Firefox gets closed-source DRM

The Apache license and "open source" (as opposed to Free/Libre) culture surrounding Mozilla continues to make apologetics for this sort of backhanded support. So long as the major funding for browser development is intrinsically tied to profit interests, it cannot easily be otherwise. The enemy, as always, is the capitalist organization of software development. But it doesn't mean that one has to allow Mozilla to do this without explaining the dangers to the user community. Mozilla, like Android, have each closed their eyes and ears and wailed "lalalala" while promoting their own "app stores" (Firefox extensions) in which little or no consideration is given to the free/libre nature of the code: licenses are not mandatory parts of search results and in fact are hardly ever to be found.

Here we see another historic line in the sand breached -- not by Microsoft, Opera, and Safari, where it is to be expected -- but by Mozilla. Having breached this line, they deserve no deference or respect in participating in future standardization processes, and that is a real shame.

I am also confident that they can leverage Mozillas standing to even further their uptake at the publishers' side.

As I said before I am merely critizing the phrasing, since it looks like an attempt to fool the uninformed into believing that this will allow them to continue to use Firefox as their only browser.

The very core principle of EME is compartmentalization, the goal is to make content exclusive to certain parties.

Sure, Mozilla Corp. is a for-profit organisation, but their marketing is usually way above the "fool the sheeple" level.

Is Linux really fully supported? AFAIK the existing Adobe DRM implementation doesn't give the same "robustness guarantees" on all platforms. They claim a higher degree of "robustness" for the Windows variant, which IIRC led Amazon (when it still had a Flash-based alternative to Silverlight) to not offer high-definition content to Linux users.

But Andreas' blog said the CDM isn't able to gather any information about its host system, so this stuff can't possibly be a problem, right?

Yeah, remember when we were *cool*. Yeah, yeah, cool man... We used to be so *cool* didn't we... Remember that ?

But that was then Gervase, this is now.

Now you have demonstrated you have no principle you're not willing to abandon in the name of popularity. None. Doesn't matter what you did in the past. The point of principles is that they are immutable. That's why they are your *principles*.

A blank, looking for validation and approval. Nothing more than that. It's sad really. Reminds me a little of Tony Blair (if you'll forgive the digression in UK politics, as I know both you and I relate to that :-). Tony used to be cool once too. Now look at him. Can't go into a restaurant now without the waiters trying a citizens arrest as a war criminal.

Is that the legacy you want for Mozilla ? Is that the organization you want to give your talents to ? Do you think that's a good use of your time ?

If you want to be an apologist for DRM, I'm pretty sure Netflix would pay you a *lot* better than Mozilla. Or any other proprietary software company.

You've already shown popularity is #1 for you. How about going to work where you can be *really* popular ! You won't have to pretend you have any principles there, life will be so much easier.