Netflix Blocking VPNs Annoying A Lot of People

[Phoenix86]

Yeah they like to assume the loss of a sale has no effect. It has numerous effects that I'm not gonna go into again on this website of pirates.

It's really quite simple, the artists has to be paid to produce or they can't produce. You can throw out all the mental gymnastics it takes to justify piracy and just stop there.

Yes, there are a lot of broken things in the system we have. Who cares? Did you pay the artist? If not, that's a far more fucked up than what we have today.

 

[JSt0rm]

They don't care if creatives get paid.

 

[Phoenix86]

They don't care if creatives get paid.

I know, it's why their mental gymnastics fail and it's how you avoid all of it in the first place.

 

[KeithP]

Mind boggling that people that go to the trouble of the VPN route cannot find the content they want elsewhere on the net. If I use a VPN it's just to increase my surfing speed by anti-throttling, nothing more nothing less.

Anti-throttling? That is even more "amazing." Most people use a VPN service for security reasons, not to geo-unlock or get around throttling (which it doesn't always work for).

-KeithP

 

[Sonikku]

Sometimes a VPN can act as a cock block when a big telecom feels they're entitled to more money to not throttle the internet speeds you're paying for.

 

[zinfamous]

The most depressing part of that article was the part where people used VPNs to watch CW, Fox, and NBC.

Sears catalogue?

 

[SP33Demon]

Anti-throttling? That is even more "amazing." Most people use a VPN service for security reasons, not to geo-unlock or get around throttling (which it doesn't always work for).

-KeithP

It almost always works. What's better, paying $2-5 per month or doubling your internet bill (i.e. increase your internet speed for another $50-200) to pay for them to not throttle me? I've had FIOS before, I know the drill.
https://youtu.be/5vs3QhEx_3w

 

[quikah]

I think to me the most amazing part is how Netflix can't have its original content on its service in some countries. Going forward with more leverage I expect less of that from them.

That is mainly because most of the "Netflix Original" content is not really produced by Netflix. They are just the distributor. Here is "House of Card" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1856010/companycredits?ref_=tt_dt_co

 

[Homerboy]

Normally I'd agree with you. There will always be a % that will pirate it simply because it's free.

However, in this particular case, you're talking about people currently paying for netflix and getting denied access to content. I pay and can't see things people in another country can see. They pay but can't see things I have access to. We both pay. This case isn't about people pirating netflix content vs. paying for it, and netflix somehow limiting that piracy.

They really need to change the industry so we all have access to the same content from the same provider for the same price. I know that's neither simple nor quick. I can't fault netflix for blocking VPNs because for the most part it's not even their fault.

That being said, even for their own content this is a problem. That's something they can and should address head on.

I like this post best so far.

 

[BoberFett]

its not that easy. Contracts are signed. Content costs different amounts in different parts of the world.

No it doesn't. The content was already produced. That's a sunk cost. Recreating that content in different parts of the world has a near-zero cost.

 

[Ns1]

However, in this particular case, you're talking about people currently paying for netflix and getting denied access to content. I pay and can't see things people in another country can see. They pay but can't see things I have access to. We both pay. This case isn't about people pirating netflix content vs. paying for it, and netflix somehow limiting that piracy.

They really need to change the industry so we all have access to the same content from the same provider for the same price. I know that's neither simple nor quick. I can't fault netflix for blocking VPNs because for the most part it's not even their fault.

No it doesn't. The content was already produced. That's a sunk cost. Recreating that content in different parts of the world has a near-zero cost.

Here's how it looks on the flip side. I am a producer. I sell Company A exclusive rights to "House of Cards" for 1 million dollars for the United States only. I sell company B exclusive rights to "House of Cards" for another million dollars, except for Canada only. Now I have 2 million dollars to produce my title.

It should be natural then, that the 2 companies who purchased exclusive distribution rights to my title for their respective territories would want to protect their exclusive distribution rights.

 

[poofyhairguy]

That is mainly because most of the "Netflix Original" content is not really produced by Netflix. They are just the distributor.

Yup, but they are changing that now that they have more leverage.

 

[JSt0rm]

No it doesn't. The content was already produced. That's a sunk cost. Recreating that content in different parts of the world has a near-zero cost.

Distribution companies buy the rights for different parts of the world. If you then had someone with north american right distribute to south america you would be in breach of contract.

 

[JSt0rm]

Its amazing how little you guys know about the thing you hate.

 

[BoberFett]

Distribution companies buy the rights for different parts of the world. If you then had someone with north american right distribute to south america you would be in breach of contract.

Then why don't the studios find a South American distributor? Because that's the issue, the content simply IS NOT available in that region. If there's no distributor, meaning there's ZERO income from that region, then how does piracy hurt? How is affecting non-existent revenue? Or do you just not want brown people to see your stuff if they haven't paid for it?

It's amazing how you support corporate greed when it suits you.

 

[BoberFett]

Its amazing how little you guys know about the thing you hate.

It's amazing how little you know about what other people know.

 

[JSt0rm]

Then why don't the studios find a South American distributor? Because that's the issue, the content simply IS NOT available in that region. If there's no distributor, meaning there's ZERO income from that region, then how does piracy hurt? How is affecting non-existent revenue? Or do you just not want brown people to see your stuff if they haven't paid for it?

It's amazing how you support corporate greed when it suits you.

What are you talking about? There most certainly is south American distribution. Its up to them to decide how they distribute it. Same with Europe, et all. This is why you see some things on netflix in some markets and not others. This is why itunes has different content based on market as well. This is why there are certain dvd's on the shelves in certain markets and not others.

It has nothing to do with corporate greed and more to do with understanding that local distribution is better at making calls about how to market something in that local market. The world is not all americans.

This was never a issue before streaming and I agree there needs to be some changes but you cant just take what you want. The companies need to figure out the best way around this issue.

 

[JSt0rm]

It's amazing how little you know about what other people know.

You haven't said anything. Sorry.

 

[slag]

If you live in South America and there's a South American distributor who owns the rights to distribute in South America but they refuse or otherwise don't want to show that content that you want to watch, is it wrong to use a proxy to bypass the distribution issue or find another, non piracy way, of acquiring the video stream, whether its subscribing to another service or whatever allows you to get original content from the source in the US? Is it against a law to do that or otherwise morally wrong if the distributor for that sector just decides to not distribute that material?

Just curious what y'alls thoughts are on that.

 

[poofyhairguy]

This was never a issue before streaming and I agree there needs to be some changes but you cant just take what you want.

Is that what you feel people using a VPN are doing? Taking what they want, even though they pay for the service?

When I use a VPN to get around local blackout restrictions for football games on ESPN am I "stealing" from ESPN even though I pay for the service and internet? Is it stealing if I can get around a stupid restriction some other entity holds them to if my loophole doesn't harm the distributor (because the entity doesn't see them at fault)?

I think the honest answer is the industry if left to its own devices changes too slowly (like many industries), but consumer expect the change too fast (basically as soon as they can think of a problem they want it changed). Probably as long as Netflix offers a free trial period they aren't the bad guy, but that doesn't help the consumer who just wants to be able to pay for the content but can't. Much like abandonware games I feel this creates a situation that lowers consumer sympathy for the current copyright regime. I am not saying people are entitled to the content, but there is no sympathy for the content provider's position when they say why the content can't be had when technologically it can be had.

On the Netflix VPN issue I feel like people aren't entitled to expect Netflix to support VPNs, but they get it to work there is nothing wrong with that. The consumer didn't agree with the distributor to only watch content offered in their market. The consumer didn't sign a contract or click a EULA that said that they have to accept a worse Netflix product because of where they live. I think Netflix is responsible for trying to block the content, and the media rights holders are responsible for holding Netflix to that, but the consumer is responsible to no one if they are paying full rate for a service and they find a way to maximize that service. Much like as a college kid I wasn't responsible that I accidently got free cable even though I only paid for internet. It was up to the cable company to cut me off and they didn't so win for me.

 

[Ns1]

Is that what you feel people using a VPN are doing? Taking what they want, even though they pay for the service?

When I use a VPN to get around local blackout restrictions for football games on ESPN am I "stealing" from ESPN even though I pay for the service and internet? Is it stealing if I can get around a stupid restriction some other entity holds them to if my loophole doesn't harm the distributor (because the entity doesn't see them at fault)?

I probably put this on the same level of illegal as driving 40mph in a 35mph zone.

 

[BoberFett]

I probably put this on the same level of illegal as driving 40mph in a 35mph zone.

Per the law, watching a blacked out game locally is a violation of copyright, no different than downloading a movie from The Pirate Bay.

Why the sudden softening on dirty pirates wanting free stuff?

 

[Ns1]

Per the law, watching a blacked out game locally is a violation of copyright, no different than downloading a movie from The Pirate Bay.

Why the sudden softening on dirty pirates wanting free stuff?

I think we can all agree that there are varying degrees of illegal.

 

[smackababy]

I think we can all agree that there are varying degrees of illegal.

Yes. Two degrees. Illegal and law is bad.

 

[BoberFett]

I think we can all agree that there are varying degrees of illegal.

So who made you the arbiter of those varying degrees? Why do you get to say that the football pirate isn't bad, but the movie pirate is? That's rather subjective, don't you think?