Dan Gillmor

The World Wide Web Consortium -- shamefully -- created a standard embedding video-playback DRM in browsers. The reason was to placate the Hollywood-based Copyright Cartel. Sadly, Mozilla put this rancid technology into Firefox.

Now Google wants to embed DRM into simple browsing, to placate ad-sellers -- including, maybe especially Google.

Will Mozilla, which has a small browser market share, capitulate on this, too? I hope not.

Jul 21, 2023 at 11:34pmWeb
Show threadSilversaltyJul 21, 2023
@dangillmor
Duckduckgo now has a browser though only app based that I can find. No separate web based version. I've found a bug with downloads so it's not perfect but I wonder how it deals with embedded DRM.
Show threadJoe HelfrichJul 22, 2023
@Silversalty @dangillmor ...you want a web based version of a web browser?
Show threadSilversaltyJul 22, 2023
@jbhelfrich @dangillmor
One that runs directly off a desktop OS, not from an app store. Think Netscape.
A version that runs on Windows.
Show threadAlex RussellJul 21, 2023
@dangillmor If you'd like to understand the technical details (and problems with the Explainer you're talking about), my DMs are open. But I assure you, this sort of accusation-slinging is not making the sort of sense you hope it does -- and I say this as someone who will be asked to vote on the proposal and would lean against today.
Show threadAnders EknertJul 22, 2023
@slightlyoff @dangillmor nah, it’s making perfect sense.
Show threadMichael Downey 🧢Jul 21, 2023

@dangillmor how much google money is moz getting these days?

last i heard was $450,000,000.00 per year

Show threadMcCoy SmithJul 22, 2023
@downey @dangillmor anything less is “too big a discount to ask people and their families to commit to.”
Show thread Mike AmundsenJul 21, 2023

@dangillmor

it seems, now that television distributors are migrating from broadcast to internet, they're bucking for status quo ante regarding revenue models.

Interstitials reduce the quality of the experience for both creators and viewers but boost revenue for distributors (suprise, surprise).

of course, once SSAI is established, we can expect to both pay for the stream _and_ be served interruptions.

not an improvement.

Show threadZacJul 22, 2023

@dangillmor

I sure hope Firefox doesn’t do this, but it’s open source, so someone will fork it to be DRM-free.

The W3C should have said DRM was outside the scope of the organization.

Show threadZacJul 22, 2023

@dangillmor

The choice to include DRM in Firefox was disappointing. Good news is you can completely disable DRM rather easily.

I’m the General settings, under Digital Rights Management (DRM) Content, uncheck:
Play DRM-controlled content

If you don’t like the annoying message at the top when you visit a page with DRM content, you can use about:config to get rid of the message:

https://support.mozilla.org/bm/questions/1388341

Disabling DRM completely | Firefox Support Forum | Mozilla Support

Show threadJP   Jul 22, 2023
@zachariah @dangillmor #mullvad and #librewolf will not likely follow suit.
Show threadDarryl RammJul 22, 2023
@dangillmor Who is it that pays Mozilla $$$ again?
Show threadrholland_again-againJul 22, 2023
@dangillmor Mozilla is no standard bearer. Focus your attention on Brave.
Show threadBarry ParrJul 22, 2023
@dangillmor Once DRM is implemented in the top three browsers, or maybe just chrome and edge, sites with DRM will require you to use one of those browsers.
Show threadLeonardo Ferreira FontenelleJul 22, 2023
@dangillmor Mozilla complying allows me to watch streaming on Firefox, and I can switch it off (or was it opt-in?). What would break in the Web if this DRM for ads is not implemented?