zlacker

Amazing. Proprietary video codecs need to not be the default and this is huge validation for AV1 as a production-ready codec.

>>IgorPa+(OP)
Why does it matter if Netflix is using an open standard if every video they stream is wrapped in proprietary closed DRM?

>>raw_an+al
because device makers will not care for the DRM, but will care for the hardware decoder they need to decide to put into their devices to decode netflix videos. By ensuring this video codec is open, it benefits everybody else now, as this same device will now be able to hardware decode _more_ videos from different video providers, as well as make more video providers choose AV1.

Basically, a network effect for an open codec.

>>chii+Gm
You’ve convinced me… (no snark intended)

>>raw_an+al
> Why does it matter if Netflix is using an open standard if every video they stream is wrapped in proprietary closed DRM?

I am not sure if this is a serious question, but I'll bite in case it is.

Without DRM Netflix's business would not exist. Nobody would license them any content if it was going to be streamed without a DRM.

>>cheema+jp
I don't think anybody could suggest going back to Blueray at this point, if selling online without DRM would be the only choice, they would have to comply.

>>chii+Gm
But they still need to decode the proprietary DRM before it can be fed to the hardware decoder... lol

>>cheema+jp
>Without DRM Netflix's business would not exist. Nobody would license them any content if it was going to be streamed without a DRM.

I don't agree. If people refused to watch DRM-protected content, they would get rid of it.

For example, Pluto TV is a free streaming service that has much content without DRM. GOG lets you buy DRM-free games. Even Netflix itself lets you stream DRM-free content, albeit in low resolution.

>>cheema+jp
I'm not convinced by that. If DRM didn't exist then do you really think studios would be like "nah we'll just miss out on all that money".

They just want DRM because it makes them even more money. Or at least they think it does. I have yet to find a single TV show or film that isn't available on Bittorrent so I don't think the DRM is actually preventing piracy in the slightest. I guess they want it in order to prevent legal tools from easily working with videos, e.g. for backup, retransmission etc.

>>csmplt+Ly
I think the point is that if you are not Netflix, you can use AV1 as most of your clients devices support hardware acceleration thanks to the big guys using AV1 themselves.

>>cheema+jp
Why? Everything gets pirated anyway, even with all the DRM. There’s no difference.

>>csmplt+Ly
I struggle to follow your point. They still need to do that for any codec, and I would think that the DRM decryption would be using algorithms that might also be hardware accelerated.

>>dontla+ME
Security theater mostly, makes the executives feel good.

>>reddal+kB
From previous experience some platforms are considered a "leakage source" for content and major rights owners won't put their content there because it's too easy to steal from. The security measures that are put on streaming platforms aren't totally ineffective, they're restrictive but it's considered worth the trouble because platforms can actually measure the effect of restrictions.

The low resolution option is something many rightsholders accept, but from a product proposition perspective it's difficult to explain to many customers. They're just grumpy that they paid for content and can only watch it in SD, that reduces your customer satisfaction. Better to do nothing than a poor job sometimes.

>>dontla+ME
I've spent >20 years doing content security in various forms at various companies. Until recently I was directing the technology at a major streaming platform.

I can confirm that while there are serious issues with Widevine (and to a lesser extent PlayReady), the protection measures aren't totally ineffective. My work in improving security had measurable results saving significant amounts of money and reducing content leakage. One memorable time my colleague and I had a call with a big rights owner who tracks the piracy of their assets and they said "Can you tell us what you've been doing recently? Because the amount of piracy from your platform has dropped significantly."

Anti-piracy and content security is also a differentiator between platforms when bidding for content deals. Rights owners will absolutely give the best deals to the provider who provides more assurance and avoid platforms which are leaky buckets.

I know that doesn't fit the narrative, but until recently this was literally my job.

>>bobdvb+FR1
Are we talking about pretty mainstream content here? Stuff with at least a hundred thousand views in the first week?

I don't think I've ever looked for a recent show and not seen a pirate version.