jwzJun 22, 2024

Mozilla's Original Sin.

Some will tell you that Mozilla's worst decision was to accept funding from Google, and that may have been the first domino, but I hold that implementing DRM is what doomed them, as it led to their culture of capitulation. It demonstrated that their decisions were the decisions of a *company shipping products*, not those of a non-profit devoted to preserving the open web.

Those are different things and are very much in conflict. [...]
https://jwz.org/b/ykVr

Mozilla's Original Sin

Some will tell you that Mozilla's worst decision was to accept funding from Google, and that may have been the first domino, but I hold that implementing DRM is what doomed them, as it led to their culture of capitulation. It demonstrated that their decisions were the decisions of a company shipping products, not those of a non-profit devoted to preserving the open web. Those are different ...

Show threadFlorian IdelbergerJun 22, 2024
@jwz disagree. I know many ppl that would or could not use Firefox if they hadn’t and like this it’s a viable alternative. What do the gazilion Mozilla/netscape/firefox or chromium forks/alternatives do for the open web because they disable drm or replaced / removed other functionality? Not much.
Show threadjwzJun 22, 2024
@fl0_id "But some people would not have used Firefox" is exactly the argument for market share over principles that got us into this mess.
Show threadFlorian IdelbergerJun 22, 2024
@jwz not ‘some people’ but basically no one would have used it. I don’t disagree that it (engaging with market realities) is also a problem, but that does not mean that the opposite would have been better
Show threadjwzJun 22, 2024
@fl0_id Well, you're wrong. \/\/
Show threadDamian YerrickJun 23, 2024
@jwz @fl0_id Please help me understand how. Among people who use Windows, macOS, or desktop Linux, and subscribe to a subscription audio or video streaming service, what program would they have used alongside DRM-free Firefox to interact with said streaming service?
Show threadvarx/tech
@PinoBatch @jwz @fl0_id DRM is more common now than when Mozilla first implemented it in Firefox. If Mozilla had not implemented it, that would have impeded the wider adoption of DRM.
Jun 23, 2024 at 2:03pmWeb
Show threadDamian YerrickJun 23, 2024

@varx @jwz @fl0_id In practice, refusing to implement Encrypted Media Extensions would have required each streaming provider to publish a macOS native app and a Windows native app to view the service. This would have left users of desktop Linux unable to view what they were paying for.

If you have ideas for a business model for a subscription #streaming service that does not rely on digital restrictions management to deter casual stream ripping, I'm interested. For comparison, cable TV has been scrambling pay-per-view for decades and using Macrovision ACP to block VCR use.

Show threadvarx/techJun 24, 2024
@PinoBatch DRM has never been an effective means of deterring stream ripping. And there are already subscription streaming services that use the ground-breaking model of "you pay us money, we send you video" without involving DRM.