
Netflix: We're Working On HTML5 Standard to Bring Streaming Video to All Devices - kingsidharth
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/netflix_were_working_on_html5_standard_to_bring_st.php
======
jerf
Translation: We need DRM in HTML5. They don't quite say it, but they come very
close and this isn't very much of a "translation".

DRM doesn't belong in a standard like HTML5. On the freedom side, the argument
hardly needs to be made around here; on the Netflix/DRM-users side, you don't
really want to standardize on DRM because then you're locked to the standard
if it doesn't work, and, frankly it solves no problems for you anyhow. DRM and
Linux are not going to fit together no matter how many standards docs you
write and how hard you thump on them. And when the standard fails to work for
you because it has been hacked, you will leave the standard anyhow.

These are pretty words but I can't see anybody actually getting anywhere with
this, not just because the standards bodies really shouldn't do this but
because it doesn't seem to be in _anybody's_ interest to create an HTML5 DRM
standard.

~~~
jmtulloss
It would be in the consumer's interest if there was DRM in HTML5. They would
get content on more platforms more quickly.

~~~
jbrennan
I really can't see how DRM is ever, _ever_ in the consumer's interest.

~~~
bigmac
Subscription media services are impossible without DRM. Many, _many_ consumers
enjoy these services, myself included.

~~~
lukeschlather
That reasoning is completely false. Yes, the content industry insists that DRM
must be in place to make a streaming solution work.

On the other hand, Hulu works just fine. Clearly subscription media services
work fine without DRM. The requirements for DRM are just a symptom of an
industry that doesn't understand digital media, and believes that DRM is
effective at stopping piracy.

~~~
modeless
Hulu has DRM.

------
bokchoi
Please link to the original source.

[http://techblog.netflix.com/2010/12/html5-and-video-
streamin...](http://techblog.netflix.com/2010/12/html5-and-video-
streaming.html)

------
sp332
This is really pushing the fundamental limit of DRM, namely, that you must
_both_ lock up the data so that the user can't "steal" it _and_ give them the
key so they can watch the movie.

~~~
rmc
_you must both lock up the data so that the user can't "steal" it and give
them the key so they can watch the movie._

All DRM is like that. All DRM tries to both give you the locked up content,
give you the key and hide the key so you can't get it. It always fails.

What they are pushing is the definition of an open standard. My guess is that
people kept asking them about HTML5, so they have written this press release
saying why they don't use it.

------
rmc
They basically say they need DRM, but its impossible to have a DRM system that
is also an open webstandard.

~~~
trotsky
Clearly. Just to expand on why you're right, it's the client that's in charge
of restricting the rights of the user -> enforcing "play once", "stream only",
"24 hour pass" etc. If anyone can write a client based on the open standard,
obviously anyone can write a client that ignores the granted rights.

If you need to rely on API keys and pre-approved platforms there isn't much
open about it. At that point you're just trying to get 3rd party developers to
build your proprietary clients for you.

~~~
lukifer
> Anyone can write a client that ignores the granted rights.

Not necessarily; the server providing the video can look at your
authentication cookie and the current timestamp, and decide whether to send
you video or not.

The harder thing is preventing clients from stealing the data. If the player
uses an open standard, someone could easily write a version that plays by all
the authentication rules, but then pipes the playback bits to the hard drive
and then torrent sites. And then suits get nervous about signing over their
content, and we're right back to the status quo of digital media.

I hope Netflix has a clever solution for this, but it's hard to see how it's
possible.

~~~
trotsky
Saving the data for later play is one of the rights you manage with DRM - if
you're not supposed to be able to play it later and the client allows you to,
it's ignoring the granted rights. Sharing the data with friends is another
"right" in DRM. What you're describing is authentication - something that you
can clearly do within HTML5 as is.

------
tomjen3
Meanwhile consumers can access everything they want on torrent sites - should
you not know about them, Google will helpfully auto-complete your searches for
you - with no limitations and no stupid "this content is not available in your
country" (not shown until after the preshow ad).

Netflix will have to get its stuff in order _now_ to remain relevant. If it is
not already too late.

------
wslh
I am really excited about HTML5 + Torrent + Streaming. There was a post a few
months ago at [http://gigaom.com/video/wikipedia-is-using-
bittorrent-p2p-fo...](http://gigaom.com/video/wikipedia-is-using-
bittorrent-p2p-for-html5-video-2/)

------
Sephr
Why does Netflix even bother with DRM or studios bother to pressure Netflix to
use it? By the time something's on Netflix, there's often already a decent
quality torrent. Their customers aren't going to steal their videos and
neither will pirates.

------
psawaya
Not without DRM, I'm sure.

