VP9 Codec Now Enabled By Default In Chrome

[My8th]

VP9 is now enabled by default in Chrome dev channel. Lots of Youtube videos are already using it.

[XorEaxEax]

I don't see how EME has any effect on non-DRM content? All it will do is make things worse.

Here is where we are of different opinion, I don't see how EME makes things worse, you seem to assume that EME as part of the HTML5 standard will suddenly mean all video media becomes DRM encumbered. Why?

As I already stated, Google could have made all their Youtube video content DRM encumbered ages ago with the flash plugin had they so wished, why would they suddenly do so now because of EME?

Content which already used DRM (through flash, silverlight etc) will continue doing so, nothing gained or lost here.

However, what we do gain is a standard way of serving non-DRM encumbered video which can be supported across all platforms. This is what I care about, whether or not commercial DRM laden content is distributed using separately installed plugins like flash, or if they are installed through a extension mechanism in the HTML5 standard really doesn't matter to me.

Right now, flash content at least can be viewed on Linux. You can bet that any EME plugin will not run on any OS that doesn't implement some form of draconian "trusted computing" to prevent screen recordings and such.

Luckily there are ways around that, Netflix will never support Linux officially for the reasons you stated, but AFAIK you can get Netflix going through both Wine and of course, a VM. Flash will be deprecated either way, so clinging to that solution because it still has (thanks to Google these days, as Adobe has dropped Linux) native support seem futile.

Commercial content will require DRM in order for it to be distributed, Hollywood won't have it any other way. If you want to consume that content you will have to bend to their will (or pirate it), again, in practice I don't see how it really matters if it's through externally installed plugins like flash, silverlight, or through an EME mechanism in the HTML5 spec.

And yes, Linux and other open systems will likely never get the kind of official support from Hollywood content providers as those systems where it's easier to lock the content pipeline (not that it has ever worked sofar, but you can bet they will keep trying...). It's just something we will have to live with.

[curaga]

Here is where we are of different opinion, I don't see how EME makes things worse, you seem to assume that EME as part of the HTML5 standard will suddenly mean all video media becomes DRM encumbered. Why?

Not everything, but the clueless majority. IIRC it was RMS that said it (or maybe someone on this site?), if DRM becomes a part of the standard, it will become a tickbox in the frameworks.

Now, if Joe NewSiteOwner is setting up a new site, you think he won't tick the box that says "protect my videos"? It might even be ticked by default. Only those explicitly aware and against DRM will not tick it, resulting in a lot of videos that previously wouldn't have been DRMd becoming so.

[erendorn]

Not everything, but the clueless majority. IIRC it was RMS that said it (or maybe someone on this site?), if DRM becomes a part of the standard, it will become a tickbox in the frameworks.

Now, if Joe NewSiteOwner is setting up a new site, you think he won't tick the box that says "protect my videos"? It might even be ticked by default. Only those explicitly aware and against DRM will not tick it, resulting in a lot of videos that previously wouldn't have been DRMd becoming so.

Joe will probably have to choose between ten DRM schemes, of whom not a single one covers all platforms while most of them will still be hackable.
So if Joe would have used DRMed videos in the flash era, he probably won't use DRM when EME becomes the norm.
Personal speculation warnings apply on that obviously.

[curaga]

It's likely there will be a Windows one from MS, with all Windows browsers hooking up to it.