I was sad when we (Mozilla) gave in, but being the browser that doesn't play Netflix wasn't getting us anywhere.
-
-
Replying to @TedMielczarek @0xabad1dea
Doesn't account for Mozilla opposing EFF's security-research covenant proposal.
2 replies 2 retweets 13 likes -
Wow they did. Why'd that happen? The EFF compromise was a no brainer...
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @wycats @BrendanEich and
The question I would ask is if it's a no-brainer why does it need the W3C to make it happen?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @robinberjon @BrendanEich and
the reason it needs the W3C is that *the W3C is creating the circumventable technology*. Rarely do you get get the chance.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @wycats @BrendanEich and
That doesn't require it to be at W3C. Nothing prevents a community-driven covenant.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @robinberjon @wycats and
Covenant needs to bind the same W3C members who give up EME IPR via patent process, so it must be administered by W3C. Not optional on side.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich @wycats and
No. That's the optimal option, but not the only one. Nothing prevents a separate operation to drive signatures.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @robinberjon @wycats and
Ignores the leverage that W3C has on Its members, which it uses to get patent covenants, on which its moral authority (diminished) depends.
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich @wycats and
Clearly that purported leverage is not enough. The options are to try something or give up.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
The W3C has plenty of leverage. Its management just wants unvarnished DRM. Why? You tell me.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.