Which means no Netflix for Linux users and such.

As Microsoft Silverlight has the DRM. Not even the Linux version Moonlight supports DRM.

So well see how HTML5 with DRM does.

[Brandon]

I don't like DRM, but I think it may stop more piracy than you realize. There is a class of adults, mostly older, who are not tech savvy enough to do the Internet and want to rent a DVD (or stream it) and record it off to a VHS or DVD+R. Anyway, they are pretty successfully thwarted by copy protection mechanisms.

My granddad occasionally gives me DVD+R copies of movies he has "acquire" from a "friend" who markets internet piracy to older folks for a few bucks a piece.

I thank him politely, but know that if I wanted to pirate the movie, I could find a Blu-Ray rip online that is much better than his 2nd generation low-res rip.