The article writes:
> We have come to the point where Mozilla not implementing the W3C EME
> specification means that Firefox users have to switch to other
> browsers to watch content restricted by DRM.
In other words, they use popularity as an excuse to ignore their own
principles.
--------
And it was a pretty poort argument, as I understand it. Reference Cory
Doctorow's "Firefox's adoption of DRM breaks my heart":
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/14/firefox-closed-source-drm-video-browser-cory-doctorow
In it, he talks about the claim of people switching away from Firefox. The
response from Mozilla was that because videos are large files which as he
says is a bad argument to use as an indicator that, from a file's size, they
can conclude people will leave Firefox.
"I am sceptical about this claim. I don't doubt that it’s sincerely made,
but I found the case for it weak. When I pressed Gal for evidence that
without Netflix Firefox users would switch away, he cited the huge volume of
internet traffic generated by Netflix streams.
There's no question that Netflix video and other video streams account for an
appreciable slice of the internet’s overall traffic. But video streams are
also the bulkiest files to transfer. That video streams use a lot of bytes
isn't a surprise.
When a charitable nonprofit like Mozilla makes a shift as substantial as this
one – installing closed-source software designed to treat computer users as
untrusted adversaries – you’d expect there to be a data-driven research
story behind it, meticulously documenting the proposition that without DRM
irrelevance is inevitable. The large number of bytes being shifted by Netflix
is a poor proxy for that detailed picture."
> Now can we organise a Mozilla protest for all the right reasons?
Yes - Let's!
