Shame! Shame! Mozilla!
We never expected such a shameful compromising notion from you.


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Sameer Thahir <[email protected]>wrote:

>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Free Software Foundation <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:31 PM
> Subject: FSF condemns partnership between Mozilla and Adobe to support
> Digital Restrictions Management
> To: Sameer Mohamed Thahir <[email protected]>
>
>
>  *You can read this post online at https://u.fsf.org/xk
> <https://u.fsf.org/xk>.*
> FSF condemns partnership between Mozilla and Adobe to support Digital
> Restrictions Management
>
> BOSTON, Massachusetts, USA — Wednesday, May 14th, 2014 — In response to
> Mozilla's announcement that it is reluctantly adopting DRM in its Firefox
> Web browser, Free Software Foundation executive director John Sullivan made
> the following statement:
>
> "Only a week after the International Day Against 
> DRM<https://defectivebydesign.org/dayagainstdrm/>,
> Mozilla has announced that it will partner with proprietary software
> company Adobe to implement support for Web-based Digital Restrictions
> Management<https://defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restrictions_management>(DRM)
>  in its Firefox browser, using Encrypted Media Extensions (EME).
>
> The Free Software Foundation is deeply disappointed in Mozilla's
> announcement. The decision compromises important principles in order to
> alleviate misguided fears about loss of browser marketshare. It allies
> Mozilla with a company hostile to the free software movement and to
> Mozilla's own fundamental ideals.
>
> Although Mozilla will not directly ship Adobe's proprietary DRM plugin, it
> will, as an official feature, encourage Firefox users to install the plugin
> from Adobe when presented with media that requests DRM. We agree with Cory
> Doctorow that there is no meaningful distinction between 'installing DRM'
> and 'installing code that installs DRM.'
>
> We recognize that Mozilla is doing this reluctantly, and we trust these
> words coming from Mozilla much more than we do when they come from
> Microsoft or Amazon. At the same time, nearly everyone who implements DRM
> says they are forced to do it, and this lack of accountability is how the
> practice sustains itself. Mozilla's announcement today unfortunately puts
> it -- in this regard -- in the same category as its proprietary competitors.
>
> Unlike those proprietary competitors, Mozilla is going to great lengths to
> reduce some of the specific harms of DRM by attempting to 'sandbox' the
> plugin. But this approach cannot solve the fundamental ethical problems
> with proprietary software, or the issues that inevitably arise when
> proprietary software is 
> installed<https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/proprietary.html>on a user's 
> computer.
>
> In the 
> announcement<https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/05/14/drm-and-the-challenge-of-serving-users/>,
> Mitchell Baker asserts that Mozilla's hands were tied. But she then goes on
> to actively praise Adobe's "value" and suggests that there is some kind of
> necessary balance between DRM and user freedom.
>
> There is nothing necessary about DRM, and to hear Mozilla praising Adobe
> -- the company who has been and continues to be a vicious opponent of the
> free software movement and the free Web -- is shocking. With this
> partnership in place, we worry about Mozilla's ability and willingness to
> criticize Adobe's practices going forward.
>
> We understand that Mozilla is afraid of losing users. Cory Doctorow points
> out<http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/14/firefox-closed-source-drm-video-browser-cory-doctorow>that
>  they have produced no evidence to substantiate this fear or made any
> effort to study the situation. More importantly, popularity is not an end
> in itself. This is especially true for the Mozilla Foundation, a nonprofit
> with an ethical mission. In the past, Mozilla has distinguished itself and
> achieved success by protecting the freedom of its users and explaining the
> importance of that freedom: including publishing Firefox's source code,
> allowing others to make modifications to it, and sticking to Web standards
> in the face of attempts to impose proprietary extensions.
>
> Today's decision turns that calculus on its head, devoting Mozilla
> resources to delivering users to Adobe and hostile media distributors. In
> the process, Firefox is losing the identity which set it apart from its
> proprietary competitors -- Internet Explorer and Chrome -- both of which
> are implementing EME in an even worse fashion.
>
> Undoubtedly, some number of users just want restricted media like Netflix
> to work in Firefox, and they will be upset if it doesn't. This is
> unsurprising, since the majority of the world is not yet familiar with the
> ethical issues surrounding proprietary software. This debate was, and is, a
> high-profile opportunity to introduce these concepts to users and ask them
> to stand together in some tough decisions.
>
> To see Mozilla compromise without making any public effort to rally users
> against this supposed "forced choice" is doubly disappointing. They should
> reverse this decision. But whether they do or do not, we call on them to
> join us by devoting as many of their extensive resources to permanently
> eliminating DRM as they are now devoting to supporting it. The FSF will
> have more to say and do on this in the coming days. For now, users who are
> concerned about this issue should:
>
>    -
>
>    *Write to Mozilla CTO Andreas Gal and let him know that you oppose DRM
>    <[email protected]>*. Mozilla made this decision in a misguided appeal
>    to its userbase; it needs to hear in clear and reasoned terms from the
>    users who feel this as a betrayal. Ask Mozilla what it is going to do to
>    actually solve the DRM problem that has created this false forced choice.
>    -
>
>    *Join our effort to stop EME approval
>    <https://defectivebydesign.org/no-drm-in-html5> at the W3C*. While
>    today's announcement makes it even more obvious that W3C rejection of EME
>    will not stop its implementation, it also makes it clear that W3C can
>    fearlessly reject EME to send a message that DRM is *not* a part of
>    the vision of a free Web.
>    -
>
>    *Use a version of Firefox without the EME code*: Since its source code
>    is available under a license allowing anyone to modify and redistribute it
>    under a different name, we expect versions without EME to be made
>    available, and you should use those instead. We will list them in the Free
>    Software Directory <https://directory.fsf.org>.
>    -
>
>    *Donate to support the work of the Free Software Foundation
>    <https://u.fsf.org/xi> and our Defective by Design <https://u.fsf.org/xh>
>    campaign to actually end DRM.* Until it's completely gone, Mozilla and
>    others will be constantly tempted to capitulate, and users will be
>    pressured to continue using some proprietary software. If not us, give to
>    another group fighting against digital restrictions."
>
> References
>
>    - What is 
> DRM?<https://defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restrictions_management>
>    -
>    
> https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/05/14/drm-and-the-challenge-of-serving-users/
>    -
>    https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-mission-and-w3c-eme/
>    - https://defectivebydesign.org/dbd-condemns-drm-in-html
>    - https://fsf.org/news/coalition-against-drm-in-html
>    - https://defectivebydesign.org/oscar-awarded-w3c-in-the-hollyweb
>
> Media Contact
>
> John Sullivan
> Executive Director
> Free Software Foundation
> +1 (617) 542 5942
> [email protected]
> About the Free Software Foundation
>
> The Free Software Foundation, founded in 1985, is dedicated to promoting
> computer users' right to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute
> computer programs. The FSF promotes the development and use of free (as in
> freedom) software -- particularly the GNU operating system and its
> GNU/Linux variants -- and free documentation for free software. The FSF
> also helps to spread awareness of the ethical and political issues of
> freedom in the use of software, and its Web sites, located at fsf.org and
> gnu.org, are an important source of information about GNU/Linux.
> Donations to support the FSF's work can be made at https://donate.fsf.org.
> Its headquarters are in Boston, MA, USA.
> --
>
> Follow us on GNU social <https://status.fsf.org/fsf> | Subscribe to our
> blogs via RSS <https://fsf.org/blogs/RSS> | Join us as an associate 
> member<https://www.fsf.org/jf>
>
> Sent from the Free Software Foundation,
> 51 Franklin Street
> Fifth Floor
> Boston, Massachusetts 02110-1335
> United States
>
> Unsubscribe<https://crm.fsf.org/civicrm/mailing/unsubscribe?reset=1&jid=130074&qid=7819592&h=e57c7bd418c2a2f1>from
>  this mailing list.
>
> Stop all 
> email<https://crm.fsf.org/civicrm/mailing/optout?reset=1&jid=130074&qid=7819592&h=e57c7bd418c2a2f1>from
>  the Free Software Foundation, including Defective by Design, and the
> Free Software Supporter newsletter.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Sameer Mohamed Thahir
>
> _______________________________________________
> Indian Libre User Group Cochin Mailing List
> http://www.ilug-cochin.org/mailing-list/
> http://ilug-cochin.org/mailman/listinfo/mailinglist_ilug-cochin.org
> #[email protected]
>



-- 
THOMAS.
*M.VAZHAPPILLY*
_______________________________________________
Indian Libre User Group Cochin Mailing List
http://www.ilug-cochin.org/mailing-list/
http://ilug-cochin.org/mailman/listinfo/mailinglist_ilug-cochin.org
#[email protected]

Reply via email to