Firefox bringing you DRM

wow, ok so firefox is going to include a DRM binary from adobe inside a "sandbox". it will no longer be 100% free software.

* http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/14/firefox-closed-source-drm-video-browser-cory-doctorow/print
* http://andreasgal.com/2014/05/14/eme/
* https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=923590
* https://brendaneich.com/2013/10/the-bridge-of-khazad-drm/

The reason for implementing DRM is to kill DRM, somehow..I think this is just post-hoc justification for the bad decision of compromising their core ideals for the sake of market share.

I'm hoping this ``feature'' will be neutered in iceweasel.

Someone at Mozilla needs some serious penis punishment.

Who cares? DRM doesn't even work.

I think Mozilla has successfully trolled Hollyflix into publishing hi-quality videos encrypted with the equivalent of triple ROT13. I bet it'll take less than 5 days after release for someone to completely break the DRM.

>>3

They need a good ball busting~

>>5

triple ROT13

Heh.

http://www.benmoskowitz.com/?p=982 THE WEB IS CHANGING

opposing DRM is not a good use of Mozilla’s resources. We’ve stood on principle before, with H.264, and it hurt us, and our ability to have impact elsewhere. A bit like cutting off the nose to spite the face.

Mozilla is essentially saying the same as Steve Jobs in 2007. And I think this will also come true on the web. Perhaps there’s a sliver of truth in the idea, suggested even by Tim Berners-Lee (the father of the web!), that DRM in HTML5 is a victory, rather than a defeat.

weren't they the ones who fired the anti-drm, anti-faggot ceo?
faggots love drm
/penis punisment/

Time to switch to Iceweasel, booo Mozilla.

cudder https://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1321853871/

Stallman was right there all along and you dismissed him as some lunatic.

>>12
Was there ever something related to software freedom Stallman wasn't right about despite being ignored every time?

>>13
yes

>>1
After making so much noise about open web and open standards, they go out and do this.

I really hope this is on an opt-in basis or I'd have to switch to Iceweasel which I really don't want to do.

>>13
no

>>15
they won't just have a thing in firefox to install the CDM binary from adobe, they're actually going to ship it - unlike "health report" you will have to agree before the thing runs..

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/mozilla-and-drm

I give it a week before someone cracks it.

>>1-13
Fuck off, back to /g/

>>20
Still not fitting in.

>>20
wait, why don't you go back to /g/?

>>15-19,21-22
Fuck off, back to /g/

>>23

U MENA ``LE GEE´´

The reason for implementing DRM is to kill DRM, somehow..

-- the Adobe module is not only closed source, it is also protected by controversial global laws that threaten security researchers who publish information about its security flaws.

These laws – the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the European EUCD, Canada’s C-11 and so on – prohibit revealing information that can be used to weaken DRM, and previous security researchers who disclosed information about vulnerabilities in DRM have been threatened and prosecuted.

This created a chilling effect on the publication of vulnerabilities in DRM, even where these put users at risk from hackers. For example, when word got out that Sony BMG had infected millions of computers with an illegal rootkit to stop (legal) audio CD ripping, security researchers stepped forward to disclose that they’d known about the rootkit but had been afraid to say anything about it.

This gap between discovery and disclosure allowed the Sony rootkit to become a global pandemic that infected hundreds of thousands of US military and government networks. Virus writers used the Sony rootkit to cloak their own software and attack vulnerable systems.

If you can't beat em, join em. If you can't join em, use em. If you can't use em, fear em.

So what can we do to eradicate DRM from both the software industry and from legal space? Let's try to make a list of things we can actually do.

>>27
use (A)GPLv3 or another license that protects you from drm
do not use drm yourself
do something to make shitzilla not use drm
???

>>28
Maybe we can write software that is better than shitzilla and release it under (A)GPLv3?

>>25
With dozens of anonymous hosting services available over anonymity networks (e.g. Tor, I2P), the only security faggots that will be turned off by the legal aspect are those who absolutely want to publish their work under their own legal name.

>>27-29
Give up. They have billions of dollars and physical armies at their disposition. Just bend over and hope they'll be gentle.

>>30

With dozens of anonymous hosting services available over anonymity networks (e.g. Tor, I2P), the only security faggots that will be turned off by the legal aspect are those who absolutely want to publish their work under their own legal name.

Isn't that equal to... all of them?

>>27
Here's your list:
1. bend over
2. take it

>>33

1. bend over
2. take it

WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT
NO, WE AIN'T GONNA TAKE IT
OH WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANY MORE

WE'VE GOT THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE AND
THERE AIN'T NO WAY WE'LL LOSE IT
THIS IS OUR LIFE
THIS IS OUR SONG
WE'LL FIGHT THE POWERS THAT BE JUST
DON'T PICK OUR DESTINY COZ
YOU DON'T KNOW US, YOU DON'T BELONG

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xmckWVPRaI

* http://lwn.net/Articles/598598/
* http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2014/05/14/to-serve-users.html

what should i do now
i don't want to use some slimy stallman shit

>>35

slimy stallman shit

what are you even talking about

continue using google chrome or whatever

>>36

i never used chrome, you stallman cocksucker

>>35-37
Faggots, meet, slap ballsacks.

>>26
But I'm a powerful being and none of what you says apply to me. I will fight and win. And die without fear. Being a Super-Spirit this is natural for me.

is drm in a sand box better or worse than running obfuscated javascript, flash, or whatever other shit is in the web? When these platforms are a bottomless pit of vulnerabilities. DRM in firefox makes firefox no longer an acceptable choice for me, but it is some food for thought. Is it safe to run obfuscated code on an open VM?