Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Playing on Linux is not the issue. The issue is that EME + CDM introduces an 'Open Web' standard that cannot in fact be implemented by anyone who chooses.

Say the W3C decided to add a new tag to HTML, called '<happy>', that displays a smiling face. Anyone who wishes (Firefox, Mozilla, you, me) could implement that feature and start properly displaying content that contains <happy> tags.

This is not true of encrypted content that requires a proprietary, closed-source CDM and / or a secret key to operate.

That is why EME should be rejected by the W3C. Lack of Linux support is a consequence of the problem, not the problem itself.



How about the embed tag? What big differences do you see between implementing EME vs the embed tag?


One difference is that with embed you can still support most existing platforms by implementing NSAPI.


My reading is that ESE is intended to work in much the same way -- the main work is done by the Content Decryption Module, which is more plugin-like. And indeed, the way existing DRM-using systems work in the browser is with the embed tag.

The spec says "The Content Decryption Module (CDM) is a generic term for a part of or add-on to the user agent that provides functionality for one or more Key Systems."




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: