
Disney+ streaming uses draconian DRM - toma1k
https://hansdegoede.livejournal.com/22338.html
======
profmonocle
> desktop Linux and many Android devices only support level 1. In this case
> e.g. Netflix will not offer full HD or 4k resolutions

And yet 4K webrips of recent Netflix shows are readily available on torrent
sites.

I don't understand who these higher levels of DRM are trying to target. They
obviously don't stop the serious pirates from ripping and sharing the content
with everyone. Yet the lower levels are "good enough" to stop average users
from trivially downloading and keeping the file, like you might do with an
plain, embedded MP4 file.

~~~
turblety
DRM punishes paying customers and does nothing to stop piracy. It reminds me
of those "you wouldn't kill" segments at the start of DVD's that you couldn't
skip, but just moaned at you to not pirate the DVD. But the only people they
were telling this to was paying customers who bought the DVD. People who
pirated the DVD, just plugged it into their computer, ripped out the content
then published.

~~~
geofft
Sure, but why? Do the rightsholders believe that these mechanisms are
effective at making them money somehow? How correct are they - are these
mechanisms effective at stopping _some_ amount of casual piracy and converting
that into purchases?

~~~
jaimex2
It's pretty simple: They pay a hot shot company to try and stop piracy and
thats the best they can come up with.

Piracy can't be stopped but thats not what they want to hear.

Piracy can be greatly reduced by distributing the content via Netflix but
thats not what they want to hear.

~~~
bilbo0s
> _And yet 4K webrips of recent Netflix shows are readily available on torrent
> sites._

and:

> _Piracy can be greatly reduced by distributing the content via Netflix_

Aren't you guys saying different things? One is saying people already pirate
on netflix, and the other is saying netflix removes the need for piracy.

If you're saying the same thing, I would interpret it to mean that piracy is
greatly _reduced_ on netflix, but not entirely eliminated. But if that be the
case, would that not be evidence of netflix' anti-piracy measures working?

~~~
catalogia
DRM doesn't inconvenience pirates, but piracy inconveniences consumers.

It's inconvenient to free up 50 GB of hard disk space to torrent of a 4k
netflix rip you found off some shady torrent site. It's much more convenient
to just give netflix a few bucks a month. That inconvenience comes from law
enforcement action against pirate sites and many users having trouble managing
their hard drive space. Not from DRM.

~~~
noodlesUK
It may be inconvenient to free up some disk space (citation needed, anyone on
HN has probably got terabytes of free space _somewhere_ ), but the
inconvenience of certain streaming platforms, or even the total hostility to
watching anything ad-free (even paid users) will knock people into the piracy
camp. There is _no_ source where I can watch AAA movies that I buy on my
laptop legally in 4K as it is illegal to break Blu-ray encryption (and I run
Linux). I buy or rent movies I want to watch on my Apple TV in 4K, but what am
I supposed to do if I want to watch something on a plane for instance?

Anything that is on Netflix I watch. I can’t watch amazon prime on my Apple TV
because their region system is broken (yes, if an amazon employee is reading
this, please fix having prime in multiple countries) so battlestar galactica
and other shows in their catalogue aren’t available come from other sources.

~~~
catalogia
I'm talking about the typical consumer, not a HN user. Most people aren't
running linux, have legal streaming options available to them, don't have
terabytes available to them at any particular moment (maybe they have a few
terabytes of portable harddrive in a closet somewhere, but not mounted and
ready to roll.)

Are there scenarios where typical consumers turn to piracy? Sure, aboslutely.
They generally do that when a convenient legal way isn't an option (e.g.
region locks screwing them over.)

~~~
lowercased
> Most people aren't running linux, have legal streaming options available to
> them... Are there scenarios where typical consumers turn to piracy? Sure,
> aboslutely

my wife - a non-tech person, really - falls in to this camp. she's turned to
torrenting things because the experience of streaming is just... slow. and
bad. and stuttery. oh, and we still get ads on things (hulu, for one). She
figured out how to find free streams for soccer matches - when we paid for
"real" streams, they still had ads taking up 20% of the screen. And still
somewhat jittery/stuttery (but - those 2 minute car ads at the start of the
stream were _never_ jittery).

yeah, the 'free' stuff experience isn't always great, but when the paid
experiences are still kinda crappy, what's the point of paying?

------
andrepd
>Widevine has 3 security levels and many devices, including desktop Linux and
many Android devices only support level 1. In this case e.g. Netflix will not
offer full HD or 4k resolutions, but otherwise everything works fine, which is
a balance between DRM and usability.

This reminds me of my very short foray into streaming services. I purchased a
month of Netflix, or rather I got their 1 month trial, and opened the website
to watch something. First it didn't open on Firefox, and they told me to
install Chrom(ium). I didn't like it, but went away and `apt install`ed
Chromium. Then it blocked my account because I was using a VPN. I liked this
even less (I gave it a credit card number, so they know I'm not a bot or
something using a VPN to hide traffic), but I still disabled my VPN. Mind that
these two steps already cost me 45 minutes of browsing through FAQs and forums
to figure out.

Then I finally open something, after installing proprietary software, a new
browser, and disabling my privacy-protecting VPN. I'm presented with a video
playing in glorious 1280x720 resolution. I just laughed to myself, closed the
tab, and opened thepiratebay.org.

So let me get this straight. I'm _paying_ for a service and I get _headaches,
restrictions upon restrictions, and mandatory malware_ , all for the
_privilege_ of watching gimped resolution content? Whereas if I went on
piratebay I could get a 4K mkv file I can watch anywhere I want, no internet
and no software required? You can fuck right off.

Strikes me as odd how anyone can describing paying for a shit service as "a
balance between DRM and usability".

~~~
matheusmoreira
People outside the United States have to suffer through all that for access to
_a subset_ of the full Netflix library. And Netflix is one of the better
companies in that regard. Most of them simply tell me the content is "not
available in my country". And when people ask them why, they have the gall to
blame "piracy".

~~~
fyfy18
Ironicallly I think this is why the privacy 'war' can never be won by these
corporations. I live in a small European country where even if you subscribe
to Netflix, Amazon (which isn't officially available here), cable TV, and
whatever else you can find, you still won't get a lot of new movies and shows
that you may want to watch. The only way you can get them is by pirating them,
so that's what people do.

The problem is piracy isnt geo-blocked, so if someone here pirates a movie and
shares it, it's also available to someone in the US.

I'm not sure why they keep pushing these technical restrictions, when really
the issue is they don't allow people to buy their content in the first place.

~~~
input_sh
Yep, I couldn't agree more. I've tried subscribing to Amazon Prime purely for
the shows/movies (not like we have next day shipping or something), and I
couldn't find a single movie/show that's not geolocked. Not even their
originals.

------
filmgirlcw
The hand-wringing in this thread is sort of amazing — especially since 99% of
the people complaining weren’t going to subscribe anyway.

Look, if there are indeed issues with actual ChromeOS (and not the Chromium
variants — but the full mostly-proprietary Google procured ChromeOS), I fully
expect that to be fixed — you might not get 4K support (but there are what, 3
Chromebooks with 4K screens? Plus, most streaming services do not support 4K
on web browsers period - even Netflix only offers it on Windows. Mac users
with 5K screens have to use Boot Camp (and even that isn’t a guarantee) to
watch 4K in the browser) — but if Chromebooks are an issue, I fully expect
that to be fixed.

As odious as DRM is, I just can’t bring myself to be surprised or overwrought
by its existence. Yes, it is largely more about appearances than actually
solving piracy — but those appearances matter. The big thing that has pulled
people away from piracy is convenience. And with the exception of Linux on the
desktop users (a population that is small and only getting smaller, as the
main distros don’t even care about the desktop or non-server users anymore),
Disney+ seems to offer that. The people that pirate because of DRM would have
pirated anyway. I pay and subscribe to more content than 99.99% of the
population — but I also download whatever I can’t get from an online service
and I feel zero guilt and make zero justifications for my choices. And that’ll
remain true for Disney+ — even if there wasn’t a DRM scheme at all (which just
isn’t ever going to happen).

DRM sucks, sure, but are we really surprised? And I’m sorry, but I’m not ready
to boycott a streaming service with tons of content because it doesn’t support
Linux in the desktop.

~~~
thayne
I probably would pay for it if it had linux support. But since it doesn't, I
won't. Every device in my household is either linux or Android, and I
primarily stream from desktop linux. If disney+ doesn't work on that there is
no rason for me to pay for it.

------
mindcrime
Interesting. I'd been toying with signing up for Disney+ at some point (when
does it even go live officially?). But if this is the case, I absolutely won't
be getting a subscription as I use Linux as my desktop OS.

"No Linux support" == "no customer"

~~~
reaperducer
While I agree with the philosophy that Disney should try to support as many
platforms as possible, I really don't think it will notice the Linux market is
missing.

Cost of building and maintaining a Linux client > Potential revenue from Linux
users.

~~~
mfer
This impacts those using ChromeOS, if I read it right. Disney May want to
support that.

Isn’t ChromeOS Linux under the hood?

~~~
Keverw
Yeah ChromeOS is Linux under the hood. Probably the most mainstream desktop
class OS based on Linux. A family member's Windows laptop quit booting up, and
wanted a new one. Talked them into a Chromebook since they mostly just use the
web, and didn't want to spend a lot of money. Figured ChromeOS would be less
bloated than the other traditional desktop OSes too, especially if not wanting
to spend a lot on hardware as I feel a similarly priced Windows laptop would
be slow probably due to the lower hardware.

Wouldn't surprise me if a lot of kids have Chromebooks too, which would be
Disney's target. There's some decent models that are cheap and probably more
secure than just giving them a Windows Laptop.

Also recently they added official support for Linux apps themselves, that's in
beta called Crostini. They run inside of a container. But before then no Linux
apps could be installed even though it's Linux under the hood, but I know
there was some unofficial ways.

I was apart of the CR-48 beta where they sent out free laptops to test with.
Surprised they did that in the first place, but it just sits in the closet now
and very slow, no longer gets updates but used to use it alot more when it was
new and feeling special since part of the beta program. So with Linux support,
part of me wants to buy a newer one. Could run Node and VSCode on a
Chromebook!

~~~
protomyth
* Wouldn't surprise me if a lot of kids have Chromebooks too*

Given how many schools want kids to have portables and Chromebooks have become
the cheap choice, this is going to be a problem.

------
yumario
AmazonPrime video does not delivers HD content in Linux... I tried everything
switching browsers, changing User agent, wine, running virtual box. I seems
some type of DRM is not implemented yet in Linux. Netflix is the same I think.

I happily pirate content now.

~~~
shakna
You can get 1080p streams from Netflix on Linux (for 99% of their collection)
by switching your user agent to ChromeOS. Their check is just:

    
    
        a = /CrOS/.test(a.userAgent);
        this.Fma = this.Aw = q.Gu.PV;
        this.Qm = [x.$l.nV];
        this.oo = [x.V.vA, x.V.wA];
        a && this.oo.push(x.V.TH);
    

It very much is _not_ "DRM not yet implemented".

Both Prime and Netflix are fully capable of streaming their highest quality
under Linux - if you have the driver support.

Unfortunately they have a bunch of hacky stuff trying to prevent it, rather
than allowing the user's browser is to make the decision.

~~~
stjohnswarts
That's one reason I use it. If they switch to nazi DRM I'll drop them. If
Disney won't play on Linux meh whatever then on them. I'm sure they won't miss
me, and I won't miss them much either.

------
jonplackett
Anyone who’s used Disney’s existing streaming service will, I am certain, tell
you it it truly awful. It’s incredibly slow, saddles you with massive
downloads regardless of device or connection type. The app sometimes just
doesn’t open at all.

I really hope whatever they’re making is not based on what they are doing
currently.

~~~
hellofunk
This whole thread has been rather surprising to me, we've been enjoying
Disney+ for a few weeks now and I've been amazed how wonderful all the content
is. I've never seen any errors or the issue described in this article (I'm on
Mac).

The only thing about the UI that I miss is that it does not respond to
keyboard shortcuts (like pressing spacebar to start and stop the playback).

But overall, I've been very happy and impressed with the service.

~~~
alt219
Are you from the future?

In all seriousness though, how are you able to enjoy Disney+ currently? It has
yet to launch. According to the Disney+ website it launches in just under 23
days from now.[0]

0\. [https://disneyplus.com](https://disneyplus.com)

~~~
mholt
It was released early in some regions like the Netherlands for testing and
promotional purposes.

~~~
alt219
Thanks, I of course didn’t read the article before asking my question. Glad to
hear it works well so far. Looking forward to it when it goes live. Cheers!

------
zeruch
Having had Disney as a client in a past life, I always assume they will go for
the most draconian, despotic IP control imaginable...as a starting point.

They are cultural not wired any other way, and cannot be mollified. They are a
horrible company.

------
Causality1
>In this case e.g. Netflix will not offer full HD or 4k resolutions, but
otherwise everything works fine,

I don't understand the point of this type of thinking. Video DRM isn't like
Denuvo where it can actually get you a few days or even weeks before any
pirated versions exist on the web. If it can be watched by a human pirates
will copy it, even if they have to rip it straight from the display controller
of their monitors. I have never once had the slightest difficulty or delay in
finding pirated versions of video content on Day 1 or even before, and at the
highest-produced quality and resolution. Why do providers think making life
hard only on paying customers is a good thing?

~~~
jedberg
They do this because Hollywood doesn't understand technology. Netflix
understands technology and understands this stops no one, but they are
licensing the content from Hollywood, who thinks this behavior actually helps.

Netflix is forced to play ball with them.

Your next question is usually, "Why doesn't the Netflix original content not
have these shenanigans then?".

The answer is that most Netflix content is still made by Hollywood studios, so
they have the same restrictions. Netflix is only a distributor in most cases,
not the content creator.

The other answer is that it is a lot more complicated in the software and for
testing to say "can this content be played at 4K based on the publisher?" than
to just say, "DRM level 1 means no 4K".

~~~
jyrkesh
Was waiting for this reply, happy to see it come from the mighty jedberg. For
those that don't know, click on his bio, he's definitely 100% spot on here

------
tolmasky
So, at least from my basic research, the levels seem to be switched in this
post: L1 is the highest level, not L3. So if Android and Desktop Linuxes
support L1, that should not be an issue. Perhaps its is a minor error and he
meant L3.

That being said, is it possible for the user to have their Desktop Linux
support L1 somehow? Android is a Linux that clearly support L1 and can show
these formats (I imagine), so can that be accomplished on another Linux?

~~~
Mindwipe
Android depends on the hardware, but generally speaking Western devices
support Widevine Level 1 and its implemented in hardware. Desktop Linux will
only ever support Level 3.

But Chrome on Windows also supports Level 3, and Disney+ works in Chrome,
there, so the article isn't correct.

~~~
yumario
Why do say that Linux will only ever support Level 3? Is there some
fundamental limitation?

~~~
Mindwipe
There's the fundamental limitation that the odds of any maintainer rewriting
the entire graphics pipleine to secure the video path from the user for DRM on
Linux is roughly zero.

~~~
londons_explore
A corporate sponsor might rewrite it... Chrome OS did it after all...

Probably wouldn't get merged into mainline Linux tho due to all the DRM
opposition

------
dmitrygr
As always, the pirate bay offers a DRM free alternative. Maybe one day the
media companies will learn that the one thing consumers cannot stand is being
inconvenienced, even slightly.

As long as their solution provides less value than pirating, or is a bigger
pain in the ass than pirating, they will lose.

Unfortunately for them, pirating has become so easy, that unless they become
like iTunes, they are dead. Just a matter of time.

~~~
city41
I think you greatly overestimate how many people pirate content.

------
dudus
Everyone here freaking out about DRM and how they think they're entitled to
free pirate it if Disney don't offer the format they want. While I'm just
looking at all my TV's that support casting from my phone by default. Who even
watches movies on their computer anyway. Your TV will support it natively if
not right away just buy a Chromecast or Roku and be done with it. There are
worse things to freak out about.

~~~
m3adow
> Who even watches movies on their computer anyway.

I do for example. I don't own a TV, my beamer is directly connected to my PC.
Just because your use case is covered doesn't mean everyones is.

> Your TV will support it natively if not right away just buy a Chromecast or
> Roku and be done with it.

"If it doesn't work for you, just buy new hardware." \- I'd call that
entitled. I prefer to just don't subscribe to a service forcing me to buy
additional hardware due to customer unfriendly DRM.

------
unangst
I like to think that if Disney+ doesn’t work on Chromebooks, the “freshmen
hivemind” (aka all of the freshmen) will solve it by complaining to Disney
relentlessly. Seriously, not sure if Disney has thought through the market
penetration Chromebooks have in the K-12 market AND the correlation between
those students/districts and discretionary income for “yet another streaming
service.”

------
vitus
Nit, since this confused me when I was looking for more context: for whatever
reason, Widevine security levels are ordered in decreasing security (whereas
the article has them backwards).

Widevine on Linux only supports L3, which means that there's no guarantee that
any processing is done inside the CPU's trusted execution environment. Which,
uh, reads as "no security guarantee" to me.

~~~
swiley
I’m not really ok with other people’s code running on my Secure Enclave.

BitTorrented video has no security guarantee either.

~~~
vitus
The security guarantee here isn't for the user, though. It's more of a placebo
effect for the content producers.

~~~
bobajeff
That's the funny thing about this whole thing they keep using terms like
security when what they're really talking about is anti-
saving/copying/skipping/fastforwarding and region blocking.

------
theninja
Content publishers sometimes demand certain DRM features in order to license
their content. For example, they can dictate that only X devices can watch
content Y. They can also demand restriction to how content is stored on
devices etc. So until the content publishers change their restrictions, DRM
will be there and will be annoying to customers :(

~~~
jonny_eh
Disney owns all the content they're streaming.

------
voldacar
Could this be fixed by disassembling the widevine .so/.dll and altering the
function that returns the "security level" so that it always returns the
highest level?

~~~
zelly
As I understand it, the DRM authenticates the physical monitor/TV with a key
on the hardware. That part is uncrackable because authentication is done on
Netflix-side.

But as for whatever is rejecting Linux but allowing Windows/macOS, that has to
be completely in-software. I think you are right--this could be bypassed by
changing a register value somewhere. This sounds like a fun project.

~~~
voldacar
>But as for whatever is rejecting Linux but allowing Windows/macOS, that has
to be completely in-software.

Yeah that's more of what i was referring to.

------
chrisseaton
Disney's existing streaming service, Disney Life, is using Silverlight, so
anything's better than that.

~~~
jonplackett
This explains a lot. But even the apps which can’t be, are truly awful.

------
Vaslo
“First of all, as always my opinions are my own, not those of my employer.”

Why do you need to write that? It’s a benign article and more so it’s about as
protective as the useless “Store is not responsible for carts that damage your
car” signs.

~~~
Spooky23
Companies react in strange ways. I recall a forum post a few years back about
an issue with a backup solution. The poster ran into a problem and shared it
in response to a question.

Someone from the storage company went apeshit, figured out who the poster was,
and met with the CIO of the guys employee to get him to remove the post.

~~~
gtirloni
I really hope he's swimming in lawsuit money.

------
cloudking
I'm pretty sure Disney is optimizing for the majority of their audience who
use Windows, OSX, iOS etc, not developers/hackers who run desktop Linux. I'm
curious about Android though.

~~~
dchest
Optimizing how?

~~~
x13
Disney is focusing on traditional popular consumer markets.

Linux doesn't have a large enough number of users for their consumer-focused
video streaming service at this time.

They'll probably move down-market after nailing the experience on the first
few platforms.

side note - I love the number of comments about piracy as the other option, as
if Disney is reading this page - or cares much about a small market (linux
consumer-users)

------
p2t2p
I’m a simple man, you treat me like a thief, I behave like one, I’m not paying
for single DRMed video, I pirate it. I do pay for music though. On bandcamp.

------
mastrsushi
> Disney+ OTOH seems to have the drm features kranked up to maximum draconian
> settings

Is this likely for legal reasons then? Maybe Disney doesn't want OS's outside
of the main consumer audience to have the ability to stream. Linux could be
feared for capturing streaming data and scraping sites. It's a lot more
customizable of an OS.

Sort of like when Sony dropped Yellow Dog Linux on PS3.

What other non Linux devices are having this problem?

------
BooneJS
MLB Advanced Media was created to stream baseball games for MLB.tv. They did
such a great job that other sports networks, ESPN, and even HBO have licensed
their technology to successfully roll out streaming and handle the GoT
bandwidth crush.

I'm looking forward to Disney+, and it's a shame that in 2019 a company as
large as Disney with a back catalog and list of properties as massive as
Disney can't simply step off the starting blocks with technology that lets
them focus on the stories. The only stories I've read lately about the service
is about the technology...

------
fredthomsen
I see a future where media consumption via general purpose computing platforms
is dead and only special super locked down devices can only play certain
media. Seems like Disney+ will start us down that road

------
cryptozeus
I don’t get the article, seems a bit of premature noise. They said they are
aware of it and working on it. Just because it has not been fixed in 1 month
during trial period does not mean they will not fix this.

Side note I had a recruiter call from disney + team to work on their app for
windows. They are building this thing in wpf. I passed.

------
xs83
Well unfortunately for Disney, my main TV box is an Ubuntu NUC so I will
definitely not be subscribing to it. Just like when the NHL did the same -
when there were better piracy options than your paid for service (which I
might add I had no problem paying for for years) - you want to ask questions.

------
dewey
From their response it sounds like they are on it, it's still 3 weeks until
the official launch in the bigger markets and it's only live in NL as a test
market right now.

To me it sounds like a normal bug for an edge case. It's made out to be much
more than it actually is with this clickbait title.

------
mcv
I do care about Linux, but I'm not using it to watch Disney+. I stream from my
Android phone to Chromecast, which works great the first time. After a while
the phone seems to lose track of the fact that it's casting and I can't stop
it or start a different movie.

------
cryptoz
Is Disney+ expected to work _fully_ before launch date? Isn't in 'testing'
right now as described by the author? Why is everything expected to be perfect
while still in testing?

From this text, it sounds like Disney is actively working on the issue. The
product has not launched yet.

I'm not sure what the problem is. Aside from a faster initial customer support
response (for a product that isn't even out!) _would could Disney have done
differently here?_

I understand that Disney+ may not launch with (or ever have) Linux support,
and that would suck. But no evidence of that is presented here. And the author
expects a resolution for a complex issue for a pre-launch product in testing
phase from a major corporation _within days_? That seems aggressive and
unrealistic timeline to expect a fix.

Edit:

The author writes "Their so called help-center does not even know about "Error
Code 83"" (with some attitude and prejudice, I'll note); but also writes that
Disney responded with "We are familiar with Error 83.". Confusing.

~~~
newnewpdro
You're ignoring the analysis that Disney+ seems to be blocking use entirely at
the lower "security level" assessed by Widevine.

It would not take significant time or effort for them to change the threshold
value if it were something they considered broken.

It seems prudent at this point to avoid becoming a paying customer until they
address it, if you care about this sort of thing.

~~~
cryptoz
> It would not take significant time or effort for them to change the
> threshold value if it were something they considered broken.

Do you have reason to believe this? To me that sounds like a complicated
change with significant potential business impacts. Have they signed contracts
already where this kind of security is ambiguous? Does changing the flag
actually solve the issues on all devices or do other issues present, since
they have been untested? Testing must happen post-change, I would imagine.

The issue still sounds complex to me. I use Linux and I want Disney+ to
support it, obviously. But I don't see Disney as being in the wrong here (yet)
- they're potentially just working on the issue before release. We'll see, I
guess.

------
matheusmoreira
> {"errors":[{"code":"platform-verification-failed","description":"Platform
> verification status incompatible with security level"}]}

Any information about this "platform verification"? What exactly are they
verifying and how?

------
snr
This is a naive question but I've always wondered, what motivates people who
distribute pirated content for free?

I get why someone would consume pirated content but why would someone take the
risk of publishing pirated content? Is it the ad traffic that the publishers
get?

~~~
h4waii
To some, it's a game, it's a challenge, and it comes with recognition and/or
reward -- potentially in the way of private services or paid requests.

Or, as the quote goes, "some men just want to watch the world burn", whichever
world they deem unworthy of existing.

------
t0ddbonzalez
There won't be much of an overlap on the Venn diagram of Fedora users and
Disney+ subscribers.

Raise a hand if you're shocked that Disney would use the highest level of DRM
possible, given their history of guarding their intellectual property...

------
ru999gol
While some streaming services might work with Linux, almost all will not show
HD or better quality. Just torrent everything, its so much easier, this DRM
clusterfuck just gives you less reason to feel bad about it.

------
joshspankit
Is _anyone_ surprised that Disney would DRM in draconian ways?

------
danmg
Are we forgiving Walt Disney for having 'trouble makers' blacklisted and
investigated by HUAC? I'm not.

Even if they made something besides pablum, I wouldn't be interested.

------
LeoNatan25
Use torrents, those are DRM free, easy to use and often just as good if not
higher quality than streaming services.

------
NoblePublius
You would think Disney would want to support chromeOS because of its
widespread use in schools

------
antisthenes
Back to piracy it is, I guess.

~~~
ahje
But _why_? Is there something Disney has that everyone _needs_ to have?

My first reaction to stuff like this is simply that I can't be bothered -- if
Disney don't want me as a customer then I'll simply ignore their service.

This is a serious question; I'm quite ignorant when it comes to the content of
the current Disney IP portfolio and I'm not really a consumer of mainstream
media.

------
xellisx
Is anyone really surprised?

------
SomeOtherThrow
Is there any other future?

------
briandear
Ironically, scrolling for the article is broken on iOS Safari.

------
ReptileMan
Torrent sites use no DRM and the speeds are higher.

------
Andrew_nenakhov
I believe it morally justifies downloading Disney+ content via torrents.

~~~
egypturnash
Oh come on, “Disney won’t stream their stuff to my niche OS” is not a reason
to get their stuff without paying. You can wait for a DVD, you can scrounge a
used device that will run their DRM, or you can decide you hate all DRM and
boycott their stuff until the unlikely event they offer a copyable version.
Lots of people work hard making this shit, and they have bills to pay, these
things don’t just spring fully-formed onto a hard drive like Athena from Zeus’
skull. _Maybe_ there’s some morality going on if you buy a ton of merch for
what you watch. Maybe.

Or you can reward the companies that _do_ support your niche OS by paying for
their stuff, _that’s_ pretty unassailable.

I am far from without sin in this area, but I don’t try to make excuses.
Watching stuff without paying its asking price is stealing.

~~~
prepend
Niche or not “Disney won’t sell me content I want to buy” seems like a tough
position for Disney to argue past.

This was the argument back in the days when movies wouldn’t be released in
many countries as the market is too small.

What do you expect potential customers to do? Should they buy new computers?
Not watch Disney stuff?

I think I would expect the latter, but if they aren’t Disney’s customer then
them pirating isn’t losing Disney any business.

~~~
zokier
> Niche or not “Disney won’t sell me content I want to buy” seems like a tough
> position for Disney to argue past.

I feel that is such an entitled attitude. Watching Disney+ is hardly some
inalienable human right nor essential for survival. Why would anyone think
their right to use a service, and cosume content, overrides Disneys well-
established ownership?

~~~
prepend
What’s wrong to entitled attitudes?

I feel like “entitled” is some sort of jerk buzzword. Entitled is a wonderful
thing. I think it’s good to be entitled to not being exploited by billion
dollar companies making decisions that make like worse for people. Even if
it’s just a little worse like not being able to watch a movie with your kids.
Sadly, we’re not entitled to such a thing.

Why is Disney entitled to oppressive “well-established ownership?” I’m not
sure how one is more entitled than retaining copyright for 70 years after the
artists who create something die.

------
RandomGuyDTB
I was planning on subscribing instead to a VPN that supports peer-to-peer
torrenting.

------
brogrammernot
I can’t imagine the vast majority of their customer base uses Linux, and was
likely left out as a fast follow as it isn’t worth being a supported system
until they can see it gains traction.

------
pcr910303
While I understand why Disney is getting much hate here at HN, I don’t think
Disney really deserves it; Let’s face it, Linux is a very niche OS.

Just flipping on a switch for level 3 on Linux also takes money, as then they
have to check whether it’s working at every deploy, provide customer support
for them, etc, ...

And there’s people in this thread that DRMs are pointless... but IMO DRMs
aren’t useless, it works as a small barrier for users to not copy. Think about
two hypothetical people A and B for example;

When DRM exists: A talking to B “Hey, I’ve watched the movie XXX from Disney+
last night, you really should subscribe to see that great movie!”

When DRM doesn’t exist: A talking to B “Hey, I’ve watched the movie XXX from
Disney+ last night, you really should see it. I’ll give the movie file in my
USB tomorrow.”

I don’t like the company-tired nature of DRMs, but not much of a solution
exists, esp when DRM was rejected by the web standards.

~~~
manicdee
When DRM exists: “Hey I watched this movie that hasn’t been released from
Disney last night, have a copy and you can enjoy it too!”

The only thing preventing this stream working on Linux is someone paying
Disney the licence fees. It’s nothing to do with control of end product
quality. Disney does not provide support for customer technical problems.

~~~
pcr910303
> When DRM exists: “Hey I watched this movie that hasn’t been released from
> Disney last night, have a copy and you can enjoy it too!”

Only if the value of time consumed trying to break the DRM is lower than the
Disney+ subscription fee. And I think for the majority, the Disney+
subscription fee will be lower.

~~~
manicdee
For a lot of people I know, there’s more cost than just the subscription fee,
there’s also buying equipment to support that streaming service.

It’s like people recommending I upgrade to Windows 10 when the machine I am
using is barely capable of running Windows 7. It’s not just $10 a month, it’s
also $1000 for a new computer to watch it on. Or a new TV which means buying
new furniture since the current cabinet can’t hold anything larger than 30”
and the smallest TV I can buy is 44”.

Then there’s streaming requiring 25Mbps when my Australian NBN struggles at
12Mbps.

