Netflix HTML5 Video in IE 11 on Windows 8.1 | Hacker News Reader

Netflix HTML5 Video in IE 11 on Windows 8.1

techblog.netflix.com

10 pointsmotowilliams15 comments

These extensions are the future of premium video on the web, since they allow playback of premium video directly in the browser without the need to install plugins.

No, thanks. Future of video on the web is DRM free. Calling a dying trend "the future" is an indirect promotion of it, and Netflix can't pretend that they are neutral or even opposed to DRM when they promote it up to pushing it into HTML standard.

The only reason Netflix appears to support DRM is because they get content from organizations that demand it.

That's how they present it. However they don't sound convincing. This announcement is enthusiastic, rather than saying "yeah, we don't really like what's going on, but our hands are tied, etc. etc.". If they are enthusiastic about DRM - they are promoting it. So it's reasonable to criticize them for it.

Today, we're excited to announce, blah, blah

People who don't like DRM and only use it out of supposedly necessity (bad excuse if you ask me), won't be excited about it.

Also, Netflix is supposedly streaming some content that they own themselves. Is it offered DRM free?

"This announcement is enthusiastic, rather than saying..."

Well, Netflix is in the business of renting video, not in the business of fighting DRM.

I don't argue with that. All I'm saying - they are pro DRM. But when confronted about it, they try to deny it, and pretend they aren't. Being pro DRM is bad PR for them. Publishers are at least honest that they support DRM (out of some stupid reasons). It's not publishers however, but Netflix who pushes this garbage into the standard. So they have to bear the responsibility instead of pretending that they have nothing to do with it.

I don't see how that changes anything. Netflix supports DRM because they view it as imperative to their profitability. That's exactly why the content creators support DRM.

Exactly! It's in the contracts Netflix signs for content distribution. So really this is good for Netflix , but CAN open the door for competitions. I don't think cable providers will let the opportunity pass them to stream through a browser.

Can anyone tell me how are HTML5 "extensions" different to or better than "plugins" (eg Flash, QuickTime, Silverlight)? Has the line between open browser / specification and proprietary plugins just been shifted over a bit?

The primary user-facing difference is that these "extensions" don't require additional installation to view content (that is, once all major browsers support them). From a technical perspective, there could other differences, like protections in place to sandbox the browser from the rest of the system, which is much better than requiring the execution of a closed-source proprietary binary.

So if Flash player was built into all major browsers (like it is currently with Chrome) then that would remove the primary reason.

I thought EME was execution of a closed-source binary blob too. I also thought some browsers sandbox plugins (I could be wrong).

EME still seems to be just a new plugin specification, with a more limited API.

The real benefit I see in regards to HTML5 video is mp4 streaming to xbox, chrome, safari, ie, firefox (on windows), android, and ios.

Utilizing other formats (like vp9, flash, and silverlight [silverlight I think is getting discontinued]) will cut off your ios demographic.

While I am against DRM, what I do like about this becoming implemented is that videos can be encrypted in the file system then distributed over HTML5. This will be good for "private," videos...it's the only positive I can see.

What is the distinction between "'private' videos" which are presumably created by individuals, and privately owned media (like movies) which are created by corporations?

I'm using my own examples here, one of the projects I'm apart of distributes personal videos over HTML5. Having these just stored on a file system is vulnerable in a way that a sysadmin could view the video or if the file system is compromised [the exploit could reveal the video]. Those are what I could think of off the top of my head.

Having the video encrypted (since Netflix is pushing for it anyways, why not use it to my benefit), allows me to provide the keys directly to the content owner for decryption.

Would you do this by creating your own EME in a cross-browser manner?

I guess the built in support for basic encryption would work here (the mandatory profile).

You could even deliver the symmetric key out-of-band with asymmetric encryption.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com