Re: Encrypted Media proposal (was RE: ISSUE-179: av_param - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals) from John C. Vernaleo on 2012-02-24 (public-html@w3.org from February 2012)

From: John C. Vernaleo <john@netpurgatory.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:17:11 -0500 (EST)
To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1202241716040.20417@yoshi>

> Which part is baloney?  The part where deaf people get to enjoy
> Hamlet, or the part where English professors get to critique it?
> 
> 
> the part where DRM/content protection is equated with intentionally
> denying access to impaired users 
> 
> 
> the argument ian is making is akin to saying that use of https is
> intentionally denying access to hackers
> 
>

Other than disagreeing with your use of the word hacker, isn't that 
exactly why most people use https?

Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 22:17:32 UTC