I get where you're coming from, I think, but Unity is not related to standards in any way, unlike EME. Unity is just another game engine that can now run on the web. All we did here is help them along the way, just like we help other game engines to port to the web. It is not going to become a standard or part of the browser in any way.
Even with Unity (and Unreal and others) porting to the web, web browsers remain open, while web content (what ported Unity is) was always non-open (since practically all websites are not FOSS).
I agree with you on the other hand that EME would in fact be a danger to the openness of the web.
I know, I mentioned it. I believe a standard at least has some practical positive impact, unlike the integration of a particular closed platform.
>web content was always non-open
It's true that obfuscated JavaScript makes, in a way, a closed platform, but much less so, in my belief, than straight-up binary code (which Unity delivers and EME enables).
I get your overall point, but it just seems a slippery slope...
Even with Unity (and Unreal and others) porting to the web, web browsers remain open, while web content (what ported Unity is) was always non-open (since practically all websites are not FOSS).
I agree with you on the other hand that EME would in fact be a danger to the openness of the web.