Apparently DRM doesn't work on Linux, yet - but either way: how can DRM even work with Free software? If I can modify the source and build my own version, surely I can [make a version of the software that] strip out the DRM? Would that make Mozilla liable as facilitating breach of the DMCA?
Or is the DRM bit really in a binary blob supplied with the gpu/audio driver? [And support in the browser is just to facilitate shipping the data to the correct api entry point]
This is obviously the main issue. The DRM component itself is nonfree, downloaded from Adobe's servers (iirc).
With this DRM section in the official html specification, it is impossible to implement a fully html spec compliant, free software browser, which personally I think is outrageous.
At the end of the day, it's still "just" a spec, but I don't think someone (like the WHATWG previously) can just come along and "fix" this and get everyone on their side. At the very least, this almost feels like a betrayal by the w3c.
The plain truth is that no one cares about free software, even when the software (a web-standards compliant web browser) is concerning one of the greatest technological revolutions in human history so far (the internet), which is just honestly sad in my opinion.
On the topic of firefox though, I hope Mozilla keeps the DRM part of the browser an opt-in to download, rather than coming directly with the firefox package itself. Anyone know if this is still the case or not? Also, does anyone know if this DRM component is in the linux packages? (The article mentions only windows vista+.)
DRM is not free software. EME itself is not DRM. It's an API to interact with DRM module. Which doesn't make it any better. It should have no place in HTML standard.
Or is the DRM bit really in a binary blob supplied with the gpu/audio driver? [And support in the browser is just to facilitate shipping the data to the correct api entry point]