Kodi's official DRM stance

  Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Post Reply
h.udo Offline
Is a huge ABBA fan
Posts: 1,170
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation: 18
Location: 25:17
Post: #1
News about Kodi and DRM support caused quite a stir in the last couple of weeks. To clarify what we mean with DRM support, what it means for Kodi, and especially what it means for our users, read our official statement in the site news section.

As always, you're welcome to join the discussion.

f**k..... started editing without sudo | M.K.

Always read the online manual (wiki), FAQ (wiki) and search the forum before posting.
Do not e-mail Team Kodi members directly asking for support. Read/follow the forum rules (wiki).
Please read the pages on troubleshooting (wiki) and bug reporting (wiki) before reporting issues.
find quote
wgstarks Offline
Posting Freak
Posts: 2,018
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 17
Location: North Carolina, USA
Post: #2
The link must be broken. I get a 404 error.
Third try's the charm I guess.

ASUS Chromebox M004U (LibreELEC 7.0.2/Aeon Nox SiLVO)--->HDMI--->Onkyo TX-NR646--->HDMI--->Panasonic P65VT30
(This post was last modified: 2017-04-24 14:00 by wgstarks.)
find quote
Oddsodz Offline
Fan
Posts: 414
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 2
Post: #3
With the greatest respect to all Devs and coders of Kodi. I feel you may just be looking at this issue wrong. From a viewpoint of an end consumer with some tech understanding of how things work (but not a great understanding). Asking devs to come up with a way to hook into existing DRM code at low level on certain operating systems will incur a lot of down the road "technical debt". The constant DRM evolution will require constant upkeep with ever changing code and standards. Now I know it has been asked about before. And I know that some Devs/coders are just not interested in it. Some are opposed on moral grounds (open versus Proprietary code). But if Kodi was to add the "ChromeCast receiver protocol" as a Core feature. Then the end user would not need to worry about addons for "NetFlix" "Amazon" "BBC iPlayer" "Tidal" "Spotify" "Deezer" and many many more legal and good subscription stream based services from around the world. And Devs/Coders would not have to worry about updating all the addons needed for all the separate providers.

What I mean by "ChromeCast receiver protocol" is that Kodi can be setup as "ChromeCast" device just like a chromecast dongle thingy from Google. Or like some mid range AV receivers have already built in. And the "nVidia Shield" (also think the Roku and the Firesticks from Amazon can do it too but I have not researched them too much).

This way. End users have a simple (and legal) way to watch all the things from the legal providers and Kodi Devs don't have to worry about DRM. The DRM is handled by the providers on their own apps on smart phones (in theory).

Now if I was a coder. And knew what I was doing. I would have done this already myself and pass the code along to Kodi. But alas. I am not ;-(


TL : DR. Noob end user wants to sneak in a feature request that many have already asked for. Sorry

Thanks for taking the time to read.

Oddsodz
(This post was last modified: 2017-04-24 15:06 by Oddsodz.)
find quote
peppe_sr Offline
Posting Freak
Posts: 1,335
Joined: Mar 2006
Reputation: 22
Location: Italia, Sicilia, Siracusa
Post: #4
don't want to talk about which is the better solution. but using your suggestions you could only send a stream to kodi and see it on the big screen.
have i understand correctly?
the purpose to use such services trought kodi, for me, is the ability to browse contents in the "kodi style" having all data about movies / tvshows inside kodi.
if i want only see a movie on the screen i will use the proper app.
Tell me if I've misrepresented your words
Peppe
(This post was last modified: 2017-04-24 16:04 by peppe_sr.)
find quote
jjd-uk Offline
Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 6,235
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 156
Post: #5
(2017-04-24 15:04)Oddsodz Wrote:  What I mean by "ChromeCast receiver protocol" is that Kodi can be setup as "ChromeCast" device just like a chromecast dongle thingy from Google.

That's simply not possible, the Chromecast protocol is closed source so it's not possible to do that in any official way, and at least the last time I checked there's no open source & free 3rd party implementation compatible with Chromecast that we could easily use.
(This post was last modified: 2017-04-24 16:22 by jjd-uk.)
find quote
CopyCounsler Offline
Donor
Posts: 30
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #6
yes please. rather than a plugin nightmare of upkeep, it would be nice to have a small portion of kodi dedicated to talking to whatever 3rd party/etc/parallel installed drm hooks.

If you install Netflix and kodi detects it in the normal operating conditions, HOOK IT!

if you need chrome to achieve this feat, BRING IT ON!

Kodi is more and more becoming a END ALL solution to the media interface needs of many households, it seems this would in fact complete the circle for all types of users.

Kodi is an interface and playback utility. If it is going into a blackbox to retrieve the streams, so be it. If I gave it the tokens and the software layers on my machine, I want it to do it. Period.

So much so I want this to come true. Amazon prime may be actually used if I could get it into my KODI interface.. LOL

and then imagine the multi integration fingertip ready media. and the ability to make it family friendly with KODI? I'm READY.
find quote
MrTarantula Offline
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 3
Post: #7
Kodi adding low level DRM support is only good news. There is no way content providers (Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Vudu, Google, etc...) have not heard of Kodi. I'm sure they are well aware. If the Kodi team were to implement first class DRM support, these companies would be tripping over each other to be the first in line to get to Kodi's install base. Who knows how many people have Kodi currently installed?

I would definitely welcome legitimate content providers. I would even be willing to subscribe to services I don't currently subscribe to (Hulu to name one) if it meant I could use it without leaving Kodi.
find quote
h.udo Offline
Is a huge ABBA fan
Posts: 1,170
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation: 18
Location: 25:17
Post: #8
(2017-04-24 22:08)MrTarantula Wrote:  Kodi adding low level DRM support is only good news. There is no way content providers (Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Vudu, Google, etc...) have not heard of Kodi. I'm sure they are well aware. If the Kodi team were to implement first class DRM support, these companies would be tripping over each other to be the first in line to get to Kodi's install base. Who knows how many people have Kodi currently installed?

I would definitely welcome legitimate content providers. I would even be willing to subscribe to services I don't currently subscribe to (Hulu to name one) if it meant I could use it without leaving Kodi.

I can assure you all content providers heard about Kodi by now. You guys need to tell that to them, not to us. We're doing our very best to fight the piracy stigma.

f**k..... started editing without sudo | M.K.

Always read the online manual (wiki), FAQ (wiki) and search the forum before posting.
Do not e-mail Team Kodi members directly asking for support. Read/follow the forum rules (wiki).
Please read the pages on troubleshooting (wiki) and bug reporting (wiki) before reporting issues.
find quote
asciidisco Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation: 2
Post: #9
My hope would be for the Kodi Foundation to become a proper Certified Widevine Implementation Partner. So addon authors could use the widevine library officially & in a user friendly way. That way it would be possible to run every audio & video that will run in a browser. It would also open up the platform for official thrid party integrations like described in the blog post.
You can think of DRM whatever you want, but if you want to satisfy all end users needs, you need to find a way to cope with it.
(This post was last modified: 2017-04-25 11:12 by asciidisco.)
find quote
asplundj Offline
Member
Posts: 83
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 1
Post: #10
(2017-04-25 11:07)asciidisco Wrote:  My hope would be for the Kodi Foundation to become a proper Certified Widevine Implementation Partner. So addon authors could use the widevine library officially & in a user friendly way. That way it would be possible to run every audio & video that will run in a browser. It would also open up the platform form official thrid party integrations like described in the blog post.
You can think of DRM whatever you want, but if you want to satisfy all end users needs, you need to find a way to cope with it.

+1
find quote
RockerC Offline
Posting Freak
Posts: 1,486
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 28
Post: #11
Having DRM support in Kodi this way will be a good thing for all.

I like to reference my reply to theAnti-DRM zealots in this other thread here:

http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=312104
(2017-04-12 13:34)RockerC Wrote:  Please see the (somewhat heated) replies/answers already given regarding this questions in this other thread:

http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=...pid2566956

@Dalej, what you and other who did not read and understand the point of this implementation is that adding DRM support to Kodi does not restrict any existing functions or features in Kodi.

Kodi will still be able to play all your existing files and streams exactly the same way as it does today, no matter if they are from a legal source or not.

That is, adding DRM support only gives users the option of also playing DRM protected streams as well if you choose, and that is not mandatory or restricting in any way at all. Adding DRM support gives legal content providers such as example Netflix the option of writing addons for Kodi and have the streams for their specific addon be protected by a DRM chain.

Adding DRM support to Kodi does not give the XBMC Foundation / Team-Kodi or content providers the ability to prevent or stop you from playing your existing local files or stream from the internet using addons from other developers.

The "R" in DRM (Digital Rights Management really do stand for "Rights", and not "Restrictions" as you might think. Having DRM support will give us the right to legally play DRM protected stream in Kodi if we want. Not having DRM support in Kodi restrict us from legally playing DRM protected stream in Kodi, even if we wanted to.


As Nathan Betzen wrote in the comments of the article on TorrentFreak:

NathanBetzen Wrote:I get the sense that a lot of people think this DRM discussion is about somehow locking down the non-drmed stuff, like people's libraries or addons that don't make use of drm. We have no interest in doing that, and even if we did, we couldn't. It's one of the many great reasons that Kodi is licensed under the GPL. Doing something like that is impossible.

Anyway, point being, the term "DRM" is a blanket that can mean "plays Netflix" and can also mean "locks down the entire application and installs malware." I'm having a hard time figuring out if the outrage is about the first of those, or a misunderstanding about the second of them.

And as I wrote in that other thread:
(2017-04-11 11:17)RockerC Wrote:  Netflix streaming playback without breaking DRM is a great example of what having support for OS underlying DRM could add to Kodi, as reported here:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=ne...ix-Support
https://liliputing.com/2017/03/plugin-br...g-drm.html

You would still be able to play all your existing offline/streaming conteant and still possibly get legal access to premium subscription services. That is, we who pay for Netflix, HBO, Amazon Prime Video, etc. will get the possibilty of legally accessing streams from those services inside Kodi. All the while Kodi will act no different att all for users accessing content in whatever other ways they do today.

It's like adding a towbar to your car; you will not really notice it unless you hook up a carriage that you want to pull, and you as a user of the car don't have to use the towbar unless you actually want to pull a carriage, that is optional. Only downsides to adding a towbar to a car is that it will maybe make your car look less 'sporty' to some who currently don't care at all about the cars capability of pulling a carriage as they right now think/know that they will never ever buy a carriage.
Now don't be an asshat by complain that the next-generation of your favorite (free) car model is getting a towbar mounted by default. YOU don't have to hook up a carriage and YOU can still put whatever YOU like in its trunk and invite whever shady friends you want for a ride. Having the towbar mounted there will not restrict YOU in any way at all! The towbar will only be there to allow those like myself who want to buy or rent a carriage to hook it up to the same car model.
find quote
RockerC Offline
Posting Freak
Posts: 1,486
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 28
Post: #12
(2017-04-24 15:04)Oddsodz Wrote:  But if Kodi was to add the "ChromeCast receiver protocol" as a Core feature. Then the end user would not need to worry about addons for "NetFlix" "Amazon" "BBC iPlayer" "Tidal" "Spotify" "Deezer" and many many more legal and good subscription stream based services from around the world. And Devs/Coders would not have to worry about updating all the addons needed for all the separate providers.
@Oddsodz So sorry to burst your bubble but your way would require the transciever (meaning your phone/tablet) to first remove the DRM-encryption before streaming it to on Kodi or whatever other desination, and that breaks the point with DRM as if you could do that the you can simply record it and piracy that stream or whatever you want with it. You would not even have to use the Chromecast protocol if that was the case.

While adding Chromecast (Google Cast) receiver support to Kodi via an addon similar to the AirPlay addon would probably not be impossible, what you don't understand is that would not be able to cast DRM-protected stream to it without Kodi having DRM support.

The reason why you can use Google Cast to 'cast' Netflix or HBO to a Chromecast video device is that both both supports the same DRM technology, so you never break the DRM chain. thus the video stream is protected end-to-end by DRM from Netflix to your TV.

That is, even if Kodi could emulate a Chromecast receiver you would only be able to 'cast' non-DRM protected streams to it if Kodi does not also have DRM-support. Meaning that you would still not be able to stream Netflix and HBO, etc. to Kodi using the Google Cast protocol for Chromecast without Kodi supporting DRM.
(This post was last modified: 2017-04-25 12:45 by RockerC.)
find quote
mwaterbu Offline
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 0
Post: #13
Forgive my incomplete and non-technical understanding, but would it be possible to implement DRM similarly to Firefox?
https://andreasgal.com/2014/05/14/eme/

While I don't like the fact that DRM exists philosophically​, it has become a fact of modern technology (not saying that couldn't one day change). But at this point, continuing to avoid it would only hold Kodi back. Integrating more content sources keeps Kodi at the top of it's class, and allows a user's full experience to remain within Kodi, an application that still respects user choice and freedom.
find quote
giss73 Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 0
Post: #14
If the implement of DRM in Kodi means having contents from Netflix, Amazon Video, Hbo, etc, then do it and if it will be added already with Leia it would be awesome. A step foward to a universal platform.
find quote
arucard Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 1
Post: #15
I would like to thank Team Kodi for the stance they have taken.

I believe that the freedom that Kodi tries to give its users has played a large part in how popular Kodi has become. It's true that Kodi is used by many people nowadays, but you'd still be hard-pressed to find 2 people that use Kodi in exactly the same way. From the use of different skins and views to the different settings and addons, everyone seems to use Kodi in their own specific way. They have the freedom to do so. This freedom has also allowed for the possibility to easily access pirated content, which is now causing problems for Kodi when they wish to collaborate with legal content providers.

Rather than making changes to reduce the freedom given to Kodi users, Team Kodi is trying to make legal content easily accessible as well. This only increases the freedom given to Kodi users, as we are now given more ways to access content (like Netflix) without losing any of the existing ways to access content. Accessing legal content does sometimes require the use of DRM, but Team Kodi has (repeatedly) declared that this will not impede the existing ways of accessing content.

I realize that this is a difficult stance to take, which requires a lot of time and effort, but I (personally) also believe that this is the best direction in the long run. Thank you, Team Kodi.
find quote
Post Reply