Nathan Willis

Rhetoric

Nathan Willis at

I'm grappling to find the right word for something. What would you call the W3C EME committee's claim that "EME isn't DRM-in-HTML"?

And I mean, specifically, the problem is that that may be a technically correct statement, but it makes no difference, since EME is a delivery vehicle for DRM. Not the DRM itself.

Is that "doublespeak"? "buck-passing"? "Equivocation?"

It's something; I just need to put my finger on the exact terminology....

Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) likes this.

Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) shared this.

Show all 8 replies

I'm not sure, but maybe someone at the @Free Software Foundation knows.

Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-03-23T00:09:45Z

Nathan Willis likes this.

@Nathan Willis Some resources and points though:

  • https://www.defectivebydesign.org/from-the-web-to-the-streets-protesting-drm
  • https://media.libreplanet.org/u/zakkai/tag/no-drm-in-web-standards/
  • I was one of the people who gave a speech at the DRM rally. I have notes from my speech, though not the excact speech itself (someone did record it though, again, maybe the FSF knows). I could give you a reconstructed version if that's interesting. ("We must not let the W3C become an enemy of itself" seemed to be the line that people liked.)
  • Harry Halpin moderated the panel. He made clear that he was acting in his own capacity, and not that of a W3C employee, by doing so. But he did say something interesting, closing off the panel... as a quasiquote: "There are some lines that must not be crossed. Thus, if the W3C adopts EME, I will resign."

Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-03-23T00:17:07Z

I am sure there is a German word that captures it perfectly.

For english "weasel words" spring to mind. Probably not quite what you are after though.

John Kristensen at 2016-03-23T00:47:46Z

How about the simple "pretending"? Or perhaps "Trojan Horse"? Although that is a bit loaded, but then again...

Charles Stanhope at 2016-03-23T01:37:39Z