
After Netflix crackdown on border-hopping, Canadians ready to return to piracy - nkurz
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-piracy-content-vpn-1.3548476
======
planetjones
I am an English person living in Switzerland. Netflix Switzerland is useless
to me (no House of Cards, not enough focus on UK and USA content, etc.).

Therefore I had a Netflix USA account, which I accessed via unblock-us. The
clampdown by Netflix has been "successful" and I now can't access Netflix USA
using unblock-us.

This happened halfway through watching House of Cards. So my choice was either
stop watching or download the remaining episodes...

I am tired of companies talking about borderless trade, global economy, etc.
when the distribution of movies and tv shows is stuck in the sad world of geo-
restrictions. I also legally get access to UK TV channels through my cable
subscription, but I don't get access to iPlayer as that's only for UK
residents... so again the only option to catch-up on TV that I forgot to
record, is to use an unblocker.

~~~
kennywinker
This blows my mind. How on earth does Netflix not have the rights to show
their _own_ show in Switzerland? I understand their hands are sometimes tied
in getting content from the studios, but they own House of Cards... I'm so
confused how they could end up in that situation...

~~~
mschuster91
> How on earth does Netflix not have the rights to show their own show in
> Switzerland?

One often-overlooked point is soundtracks. This is why there's no official
Cold Case DVD/BD set - it would be prohibitively expensive to license all the
music for distribution outside of TV.

~~~
tracker1
Same thing with "Wonder Years" it's all about licensing... hell "Daria" had to
replace significant portions of the music (thankfully they had the original
separate tracks to work from).

------
thrusong
We're in Canada and have been cable cutters for almost five years now. We've
gotten by on Netflix US and YouTube with the occasional pirated streaming
site, but we're barely ever using Netflix anymore.

We've turned to Kodi. We don't want to pirate, but it's hard to make a
compelling argument against it when you get everything you want even easier
than torrents.

Add to that the abusive monopolies of Shaw and Bell, who each now have their
own streaming subscriptions, services like Hulu and HBO Now either being
blocked here or controlled by Shaw or Bell, and the Netlix subscription
increasing by 50% in May for a lacklustre catalogue.

With all of that, the three movies I go to the cinema to see each month, and
my Netflix subscription, it's hard not to feel like I pay my share for
content. Not a popular opinion, I'm sure, but I'm not getting a dozen
streaming services subscriptions.

~~~
kejaed
What's wrong with Bell/Saw/Rogers having their own streaming services? I've
found Bell's Crave TV to be pretty good, Shomi not as much.

~~~
thrusong
It might just be my experience dealing with Bell when we had ExpressVu before
becoming cable cutters, and Shaw's Internet service when I was growing up.

I also hate the things Bell has tried to do through the CRTC, like that whole
Internet thing with smaller providers using its pipes.

I guess it's a principal thing.

EDIT: Another example... I used to always choose Famous Players for movies. I
avoided Cineplex. Then Cplex gobbled up Famous and I started going to
Landmark. I should be able to choose where I consume my content.

~~~
yuhong
Yea, the CRTC is much better than what it was years ago. They are pushing for
channel unbundling for example now.

~~~
Corvus
Yeah, and look how well that turned out:
[http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/crtc-skinny-basic-pick-
and-p...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/crtc-skinny-basic-pick-and-
pay-1.3472647)

(Spoiler: the unbundled packages cost more and have fewer shows)

------
zamalek
The same effect is occurring in South Africa. People I know are switching back
to piracy because our Netflix catalog is probably in the region of 10% of
America (for the same reasons, as well as others).

After years of not being able to legally access some copyrighted content, with
no discussion and no change, I honestly don't see the copyright holders
backing down - strange considering that they are the only ones actually losing
out. Nobody deserves to have their hard work stolen, but I can't lie and deny
that I don't perceive some form of justice happening here.

~~~
Grishnakh
>Nobody deserves to have their hard work stolen

First off, it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. No one's stealing
their content, because the copyright holders still have it. Stealing is wrong
because it deprives the owner of the use of that thing: if I steal your car,
then you can't drive to work any more. If I sneakily scan your car with a
tricorder and 3D-print a clone of it, you still have your car.

Semantics aside, I completely disagree about them deserving to have their hard
work copied and not getting paid for it. They absolutely do deserve this. If
someone works hard on some piece of art (music, movie, etc.) and makes it
conveniently available to everyone at the same fair price, then I think they
deserve to get paid for it. But if they're dicks and they use their dominant
position and inertia to promote their works and make them popular and
culturally relevant, but then they only make them available to some people and
not to others because they're trying to figure out unethical ways of gaming
the system to make more money, then fuck 'em. People in other regions where
this stuff isn't available have _every_ right to copy it without paying.

These copyright holders have been bitching for many years about "piracy". Then
along came the iTunes Store, Netflix, etc., and they _proved_ that people are
willing to pay for this stuff as long as it's a fair price and is convenient.
Now they want to dick with it, so predictably, people are going back to
piracy. Personally, I'd rather not bother with piracy: it's a PITA to use
BitTorrent, try to find good versions of stuff, hope there's enough seeders
out there, wait forever for it to download (not a problem if it's extremely
popular that day, but a big problem if it's not), etc. I'd much rather pay
$8/month for Netflix and just select what I want to see, hit "play" and watch
it. But if the copyright holders are going to kill the goose that laid the
golden egg, then oh well...

~~~
sbarre
> People in other regions where this stuff isn't available have every right to
> copy it without paying.

I think you've got this wrong. The people in other regions don't have "every
right to copy it", they have "every right to not consume it". Don't like the
rules? Don't play. It's their content, so they set the rules. That's kind of
all there is to it. I absolutely agree that you can be pissed off about this
and not like it though.

But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party
just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price. If you
think like that, you're as much of a dick as the people you seem to be mad at.

So unless you are using the word "unethical" in an ironic fashion when you
describe what they do, you probably should not use it at all if you're then
going to condone what is essentially an unethical response yourself.

~~~
Grishnakh
>The people in other regions don't have "every right to copy it", they have
"every right to not consume it". Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's their
content, so they set the rules.

>But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party
just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price.

Completely wrong on both counts.

If I'm not invited to someone else's party, but I want to observe it without
interfering with the partygoers, I have every right to invent a device which
allows me to create an artificial wormhole which then allows me to remotely
observe this party (see the Arthur C. Clarke book "Light of Other Days"). The
partygoers will have no idea I'm observing them and since they wouldn't sell
me a ticket anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues.

Similarly, if content holders don't bother to offer their wares to me and then
make it too difficult for me to acquire them with a workaround (subscription +
VPN), then I have every right to download a copy. As above, they have no idea
that I'm watching their content, and since they didn't offer it to me for sale
anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues.

>if you're then going to condone what is essentially an unethical response
yourself.

I'm not condoning an unethical response, I'm condoning an ethical one. Ethics
are in the eye of the beholder; for some people, it's completely ethical to
hack someone's head off if they don't follow the correct religion. I choose to
reject your system of ethics which grants all power to large, moneyed
interests.

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
> I have every right to invent a device which allows me to create an
> artificial wormhole which then allows me to remotely observe this party (see
> the Arthur C. Clarke book "Light of Other Days"). The partygoers will have
> no idea I'm observing them and since they wouldn't sell me a ticket anyway,
> they won't see a difference in their revenues.

Voyeurism may or may not be a crime in your jurisdiction.

~~~
Grishnakh
That really depends on the exact laws and how they're worded, and what kind of
party this is. A party which involves ticket sales (as was stipulated before)
is not a private house party, this is the kind of party that happens at a club
and is something that's "open to the general public" (just like a concert or
movie), so I don't think voyeurism laws would apply here. There's no
expectation of privacy in a setting like this; anyone is allowed to enter, as
long as they pay the ticket price and don't exceed the venue's capacity. So if
you come up with a way of looking inside the place, getting the viewing
experience everyone else has there, without trespassing in any way or
interfering with other people there, I don't see how it could be a crime
unless they invent a new law to address it.

Here's another thought experiment, but using modern tech: suppose there's a
party like this (open to the public, tickets required to enter), and there's
no rules at the club forbidding cameras or communication devices. If you pay
the ticket price, you're allowed to enter and take photos all you want as long
as you don't disturb people and make a nuisance of yourself. (I'm pretty sure
any normal bar or club these days is just like this; people take photos of
themselves at bars all the time.)

You don't want to pay the ticket price to get in, but you want to see what's
going on there. Your friend however wants to go in, so he buys a ticket and
enters. While inside, he whips out his phone, and activates an app which
contacts your phone, and then streams live video from his phone's camera to
your phone. You're now able to see and hear what's going on in the party
without buying a ticket, apparently legally. Fast-forward a few years and
instead of watching your buddy's video stream on your 5" phone screen, you're
watching it on a VR headset, so it's almost like being there. My wormhole idea
isn't much different from this; it just doesn't require a confederate.

------
wjoe
Regional rights agreements are really slowing down the move of TV to online.
Publishers say "well, we already signed these agreements with these TV
companies, so we can't let this shows be streamed online in those countries".
TV companies say "well, we only got the rights to broadcast on TV, so we can't
stream the show online in this country".

Hopefully as the popularity of online streaming increases, new contracts will
take online streaming into account more. There's no real reason to have
regional restrictions online, but I'm sure they'll continue as long as the
companies want to get more money

~~~
richmarr
> There's no real reason to have regional restrictions online...

While I broadly agree with you I don't buy this one point.

By restricting availability by region, publishers can (a) spread out their
promotion costs & reduce risk exposure, and (b) charge more.

Wearing my techno-utopian hat, the first reason is bullshit that nees solving
and the second reason is greed. Wearing my realist hat, both reasons are the
way the world works and neither seems like it's going to change in short order
as publishers hold a monopoly over content.

Does anyone know if Netflix delay release of their own content by region?

~~~
Gmo
They kind of do. At least in France, until about a month ago, you could not
watch House of Cards on Netflix because the show was sold to a local network !

It's been "fixed" now though.

------
NovaS1X
Piracy has always been a convenience problem and only partly a cost problem.

Pirating content is the easiest, fastest, highest quality, and most available
method of watching content. The price is just a nice bonus.

Digital restrictions hurt everyone and maybe one day Hollywood will wake up
and realize that you can't strong-arm the market into behaving how you want it
to and you have to adapt to consumer demand. It's one of the few industries
that I know of that try this hard to fight against consumer demand. It's so
backwards.

Until the day they change, pirate on.

~~~
mmanfrin
Yep -- I want to watch tv shows on the night they come out so I can talk with
friends about them the day after. Nearly every per-episode-purchase vendor
lists them the day _after_ (most likely because the networks that air the
shows require them to wait). It's dumb, and all it does is push me away from
paying them more than they'd make on advertising from me anyway.

------
sgift
The only reason I subscribed to Netflix was that it was the best way to get
Warehouse 13, which I really wanted to see at the time. For now Netflix still
has enough content to satisfy me, but the idea that the library is so much
smaller here in Germany than in the U.S. was never to my liking .. Greedy
companies force Netflix to block customers, customers pirate content instead,
all loose. One would think Hollywood learned their lesson, just as the music
industry did, but it doesn't look that way. Maybe one day they'll find out
that the correct solution if you ran against a wall is not do it again and
hope that the wall falls, but to go around it.

~~~
themartorana
It's never been well explained to me how this is a profitable model,
_especially_ considering the ease with which popular shows are pirated - in
full HD and digital sound I might add. What do studios really stand to gain by
keeping Germany et al from so much content?

~~~
rhino369
Why is everyone assuming that greedy German companies aren't willing to sell?
Is it also possible that Netflix isn't willing to pay the going rate or hasn't
bothered to negotiate for the rights.

Netflix launched globally without taking the time to negotiate content for
most countries on earth. I'm not sure you can assume that Netflix is being
diligent in trying to acquire content.

Especially since even in the USA netlix appears to be pivoting into being a
content creator instead of a content aggregator.

~~~
Grishnakh
>Why is everyone assuming that greedy German companies aren't willing to sell?

The OP isn't talking about greedy German companies, he's complaining about
greedy American companies who won't let Netflix in Germany show American
content to German viewers. Greedy German companies are a different issue.

This whole issue is mainly about greedy American companies, because if there's
one thing that America produces that people around the world want, it's our
movies and TV, and a lot of people outside the US were/are using VPNs and
other such things to get access to a US-based Netflix account because the
versions in their own countries didn't have all the content that the American
version has, and now Netflix is restricting that access.

There aren't many people outside Germany/Austria who really want to see
content from German media companies.

~~~
rhino369
But it most of these situations some German company already bought the rights
to the show. So the greedy American companies already got paid.

------
nicolas_t
I still can access netflix through the VPN I use. As long as I still can do
that, I will keep my account. The second they block it, I'll cancel my netflix
account and will go back to resorting to piracy. If movie studios don't want
my money then so be it, I'll find better use for it.

EDIT: And I say this as someone who spends roughly $100/month supporting
artists I like on Patreon and Kickstarter, so I'm not opposed to paying for
content. I'm just opposed to big media conglomerates screwing me.

~~~
OSButler
Their blocking seems to be quite aggressive, as a lot of regular hosting
providers even had their IP ranges blocked by them. I've been following a few
forum posts where people were sharing their working VPN provider/ISP, but
those were showing the same error message a few days later, so it looks like
they are actively monitoring traffic and maybe even social media to block
further IP ranges.

~~~
rabidrabbit
I was not able to test it (for example borrowing a residential IP in a
different country) but I suspect they detect OpenVPN via packets inspection,
like this example: "Detecting VPN (and its configuration!) and proxy users on
the server side" by @ValdikSS [https://medium.com/@ValdikSS/detecting-vpn-and-
its-configura...](https://medium.com/@ValdikSS/detecting-vpn-and-its-
configuration-and-proxy-users-on-the-server-side-1bcc59742413#.forbbpie6)

------
secoif
Same issue in Singapore. The Netflix library available here doesn't even
contain the latest season of House of Cards – and it's a bloody Netflix
production.

I would love to pay _someone_ for timely content, but now that Netflix is
blocking vpn access there is literally nobody to pay. It's complete madness.

~~~
dogma1138
Netflix doesn't own house of cards actually, it exclusive rights to it in some
countries in others it doesn't.

~~~
maze-le
Since it is a production of them, is seems utterly moronic to remove one of
the main reasons people would join their services in the first place. Many
non-us customers joined, just to cancel the account right after they realized
that they had no access to the good content. In some cases this is not the
fault of netflix, but that of 19th century copyright laws. I cannot blame
them, when other services had the rights prior to them...

But 'House of Cards' is a Netflix production, and this doesn't apply here.
They would have done themselfs a favour by not selling the rights to this
content to the highest bidder. Especially since their ads suggest access to
'House of Cards'.

~~~
drspacemonkey
The problem comes from the original BBC House of Cards. Netflix doesn't
actually own the rights, they're licensed from a company called Media Rights
Capital.

~~~
bryanlarsen
Netflix funded production, so would have had strong leverage over MRC's
relicensing. We can't see the contracts, but I'm fairly confident that Netflix
would have had at least right of first refusal for rights for any region.

~~~
drspacemonkey
Leverage only goes so far. Since it was originally a BBC show ~20 years ago,
chances are that country-specific rights were sold off long before Netflix got
involved.

~~~
bryanlarsen
Why would the licensing of the old shows have anything to do with the
licensing of the new shows?

MRC licensed the name and concept from the BBC. That license would definitely
not be regionalized.

~~~
drspacemonkey
It's likely impossible to say without having insider knowledge. Perhaps
somebody with international IP law could weigh in.

But it appears there's an added wrinkle. Back when the show started
production, MRC sold off rights in countries where Netflix didn't yet operate.
CanalPlus in France and Sky Deutschland in Germany managed to get exclusive
rights in their respective countries. Netflix is trying to get the rights
globally, but they can't force anyone to sell them anything.

source: [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/netflix-subscribers-
eu...](http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/netflix-subscribers-europe-wont-
get-714647)

------
lostgame
I ended up having the conversation with a co-worker...I live in Canada, and
anyone who lives up here can back me up on the fact that this country is just
awful with regards to its copyright litigation with regards to television,
especially.

It's far, far easier for me to pirate content than it is to legally buy it.

Until that's the case, I'm not interested in forking over my money to be
inconvenienced (and this is coming from a dude who buys his music mainly on
vinyl).

~~~
guiomie
Wait, you are justifying an illegal action of yours because it is easier than
the legal route? Since when doing the right thing is and should always be
easier... So, do you also not pay income tax because it is much easier to not
do so? There are countless examples where being illegal is easier over legal,
but as a society some of us understand that if the majority respect the law
and order, we are much better off.

I'm Canadian, and I certainly don't back you up on this. I use Netflix, Crave,
my providers VoD service, independent and mainstream theaters to consume
content all the time. When I realize I've spent more then I should on
entertainment, I simply find other stuff to do or consume.

Is it really about being "easier" and not about being cheap? Personally, I
find it quite easy to swipe my credit card or link it to a Google Play
account.

I am amazed to read this under the caption of articles picture: "Netflix
customer Susan Lorenz of Toronto doesn't understand why the company is
suddenly shutting her out from the content she used to be able to see." ...
Susan most certainly understands why.

~~~
MAGZine
Regardless of whatever moral card you want to play here, the fact of the
matter boils down to Gabe Newell's famous insight on the matter: Piracy is
almost always a service problem[0]. People value their time. Make the
experience easy for them, and people will pay. Make the experience shitty for
them, and people will find the path of least resistance.

People pay taxes because they have to. When it comes to entertainment, people
aren't going to waste their time jumping through hoops.

[0] [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114391-Valves-
Gabe...](http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114391-Valves-Gabe-Newell-
Says-Piracy-Is-a-Service-Problem)

~~~
geodel
It might be true of first world. I do not think that in poor countries like
India where 100s of millions live on less that ~2 dollar a day any service
could be cheaper than piracy. And I have seen people in India jump through
hoops to pirate content rather than paying even a little for convenience.

Gabe Newell's observation seems to me a very limited view of the world by a
spectacularly successful first world entrepreneur.

~~~
CaptSpify
Odd that it seems to work, though. How much money does Steam make from people
who could be getting the content for free?

------
Geojim
Puts pressure back on regional rights holders to sign on with Netflix - join
the dominant market player and make a few bucks, or see your content pirated
and get nothing

~~~
distances
The whole deal system is a problem here. In Germany even the latest season of
House of Cards isn't available, and that's their own production.

~~~
danmaz74
Production that, I'm pretty sure, they sold to some German network for more
than it would bring in on Netflix itself... gotta love economics!

~~~
slowmotiony
Yup, sold to Sky.

------
qwertymaster
After years of using netflix, since long before it was even available in
Germany, I canceled my account the moment I couldn't access the US library
anymore. The German library is just not worth it and titles were often missing
English subtitles, even for movies which were available on US netflix with
subtitles. As I usually watch shows with english subtitles (including shows in
english) and original audio, this really bothered me and made the non-US
experience even worse. Never really watched many of the German shows on there,
maybe one or two.

------
tech-no-logical
I must say I've been considering the same thing (I'm in the netherlands). for
now, there's still ways to watch the US version of netflix, but should that
too be blocked, I will probably revert to piracy, even though I've been
against it for a long time...

------
kinofcain
But violating the license terms by border hopping _is_ piracy.

Not saying I agree with geo restrictions, or any of the other silliness (I
don't, and thankfully we're rapidly moving away from that sort of thing), but
using VPNs or foreign credit cards to subscribe to a service that isn't
available to you because the company selling it doesn't have a license to do
so is still, technically, piracy.

~~~
anExcitedBeast
Sure, but piracy where everyone gets paid.

~~~
rhino369
No, piracy where the service provider you subscribe to gets paid, but the
rightful license holders don't. Sometimes the license holder and the service
provider are the same, in which case everyone gets paid.

But in most cases you aren't. Sure you pay netflix, but netflix just keeps the
money. They definitely don't go find and pay the right people.

------
leonatan
Good. This is the only way to make the publishers change something.

------
cazum
What exactly does Netflix stand to gain from making it harder for its non-
american subscribers to VPN the geoblocked content?

Surely they must have predicted a substantial drop in subscription rates as
soon as people realize they can't watch the good stuff.

It just seems like international-marketshare suicide.

~~~
fossuser
My guess is that Netflix has now positioned themselves as the first global
'television' network.

They hopefully have enough power and leverage to stop the content producers
from stupidly restricting access via region, but they're not able to do this
effectively if users can easily bypass the restrictions.

If it doesn't work out then at least they'll get a global audience for their
own content and the rest will go back to piracy.

~~~
skykooler
They don't even have a global audience for their own content - House of Cards
isn't available in many countries because Netflix sold the TV networks
exclusive distribution.

------
cbaleanu
Same story here, but I have been living in Eastern Europe and then Australia
and then back for a few years now, paying for unblock-us and Netflix US which
I signed up for while in the US.

Ever since my first experience with Netflix powered by a Roku I have been
praising how awesome it is, trying to get my friends to sign up for the
service.

And then the geofencing crap happened but the service was suddenly available
in our country, but with minus 90 percent of the content - a lot of my friends
signed up and then cancelled their subscription.

I for one am seriously thinking about canceling both unblock-us and Netflix as
I suddenly feel a 'localized' citizen with no way to legally we global anymore
and it sucks.

------
brendangregg
"We look forward to offering all of our content everywhere and to consumers
being able to enjoy all of Netflix without using a proxy. That’s the goal we
will keep pushing towards."

\-- David Fullagar is Vice President of Content Delivery Architecture at
Netflix.

[https://media.netflix.com/en/company-blog/evolving-proxy-
det...](https://media.netflix.com/en/company-blog/evolving-proxy-detection-as-
a-global-service)

------
mrmondo
The same is happening here in Australia talking to people.

~~~
iamlolz
Yes I'm cancelling my account as I haven't used it in 2 months.(since the vpn
I used was blocked)

~~~
2muchcoffeeman
Getflix still mostly works. They added new proxies but many of the old ones
don't work.

------
bryanlarsen
Netflix really screwed up with House of Cards. They should be able to take the
high ground and say:

"Don't get mad at us, they're making us do it. We're leading by example, maybe
someday everybody will realize that regional restrictions are a bad idea."

But their licensing and handling of House of Cards prevents them from taking
the moral high ground.

------
blue_dinner
We can say the same about taxes and regulations: if it's too high, individuals
will just go elsewhere. For some reason, we always try to punish the
individuals that do this.

Piracy will only continue to make it more difficult for small and mid-sized
companies to compete. The multi-national corporations will always have the
resources to wait out the slaughter.

The end result will be the same as what we have with the music industry: huge
companies owning all of the media.

------
ericfrederich
Popcorn Time should publish some graphs of their traffic. I bet there will be
a correlation between Netflix blocking proxies and downloads of Popcorn Time

~~~
deskamess
I thought Popcorn Time had shut down?

~~~
JTon
If I recall correctly the original project did close down and others picked up
where it left off. Some good, some malicious.

I use this subreddit to find a trusted one:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/PopCornTime/](https://www.reddit.com/r/PopCornTime/)

[https://popcorntime.sh](https://popcorntime.sh)

------
xg15
Imagine I live in Canada and one day drive to the US and purchase a House of
Cards DVD, which I take back with me to Canada. Would you consider what I just
did piracy?

No? Then why is it piracy if I do the exact same thing by different technical
means? (Streaming the content instead of buying a physical disk)

------
make3
I see no statistics. This article is air.

------
unabridged
Why does netflix care so much? Doesn't just blocking ip's by country satisfy
whatever legal requirement? Do the contracts with content provider
specifically require netflix to maintain a list of VPN providers and block
them?

------
gshulegaard
A lot of people seem angry about the geo-blocking, and I would agree with the
sentiment, but can anyone tell me why Netflix is geo-blocking so heavily?

Companies don't do things for no reason...

~~~
kstenerud
Because content producers are threatening to remove their support of Netflix.

~~~
gshulegaard
Which is what I thought...so why the Netflix hate? Shouldn't we be instead be
getting angry at the copyright holders essentially exercising monopolistic
control of the market?

~~~
atemerev
Isn't everybody already?

------
pinkskip
Same here downunder. Loved my Netflix US subscription. Now I have no
subscription with Netflix guess they don't want money ey?

------
cdnsteve
Content geofencing makes no sense. Until businesses realize this people will
always find ways around it.

~~~
rhino369
It makes a lot of sense for the world we live in now. Most revenue from TV is
still captured by regular broadcast or cable viewership. Those means of
distribution are typically geofenced.

If you have an American show, Sky or BBC will pay more than Netflix will.

Plus, people in developing countries can't and won't pay western prices for
content. It makes sense to geofence and then sell it to them much cheaper.

~~~
russdill
But in most cases here, people are willing to pay the same price as the
original country of origin of the content but are denied that option.

------
xufi
Atleast you can download : for personal use in Canada last I read.

~~~
err4nt
It was ten years ago. I believe this has changed since then…

~~~
lisivka
It cannot be changed. You can download (watch) any proprietary content (if you
can), but you cannot redistribute it to others.

~~~
msbarnett
Canada signed the TPP, which tadically changes things

~~~
bluehazed
Signed, not ratified, nor codified anything in law.

------
byuu
I've been rather stunned at how no one has come up with a strong workaround to
this yet. It's really quite simple, we just need slick, easy-to-use software
for it.

Make software that both turns your home computer into a single-user VPN
server, that lets you set the maximum upload bandwidth to ~5mbit/s or so, and
lets you _only_ pass through Netflix content; and also gives you a VPN client
that lets you connect to another's computer and _only_ uses the VPN for
Netflix content, allowing your web browser and everything else to continue
working through your regular ISP. The whitelisting eliminates the traditional
concern of someone using your connection for torrents or worse illegal
content. The bandwidth limiting ensures smooth QoS for your own network.
Latency here is not a concern at all ... it's streaming video.

Once you have this software, it's simply a matter of setting up a message
forum somewhere where people say, "I am from 'country X' and want to watch
content from 'country Y'", and waiting for someone in the reverse situation to
come along. As long as your connections are always-on, this works perfectly.

As an alternative to the fact that more people will want US Netflix than any
other region, people could also offer server-only access for nominal Paypal
fees. Eg lease out a 5mbit/s link for $10/mo. The price would naturally follow
supply and demand.

I can change my IP any time, and there is no possible way Netflix can ban my
hostmask as a VPN (all of Time Warner Cable in Columbus, Ohio.)

And if this forces Netflix to start charging by billing region ... _good_!!
Now we can offer services that let people pay for the regions they want to
access! Or if they try and block that too, then perhaps people sharing VPNs
can share their account logins next.

Either way, this is a cat-and-mouse game with a _very clear_ end-game. Why the
hell is no one working on this problem? There are _millions_ of people
affected by this VPN block nonsense.

On that note, I have a US 300/20 connection I'd be happy to share, and I can
do the software the hard way with BSD/pf. Is there anyone with an always-on JP
connection that would like to trade with me? I would also be willing to pay
someone for a residential ISP VPN connection in Japan, which I would use
exclusively for Netflix only. I'd really love to be able to use Netflix Japan
again; it's helped a lot with my listening comprehension in studying the
language.

(Side note: this proxy software wouldn't have to be _just_ Netflix. It could
be a wonderful anti-geolocking system. The major VPN and VPS models are
clearly detectable and blockable. This could allow fine-grained whitelisting
or blacklisting and decentralization of VPN services.)

~~~
dijit
Or: go to private tracker, hit download button, wait 60 seconds.

Don't pay $10/mo to some random, don't pay $10/mo for HD netflix subscription.

~~~
byuu
In my case, it's much more difficult to find Japanese series. Japan isn't
nearly as big on file sharing as we are. Anime, sure, but I'd like to watch
things with real people too.

Example: try finding the live action version of Nobunaga Concerto [信長協奏曲] (not
the anime that's readily available.) Now I'm sure someone here can do it. But
look at its seed ratio compared to say, Game of Thrones or Last Week Tonight.
And this is a _really_ easy case, because it's being streamed subtitled from
Crunchyroll. Now imagine the difficulty of series not conveniently subtitled
into English on major streaming services already.

~~~
OSButler
Oh yes, I'm constantly clashing with unavailable/blocked Japanese content.
Crunchyroll has quite a bit of non-anime content to offer, but it's still far
from other country specific streaming sites.

The oddest thing for me are the constantly blocked Japanese music videos on
Youtube. I'm not talking copyright infringing content, but music videos
published on the official band/performer's channel and being viewable from
within Japan only. Why is a music video blocked outside of Japan, when you can
buy the song via the regional iTunes store? One would assume that a music
video is meant to promote the music sales, so why are so many of them blocked
outside of Japan then?

~~~
byuu
> Crunchyroll has quite a bit of non-anime content to offer

Yeah, they have a drama-only section that even then is 80% Korean (nothing
wrong with that, just I'm not personally studying Korean.) And no option to
turn off the English subtitles unless I want to watch movies on my computer
instead of my TV. And absolutely, definitely, 100% _never_ any offer for
Japanese subtitles (closed captioning.) Very, very rare even on Netflix Japan,
but it helps so much when I can find them.

> The oddest thing for me are the constantly blocked Japanese music videos on
> Youtube.

Yeah ... I don't understand that at all. Of all the countries, Japan seems to
have the most obscenely strict copyright takedown enforcements of all. I
pretty much always have to resort to torrents to obtain songs even remotely
popular.

Japan really is a country that's stuck in the '90s. No surprise that also
includes their views on music.

> Why is a music video blocked outside of Japan, when you can buy the song via
> the regional iTunes store?

I'm surprised they even let you buy it on iTunes. Apple must be forcing their
hand somehow.

I've always dealt with extreme aversion to selling to me. The Japanese
famously hate selling their wares internationally. It's pretty much a given
that anything on Yahoo! Japan will be from sellers that refuse to ship
internationally, so you have to use deputy services and pay them an extra 30%
markup (plus a predatory and unfair yen exchange rate that's off by 15+ yen
from the real market value.) And even _then_ , there are sellers that track
deputy IDs and will delete deputy bids. I've even come across one such seller,
and my deputy of choice used one of their 'hidden' IDs to pick it up anyway.
They're so used to it that they already had sleeper accounts for dealing with
such sellers, despite having 100% perfect payment histories to sellers.

There are several major doujinshi websites for buying from artists, and these
sites are 100% perfectly capable of accepting Visa cards from anywhere in the
world ("it's everywhere you want to be... unless you want to be in Japan"),
yet they block you anyway.

It was only just very recently that Amazon finally started selling new
Japanese games internationally. Before then, I was paying 50% markups to
small, sleazy extortionist companies. On top of having to buy Japanese systems
to get around their region blocking attempts. Half surprised the fuckers don't
try to use GPS to pinpoint you're not actually in Japan while playing their
precious games.

Apologies if I seem bitter... it's because I am. I probably wasted $2000 on
deputy fees alone trying to build a game collection and buy other items I
like. And the harder I try to practice and learn this language, the more I get
taken for a ride.

------
user10001
Hollywood movies are such shit these days, I wouldn't even watch most of them
for free.

~~~
Ralfp
Nobody is forcing you to. Plenty of folk have Netflix for access to favorite
classics or TV series when they have time to. New titles are only added value
for them.

~~~
omegant
In Spain Netflix has a VERY limited classic (or contemporary for that matter)
catalog. Is only worth paying it for series IMHO.

~~~
rtkwe
That's going to vary wildly from country to country depending on what deals
they're able to actually get for content. In the US it's pretty good for
watching old shows.

------
randommodnar
Well, I've cancelled my account. Who needs Netflix when I've got BitTorrent?

------
thinkMOAR
Wonder when the first person stands up and claim this is blatant racism/
discrimination. Because it literally is. 'oh you come from this country and
you have netflix? -- oops then you cannot see because you are
canadian/european/ whoever'

Media copyrightrights per country, its 2016 its insane release your media
globally or don't release it at all.

~~~
CosmicShadow
It sure is how it feels. Facebook trending: look at this awesome SNL clip the
world is laughing and talking about! Click on it, oh sorry, you can't watch
this in Canada, but hey, the rest of the world that matters can(read: the US),
so yeah, good bye. Any content provider that blocks you out based on your
location makes you feel discriminated against and it sucks!

I like how Netflix says that we are very vocal, but minor and
'inconsequential'. Well yeah, fuck you too!

~~~
rchaud
I don't agree that that's the case. To me, region-restrictions for US content
(the most popular worldwide) present a massive opportunity for content
creators not based in the US to make something that is in fact truly globally
available. While it's true that US TV and movies have been globally popular
since the time of their invention, the rise of YouTube, Vine, Instagram etc.
show that global audiences can be developed without needing to be US centric.

Your comment "this awesome clip the world is laughing and talking about"
refers to SNL, but there are examples of viral videos that didn't originate
from a big-name US studio. "Charlie bit my finger" and "Gangnam Style" are two
examples. I don't think it's too much of a stretch that English-language long-
form content (30-60 minute series) can be developed without having a "Made in
America" imprimatur on it. Danish crime shows are popular in Europe and the
UK, while Korean dramas are extremely popular in East Asian markets. Indian
cinema is also popular in the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Southeast
Asia. A small slice of British shows like Made in Chelsea have carved out a
niche in English-speaking markets like the US, Canada and Australia.

I hope production studios large and small across the world are seeing this as
an opportunity to expand past their borders rather than simply continue
"Business as usual" under the protectionism offered with these types of
restrictive licensing rules.

~~~
CosmicShadow
I never said it wasn't a great opportunity for non-US content creators, I love
shows from all over, I'm just saying it feels racist when the country next
door won't share with me (or others) their content. Do I understand why they
won't yes, but it's frustrating none-the-less and I imagine most people don't
understand it. And it's not like they can stop me from viewing what I want,
it's just incredibly aggravating when a simple hyperlink fails and requires a
multi-step, lengthy process, especially for things ranging from a 30 second
clip from goddamn syndicated TV I can get with basic cable (which I no longer
have) to premium talk of the town shows.

In short, I'm kind of confused with why you don't agree and then talk about a
completely different subject. Yes, good opportunity, but that doesn't stop the
feelings for existing content that is also good, unless you consider it
irrelevant, which you might, but I still like some premium US based stuff.
Geo-blocking, at least to me, and I'm sure many others, feels like
discrimination. Not all have to feel that way for it to be true.

