[governance] Re: Revised Draft IGC Statement #DRM in HTML5

Sat Jun 8 12:24:30 EDT 2013

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:

> Hi Sala,
>
> Just to be clear, I haven't alluded to anything; I hope I've been
> clear and direct when saying the February statement was a mess.  Which
> it was (is :-)
> <
> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/2013/contributions/contributions/Civil_Society_Caucus_Feb_2013%20copy.pdf
> >)
>
> That mess that you referred to was the consolidation of the statements
expressed by members of the IGC. Whilst it is all very well and easy to
whinge post the process, it is even far better to participate during the
process of preparing the statement.

> Agree about the need to discuss the new statement.  Great to have this
> mailing list for that purpose, it has worked very well for many years.
>
> Best,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Firstly, Adam, I will address you regarding your comment on what you
> > perceive to be contradictory during the IGF Consultations. I am only
> > responding to it because this is not the first time you have alluded to
> this
> > on this mailing list. For the record, there were extensive and diverse
> views
> > expressed whilst gathering feedback from within the IGC and that was
> > reflected within the submissions, nothing new given that there are many
> > diverse views within the IGC.
> >
> > As for the discussions on the draft statement, it is our duty to tease
> out
> > the discussions on the matter, particularly where dissent has been
> > expressed. This is why we have posted the draft statement on the
> statement
> > workspace to allow for people to comment on each pararaph and where it
> can
> > be easily pulled up from records of work going into drafting statements.
> >
> > Sala
> > (co-coordinator)
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks Catherine, Deirdre.
> >>
> >> I think, or hope, we are pretty much in agreement.  I tried to make the
> >> proposed IGC comment pretty simple, cutting the paragraphs that had
> >> attracted the most disagreement.  That left an opening sentence saying
> IGC
> >> supports the EFF statement.  2nd sentence saying IGC thinks DRM in HTML5
> >> harmful, trying to capture the overall sense of the other paragraphs
> >> discussed on the list.  3rd sentence IGC supports the EFF statement.  I
> know
> >> 1st and 3rd rather the same, but that was the point.  After a lot of
> to&fro
> >> where we seemed not to be getting anywhere, just tried to make something
> >> simple.
> >>
> >> I suspect we won't get consensus on more.
> >>
> >> And either we say something simple or end up, again, with a blathering
> and
> >> generally meaningless set of contradictions and compromise (for example
> see
> >> the IGC's February comment to the IGF open consultation).
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 8, 2013, at 8:41 AM, Deirdre Williams wrote:
> >>
> >> Thank you Catherine - that's what I thought.
> >> But if EFF has gone to such lengths to object to the working group
> charter
> >> rather than to DRM in HTML5 directly then I'm wondering why we are not
> >> simply supporting the EFF objection to the Charter?
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7 June 2013 13:10, Catherine Roy <ecrire at catherine-roy.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Deirdre.
> >>>
> >>> I am sure someone from EFF on this list could explain it better than I
> so
> >>> please correct me as needed but my understanding is that EFF's formal
> >>> objection concerns an element of the HTML Working Group charter that
> enables
> >>> the Working Group to propose the Encrypted Media Extensions (EME)
> >>> specification which effectively represents a technology  that, in
> >>> combination with Content Decryption Modules (CDMs), allows "the remote
> >>> determination of end-user usage of content". EME is used with CDMs,
> which is
> >>> a software component that permits access to encrypted resources (so
> >>> basically DRM).
> >>>
> >>> EFF has made a formal objection on the Working Group charter to
> basically
> >>> argue that such work, which is formulated in the charter as "supporting
> >>> playback of protected content", is out of scope for the Working Group
> >>> deliverables. So in effect, EFF is objecting to the fact that W3C,
> through
> >>> its HTML Working Group, propose a specification that will enable the
> use of
> >>> Digital Rights Management (via CDMs) in HTML5.
> >>>
> >>> It is my understanding that by supporting the EFF formal objection, IGC
> >>> is effectively saying no to DRM in HTML5.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Catherine
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Catherine Roy
> >>> http://www.catherine-roy.net
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 07/06/2013 10:02 AM, Deirdre Williams wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Could someone please help to clarify things for me?
> >>> I hadn't responded before about the Electronic Frontier Foundation
> (EFF)
> >>> statement because I had no time to read the documents until this
> morning.
> >>> My understanding is that the IGC was asked if it would support the
> recent
> >>> EFF statement.
> >>> The EFF statement is a "Formal Objection to the HTML WG Draft Charter",
> >>> indicating that the Charter "represents a significant broadening of
> scope
> >>> for the HTML WG (and the W3C as a whole) to include the remote
> determination
> >>> of end-user usage of content."
> >>> https://www.eff.org/pages/drm/w3c-formal-objection-html-wg The
> objection is
> >>> NOT to DRM in HTML5 as such, although the text contains a detailed
> >>> discussion of that issue as justification fotr the objection.
> >>> Particularly within the working group Charter, the objection is to this
> >>> reference in 2 -
> >>>
> >>> "Some examples of features that would be in scope for the updated HTML
> >>> specification:
> >>>
> >>> additions to the HTMLMediaElement element interface, to support use
> cases
> >>> such as live events or premium content; for example, additions for:
> >>>
> >>> facilitating adaptive streaming (Media Source Extensions)
> >>> supporting playback of protected content"
> >>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/charter/2012/
> >>>
> >>> So please - are we discussing offering support to EFF's Objection to
> the
> >>> Charter, or are we creating an IGC statement on DRM in HTML5?
> >>> And if the latter, are we doing anything about EFF's Objection, which
> was
> >>> what we were asked about in the first place?
> >>> Thank you
> >>> Deirdre
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 7 June 2013 01:54, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Catherine,
> >>>>
> >>>> Does the EFF statement cover your concerns?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Adam
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jun 7, 2013, at 2:14 AM, Catherine Roy wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> While I support this latest formulation by Adam as it is simple, to
> the
> >>>> point and avoids ambiguous and perhaps (for the moment) unprovable
> facts, I
> >>>> feel it is lacking with regards to users' rights, which is also one
> of the
> >>>> key issues at the heart of this whole matter. That is, as someone on
> the W3C
> >>>> restricted media mailing list mentioned, standards should be at the
> margin
> >>>> of debates, and if required to take part, should always, in the end,
> be on
> >>>> the side of the user. Much like optimizing sites for particular
> browsers
> >>>> that shut out certain users, there is a real problem here with
> shutting out
> >>>> users who do  not have the right software/hardware from content (in
> this
> >>>> case, much of the discussions revolve around premium content  but it
> could
> >>>> extend to any content that applies DRM). So, while I am not a
> wordsmith and
> >>>> therefore apologize for not proposing exact wording, I would like to
> see
> >>>> something more clear in the statement regarding users rights and
> sovereignty
> >>>> over their euh, "equipment".
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Catherine
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Catherine Roy
> >>>> http://www.catherine-roy.net
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2013-06-06 04:52, Adam Peake wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Sala,
> >>>>
> >>>> To be honest, having to remember a url and jump off to a separate site
> >>>> for such a small statement is a pain.  In my opinion, anyway.
>  Perhaps you
> >>>> can see the stats on the http://www.igcaucus.org/ page, how many
> people
> >>>> bother to visit vs the very large number who read the list?
> >>>>
> >>>> A cleaned up version of a short statement:
> >>>>
> >>>> The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) endorses and
> supports
> >>>> the formal objection lodged by the Electronic Frontier Foundation
> (EFF)
> >>>> <https://www.eff.org/pages/drm/w3c-formal-objection-html-wg>
> >>>>
> >>>> We believe that the inclusion of digital rights management in HTML5
> has
> >>>> the potential to stifle innovation and we object to the inclusion of
> digital
> >>>> rights management (DRM) in HTML5.
> >>>>
> >>>> We fully endorse the arguments raised by the EFF in their statement
> >>>> "EFF's Formal Objection to the HTML WG Draft Charter"
> >>>> <https://www.eff.org/pages/drm/w3c-formal-objection-html-wg>
> >>>>
> >>>> The EFF statement we're considering to support is itself long and
> speaks
> >>>> for itself.  See no need to add more than above.
> >>>>
> >>>> Adam
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jun 6, 2013, at 4:30 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> In case, people missed it. The revised Statement is live at:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/112 where you can add your
> >>>> comments and suggest text.
> >>>>
> >>>> Kind Regards,
> >>>> Sala
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> >>>> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dear All,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Further to the discussions on the mailing list, I have revised the
> >>>>> first version to the one below. I have highlighted the sentence
> still in
> >>>>> contention and also note that there are mixed reactions to the
> balance of
> >>>>> the protection of intellectual property rights through mediums like
> the DRM
> >>>>> to protect innovation and challenges to threats of impeded "Access".
> This is
> >>>>> a very interesting debate and one I believe should be thoroughly
> explored by
> >>>>> the IGC where we can come to some common ground (if we are able to).
> I have
> >>>>> not had the time to read Frank La Rue's new report but it would be
> >>>>> interesting to see his report of what the world is saying in
> relation to
> >>>>> this conflict. I am of course interested in what the IGC has to say.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Roland and Avri raised some very interesting points that deserve
> >>>>> discussion. As we speak, the Statement will be hosted on the
> Statement
> >>>>> Workspace on the IGC website. I have tried to capture every comment
> in the
> >>>>> attached document. I find that Statement Workspaces are far more
> effective
> >>>>> in neatly allowing people to comment on each sentence etc, so my
> apologies
> >>>>> if the attached document is inherently messy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What are your collective thoughts on what Roland suggested that
> whilst
> >>>>> there are many battles, this is not one we should spend time on? The
> key
> >>>>> issues for your deliberation would be:-
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What is the IGC's position on Digital Rights Management?
> >>>>> What is the IGC's position on Digital Rights Management in HTML 5?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you to all those for suggesting text and new wordings and
> >>>>> phrases. I have tried to capture your views below. All the mistakes
> are of
> >>>>> course mine. Let us have your thoughts. As soon as the Statement is
> on the
> >>>>> Workspace, Norbert will inform us and this will allow us to track
> comments
> >>>>> on the revised  statement.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Revised Draft Statement on Support for EFF’s Objection
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) objects to the
> >>>>> inclusion of digital rights management (DRM) in HTML5. We endorse and
> >>>>> support the formal objection lodged by the Electronic Frontier
> Foundation
> >>>>> (EFF) and that the draft proposal from the World Wide Web Consortium
> (W3C)
> >>>>> could stifle Web innovation and block access to content for people
> across
> >>>>> the planet.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We believe that the proposed standard by W3C is a serious threat to
> an
> >>>>> open and free internet. The inherent danger of the proposal would be
> to shut
> >>>>> out open source developers and competition, destroy interoperability
> and
> >>>>> lock in legacy business models.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Much of the developing world relies on open source developers to
> enable
> >>>>> OR CREATE mechanisms that allow for an open environment of sharing
> resources
> >>>>> related to agricultural practices, education, health and diverse
> content. In
> >>>>> such regions, access to information is a challenge and with serious
> resource
> >>>>> constraints, but it is an open and free internet (and the resultant
> ease of
> >>>>> collaboration/sharing information) that empowers communities.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For the foregoing reasons we reiterate our strong objection to the
> >>>>> support for DRM technologies in HTML5, and our agreement with the
> EFF's
> >>>>> arguments in this regard.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> >>>> P.O. Box 17862
> >>>> Suva
> >>>> Fiji
> >>>>
> >>>> Twitter: @SalanietaT
> >>>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> >>>> Tel: +679 3544828
> >>>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
> >>>> Blog: salanieta.blogspot.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
> >>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >>>>
> >>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
> >>>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> >>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >>>>
> >>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
> >>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >>>>
> >>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
> >>>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> >>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >>>>
> >>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
> >>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >>>>
> >>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
> >>>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> >>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >>>>
> >>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir
> William
> >>> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir
> William
> >> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >> To be removed from the list, visit:
> >>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >>
> >> For all other list information and functions, see:
> >>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >>
> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> > P.O. Box 17862
> > Suva
> > Fiji
> >
> > Twitter: @SalanietaT
> > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > Tel: +679 3544828
> > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
> > Blog: salanieta.blogspot.com
> >
> >
>

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Tel: +679 3544828
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
Blog: salanieta.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130609/8616fe44/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t