While this "battle" may be won for now, I've no doubt Google will simply try to implement this in a different way with less backlash.

Ah, let me guess, now Google's gonna get everyone and their sister to move all their content to apps...

Good! Now we just need to degoogle everything else on the internet.

Rriiiiiiiigghhhhtt.

I'll just be standing over here, watching them not do that.

Web Integrity API proposal is what happens when Big Tech takes over the internet.

I absolutely do not trust Chrome or the google team. It does not make me feel any better the only barrier to them trying to ruin a internet a bit is some backlash.

I have not followed this stuff very closely. Here's a question. This article says:

People took issue with how the Web Integrity API would bring DRM to the open web.

Has there not been DRM on the web for many years by now for videos?

The Media Integrity API is something that streaming video services want and applies only to Android apps that are built on web technologies. This has nothing to do with conventional web experiences or even the Chrome browser on Android: it's effectively a solution for when media is served on webpages that are embedded inside an Android app.

Typically an Android app will use native libraries like ExoPlayer to request and serve DRM content, for instance a video from a paid streaming service to ensure that the viewer is permitted to watch it. Chrome is built on top of open video codecs and doesn't inherently support DRM in this manner (as far as I'm aware), so if an app developer wants to use web technologies by leveraging a WebView, they are restricted to which codecs and DRM is available.

It's my understanding that this new library offers a solution to such developers. As a reminder, this doesn't apply to the web at large.

From my perspective, this is no different than DRM offerings that are supported natively in all operating systems, including Android, iOS, Mac and Windows.

I am not asking for much. Just break up Google and throw both the big shareholders as well as the executives in jail for the rest of their lifes. If you go as far and decide to take all their money and spend it on social services, healthcare and education for the general public, I wouldn't be mad.

Google isn't proceeding. Maybe now they'll realize YouTube is also suffering from their poor decisions.

Unpopular opinion here: I kind of hoped they'd go through with it, as that would completely kill Chrome and Chromium and would lead to a repeat of IE vs Firefox, except Chrome would be the new IE. The fact that they backtracked means that they too saw that people would be massively flocking to Firefox.

thank FUCK