Il W3C ha deciso di continuare a portare avanti la proposta per la creazione di un DRM per il web (Encrypted Media Extensions, o EME), portata avanti inizialmente da Netflix, Google e Microsoft. Di proposte simili ve ne erano già state in passato: per i webfont, ad esempio, da parte delle aziende produttrici.
La Electronic Frontier Foundation, che si è opposta alla proposta, spiega come la creazione di uno standard per DRM su web potrebbe modificare radicalmente il web stesso, così come lo conosciamo:
Indeed, within a few weeks of EME hitting the headlines, a community group within W3C formed around the idea of locking away Web code, so that Web applications could only be executed but not examined online. Static image creators such as photographers are eager for the W3C to help lock down embedded images. Shortly after our Tokyo discussions, another group proposed their new W3C use-case: “protecting” content that had been saved locally from a Web page from being accessed without further restrictions. Meanwhile, publishers have advocated that HTML textual content should have DRM features for many years.
A Web where you cannot cut and paste text; where your browser can’t “Save As…” an image; where the “allowed” uses of saved files are monitored beyond the browser; where JavaScript is sealed away in opaque tombs; and maybe even where we can no longer effectively “View Source” on some sites, is a very different Web from the one we have today.
