User:Djm-leighpark/sandbox7

bitChute

BitChute is a video hosting service that uses peer-to-peer WebTorrent technology that emerged in January 2017. The use of WebTorrent technology has allowed BitChute to scale in size without incurring the high bandwidth costs of more traditional video host sites such as Youtube, Vimeo and Dailymotion. BitChute's guidelines emphaise its neutral, "censor-free" and liberal approach to content but there are restrictions set towards the more extreme ends of the content spectrum.

[2] It was founded as a way to avoid content rules that are enforced on platforms like YouTube,[2] and some creators who have been banned or had their channels "demonetized" (barred from receiving advertising revenue) on YouTube have migrated to BitChute.[3] The platform has accommodated far-right individuals and conspiracy theories.[8] The Southern Poverty Law Center's Hatewatch blog has said the site hosts "hate-fueled material".[9]

S Suggestion

Berners-Lee's position as director of the W3C meant that his final approval was required before a specification progressed to become a W3C recommendation. With its controversial Digital Rights Management (DRM) implications, he had for several years maintained neutrality on the Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) proposal. However, by March 2017 he indicated that he felt the situation required him to finally state his position on the matter, which was to support the EME proposal. Widespread criticism of his decision and its implications arose, a portion of it centered on Berners-Lee's stated reasoning for coming to the position. There were claims that his position was "defeatist" and not supportive of the internet's open philosophy against commercial interests. In July 2017 Berners-Lee chose to approve the developed EME specification, a decision that would by default lead to its ratification as a W3C recommendation two weeks later. Despite the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFE) raising a formal appeal, W3C members went on to vote and ratify the EME specification as a W3C recommendation in September 2017.

Attempt-4a

Berners-Lee's position as director of the W3C meant that his final approval was required before a specification progressed to become a W3C recommendation. With its controversial Digital Rights Management (DRM) implications, he had for several years maintained neutrality on the Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) proposal. However, by March 2017 he indicated that he felt the situation required him to finally state his position on the matter, which was to support the EME proposal, there being some benefits with EME. Widespread criticism of his decision and its implications arose, a portion of it centered on parts of Berners-Lee's pragmatic reasoning for coming to the position, including "... Yes, there is an argument made that in any case, W3C should just stand up against DRM, but we, like Canute, understand our power is limited". There were claims from critics his position was not supportive of the internet's open philosophy against commercial interests, while an anti-DRM campaign group labelled Berners-Lee "defeatist" and "powerless". In July 2017 Berners-Lee chose to approve the developed EME specification, a decision that would by default lead to its ratification as a W3C recommendation two weeks later. Despite the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) raising a formal appeal, W3C members went on to vote and ratify the EME specification as a W3C recommendation in September 2017.

Cmt

I need to look at the criticisms section and see if I need to weave in part of "Many of the comments on Berners-Lee's post are also strongly critical of his position. Most of the arguments put forward are ideological rather than pragmatic, and do not address his counter-points about DRM being a simple reality with EME offering a standard that ultimately provides better protection for the Web as a whole.". But I need to do other things for a bit and then I'll rework the above.Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:43, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Attempt 4.01

Berners-Lee's position as director of the W3C meant that his final approval was required before a specification progressed to become a W3C recommendation. With its controversial Digital Rights Management (DRM) implications, he had for several years maintained neutrality on the Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) proposal. However, by March 2017 he indicated that he felt the situation required him to finally state his position on the matter, which was to support the EME proposal. Widespread criticism of his decision and its implications arose, a portion of it centered on Berners-Lee's stated reasoning for coming to the position. There were claims from critics that his position was "defeatist" and not supportive of the internet's open philosophy against commercial interests. In July 2017 Berners-Lee chose to approve the developed EME specification, a decision that would by default lead to its ratification as a W3C recommendation two weeks later. Despite the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) raising a formal appeal, W3C members went on to vote and ratify the EME specification as a W3C recommendation in September 2017.

Reset to base .. Clears the cn .... but the claims from critics is better but may be still be weasely ....

Attempt 4.02

Berners-Lee's position as director of the W3C meant that his final approval was required before a specification progressed to become a W3C recommendation. With its controversial Digital Rights Management (DRM) implications, he had for several years maintained neutrality on the Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) proposal. However, by March 2017 he indicated that he felt the situation required him to finally state his position on the matter, which was to support the EME proposal. Widespread criticism of his decision and its implications arose, a portion of it centered on Berners-Lee's stated reasoning for coming to the position. A number of opponents of DRM felt he was not being not supportive of the internet's open philosophy against commercial interests. In July 2017 Berners-Lee chose to approve the developed EME specification, a decision that would by default lead to its ratification as a W3C recommendation two weeks later. Despite the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) raising a formal appeal, W3C members went on to vote and ratify the EME specification as a W3C recommendation in September 2017.

Key Focus Area

However, by March 2017 he indicated that he felt the situation required him to finally state his position on the matter, which was to support the EME proposal. ^^BRAINWAVE:Optional insert point for TimBL reasoning detail^^ Widespread criticism of his decision and its implications arose, a portion of it centered on Berners-Lee's stated reasoning for coming to the position. There were claims from critics that his position was "defeatist" and not supportive of the internet's open philosophy against commercial interests.

Attempt 4.10a

However, by March 2017 he indicated that he felt the situation required him to finally state his position on the matter. Berners-Lee indicated the EME proposal brought some benefits including inter-operability.. We also noted he felt it was not particularly the W3C's function to restrict the usage of the internet however people liked, and if people wish to use HTML5 to watch movies then the W3C's purposes were to support that. While the W3C could make a stand against DRM it was the case DRM was already a reality and resistance by the W3C would be akin to King Canute (and the tide). Criticism of his decision and its implications. A number of opponents of DRM felt he was not being not supportive of the internet's open philosophy against commercial interests whilst the Anti-DRM campaign mocled him as "defeatist". There were technical concerns the EME did not given specification for the CXX? module needed for the incrtypion to support DRM thus a browser lock-in could occur.

Attempt 5

There has arisen need to do a one-liner for policy. OK this isn't a one liner.

From the mid 2010s Berners-Lee initially remained neutral on the emerging Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) proposal for with its controversial controversial Digital Rights Management (DRM) implications. In March 2017 he felt he had to take a position which was to support the EME proposal. He reasoned EME's virtues whilst noting DRM was inevitable. As W3C director he went on to approve the finalised specification in July 2017. His stance was opposed by some including Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the anti-DRM campaign Defective by Design and the Free software foundation. Varied concerns raised included being not supportive of the internet's open philosophy against commercial interests and risks of users being forced to use a particular web browser to view specific DRM content. The EFF raised a formal appeal with did not succeed and the EME specification became a formal W3C recommendation in September 2017.

Refs

References