I know about DRM from games and how it’s a plague these days but I’ve heard a rumor that it would be implemented in videos, so how will this work if it comes to fruition?
That’s already a thing, so I’m not sure what you’re referring to or asking.
Video can be encrypted with DRM, and only play on devices with DRM module or decryption.
When you can play and see the video on your screen, through your web browser or media player, and then stream your desktop to a TV, you may not be able to see the video if it’s DRM protected against that.
YouTube already used DRM for many years, but only on select videos. Youtube-dl was criticized and attacked for having decryption code and test cases / explicitly referenced protected videos/video URLs, effectively meaning promoting or instructing DRM circumvention, which is illegal in many jurisdictions (moreso than downloading or playing unprotected media).
That’s why yt-dlp (fork of youtube-dl) does not include that DRM decryption - AFIK anyway.
The main webbrowsers include DRM related stuff to be able to play them back. Those who want to ship their own have this additional barrier to reach feature parity. And distributors or operating systems like Debian that want to distribute only free code can’t include them.
This is from the top of my head. So excuse me if anything is wrong or overly broad.
major streaming platform like netflix, amazon disny etc, are using drm. you may experience limited video quality on your device. especially older devices will be capped at 720p
yt-dlp and similar tools will stop working, but there is already a temporary solution. The current drm issue with YouTube is limited to the app on TVs and consoles, web browsing (windows, linux) is unaffected
Will this affect Invidious, or apps like FreeTube?
I’m guessing yes…
I believe freetube uses yt-dlp, so probably eventually yes. Many of these tools do.
Has it already been implemented? Glad I archived the videos / channels I wanted.
AFAIK it’s been implemented years ago, but only for when the uploader checks a box in the advanced settings for the video.
Some videos are barricaded with DRM, most aren’t.
Don’t know nuances but DRM for videos is already a thing as far as I know. It is just coded and to decipher it you need some black-box library. A similar thing works for satellite TV.
That means only “authorized” clients equipped with “correct” DRM module can ever plays those video. If I have to guess, it would be Widevine L3 for browsers.
Is it just me that thinks this is a slippery slope into Google working towards locking everyone who uses/watches YT into Chrome only?
There’s a chance google has to divest from Chrome, but we won’t know until September at the earliest. The process the DOJ brought against it is in progress. Binding YouTube to chrome now might jot be a smart move if google loses the process.
There is a good chance in my mind that google will win against the Department Of Justice simply because of the current administration in the US.
There is no locking into Chrome needed, because all big browsers have interfaces for DRM content implemented.
Probably same as how Netflix does it?
