129 lines
6.4 KiB
Markdown
129 lines
6.4 KiB
Markdown
|
# FSF Condemns Partnership Between Mozilla and Adobe to Support DRM
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Two days ago, the Free Software Foundation published [an announcement
|
||
|
|
strongly condemning Mozilla's partnership with Adobe][0] to implement the
|
||
|
|
[controversial W3C Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) API][1]. EME has been
|
||
|
|
strongly criticized by a number of organizations, including the [EFF][2] and
|
||
|
|
the [FSF's DefectiveByDesign campaign team][3] ("Hollyweb").
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[Digital Restrictions Management][4] imposes artificial restrictions on
|
||
|
|
users, telling them what they can and cannot do; it is a system [that does
|
||
|
|
not make sense][5] and is harmful to society. Now, just about [a week after
|
||
|
|
the International Day Against DRM][6], Mozilla decides to [cave into the
|
||
|
|
pressure in an attempt to stay relevant][7] to modern web users, instead of
|
||
|
|
sticking to their [core philosophy about "openness, innovation, and
|
||
|
|
opportunity"][8].
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[0]: http://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-condemns-partnership-between-mozilla-and-adobe-to-support-digital-restrictions-management
|
||
|
|
[1]: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html
|
||
|
|
[2]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/defend-open-web-keep-drm-out-w3c-standards
|
||
|
|
[3]: /2013/03/defective-by-design-campaign-against-w3c-drm-standard
|
||
|
|
[4]: http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restrictions_management
|
||
|
|
[5]: https://plus.google.com/+IanHickson/posts/iPmatxBYuj2
|
||
|
|
[6]: http://www.defectivebydesign.org/dayagainstdrm
|
||
|
|
[7]: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/05/14/drm-and-the-challenge-of-serving-users/
|
||
|
|
[8]: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
John Sullivan requested in the [FSF's announcement] that the community
|
||
|
|
contact Mozilla CTO Andreas Gal in opposition of the decision. This is my
|
||
|
|
message to him:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<!-- more -->
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
```
|
||
|
|
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 22:57:02 -0400
|
||
|
|
From: Mike Gerwitz <mikegerwitz@gnu.org>
|
||
|
|
To: agal@mozilla.com
|
||
|
|
Subject: Firefox EME
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Andreas,
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
I am writing to you as a free software hacker, activist, and user; notably,
|
||
|
|
I have been using Firefox for over ten years. It has been pivotal, as I do
|
||
|
|
not need to tell you, in creating a free (as in freedom), standard, and
|
||
|
|
accessible internet for millions of users. Imagine my bewildered
|
||
|
|
disappointment, then, to learn that Firefox has chosen to cave into the
|
||
|
|
pressure to [support Digital Restrictions Management through the
|
||
|
|
implementation of EME][0].
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Mitchell Baker made a feeble attempt at [rationalizing this decision][0] as
|
||
|
|
follows:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[...] Mozilla alone cannot change the industry on DRM at this point. In
|
||
|
|
the past Firefox has changed the industry, and we intend to do so again.
|
||
|
|
Today, however, we cannot cause the change we want regarding DRM. The
|
||
|
|
other major browser vendors =E2=80=94 Google, Microsoft and Apple have already
|
||
|
|
implemented the new system. In addition, the old system will be retired
|
||
|
|
shortly. As a result, the new implementation of DRM will soon become the
|
||
|
|
only way browsers can provide access to DRM-controlled content.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
She goes on to explain how "video is an important aspect of online life"
|
||
|
|
and that Firefox would be "deeply flawed as a consumer product" if it did
|
||
|
|
not implement Digital Restrictions Management. This is precisely the FUD
|
||
|
|
that the "content owners" she describes, and corporations like Adobe, have
|
||
|
|
been pushing: Mozilla understands that the solution is not to implement DRM,
|
||
|
|
but to fight to encourage content to be published *without* being
|
||
|
|
DRM-encumbered. Unfortunately, they will now have little motivation to do
|
||
|
|
so, with every major browser endorsing EME.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
She defers to a post by Andreas Gal [for more implementation details][1], in
|
||
|
|
which he mentions that the proprietary CDM virus (which will be happily
|
||
|
|
provided by Adobe) will be protected by a sandbox to prevent certain spying
|
||
|
|
activities like fingerprinting. While this is better than nothing, it's a
|
||
|
|
clear attempt by Mozilla to help make a terrible situation a little bit
|
||
|
|
better.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
He goes on to say:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
There is also a silver lining to the W3C EME specification becoming
|
||
|
|
ubiquitous. With direct support for DRM we are eliminating a major use
|
||
|
|
case of plugins on the Web, and in the near future this should allow us to
|
||
|
|
retire plugins altogether.=20
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Let us not try to veil the problem and make things look more rosy than they
|
||
|
|
actually are: this is not a silver lining; it is not appropriate to have a
|
||
|
|
standardized way of manipulating and taking advantage of users.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
It is true that Firefox was in an unfortunate position: many users would
|
||
|
|
indeed grow frustrated that they cannot watch their favorite TV shows and
|
||
|
|
movies using Firefox. But Firefox could have served, when the EME API was
|
||
|
|
used, static content that provided a brief explanation and a link for more
|
||
|
|
information on the problem. They could have educated users and encourage an
|
||
|
|
even stronger outcry.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Instead, we are working with the corrupt W3C to implement a seamlessly
|
||
|
|
shackled web. Mozilla wants to propose alternative solutions to DRM/EME, but
|
||
|
|
by implementing it, their position is weakened.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This is a difficult and uncomfortable step for us given our vision of a
|
||
|
|
completely open Web, but it also gives us the opportunity to actually
|
||
|
|
shape the DRM space and be an advocate for our users and their rights in
|
||
|
|
this debate. [1]
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Such advocacy has been done and can continue to be done by Mozilla without
|
||
|
|
the implementation of EME; once implemented, the standard will be virtually
|
||
|
|
solidified---what is the incentive for W3C et. al. to find alternatives to a
|
||
|
|
system that is already "better than" the existing Flash and Silverlight
|
||
|
|
situation?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
On behalf of the free software community, I strongly encourage your
|
||
|
|
reconsideration on the matter. Mozilla is valued by the free software
|
||
|
|
community for its attention to freedoms. Stand with us and fight. You're in
|
||
|
|
a powerful position to do so.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[0]: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/05/14/drm-and-the-challenge-of-serving-users/
|
||
|
|
[1]: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-mission-and-w3c-eme/
|
||
|
|
```
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The following day, I [submitted the FSF announcement to HackerNews][9]
|
||
|
|
(surprised that it was not there already) in an attempt to bring further
|
||
|
|
coverage to the matter and hopefully spur on some discussion. And discuss
|
||
|
|
they did: it was on the front page for the entire day and, at the time of
|
||
|
|
writing, boasts 261 comments, many of them confused and angry. I sent the HN
|
||
|
|
link to Andreas in a follow-up as well.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Mozilla has a vast userbase and is in the position to fight for a DRM-free
|
||
|
|
web. Please voice your opinion and hope that they reverse their decision.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[9]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7749108
|