Legality and/or morality of geoblocking

Forums › Online streaming services › Legality and/or morality of geoblocking

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 21

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475631 20-Jan-2016 19:00

MikeB4:
sultanoswing:
NonprayingMantis:
sultanoswing:
NonprayingMantis:
MikeB4:

Has it ever been confirmed in court that accessing electronic content from another geographic locale is parallel importing?

It has not.

That was the assumption made by slingshots lawyer, (and clearly sky etc had lawyers that felt they could argue this opposite) but until a judge declares one way or the other the matter is very much undecided.

That ain't no thang. Lawyers always feel they can argue the opposite. You got cash, they'll happily argue black is white and up is down all day long.

That's a very common misconception of how lawyers work - based probably on TV shows.

You see? Black is white, my friend.

The lawyers I have dealt with over years are self thinkers and don't need others to do it for them. They also follow the law, they are officers of the court.

Should a lawyer give bad advice, by allowing frivolous actions and statements in legal case, the Judge would take a dim view, reputation would disappear. The law is the law, any grey areas can be argued. That where it ends. I don't watch legal drama, I'm unsure how they act there, excuse the pun.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475633 20-Jan-2016 19:01

Why are some shows only on Netflix?

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1475636 20-Jan-2016 19:04

tdgeek:
Why are some shows only on Netflix?

Produced by Netfix

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475640 20-Jan-2016 19:08

MikeB4:
tdgeek:

Why are some shows only on Netflix?

Produced by Netfix

I read on one of these threads that they are produced by another party, for Netflix. I.e. Netflix has exclusive rights

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475646 20-Jan-2016 19:19

Your right Mike.Wiki says "In addition to its original productions, Netflix also licenses content from international broadcasters for exclusive broadcast in other territories, which is also branded in those regions as Netflix original content."

Exclusive rights. Thats unfair isn't it, according to this thread? Restricting access. The practices that apparently everyone else does, that is, the outdated models, Netflix also does, or more accurately, streaming services do. Actually, we can blame the content owners, but Netflix is a content owner and a streaming service, and it uses exclusivity and restrictions. Does that make it outdated?

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#1475662 20-Jan-2016 19:43

MikeB4:
tdgeek:

Why are some shows only on Netflix?

Produced by Netfix

Lets take that smash hit Daredevil. NOT produced by Netflix. Exclusively distributed by Netflix.

Netflix embracing old world business models and thinking with exclusivity??? Just direct-to-consumer distribution. Nothing new there.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3322312/companycredits?ref_=tt_dt_co

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Blurtie

487 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 131

#1475784 20-Jan-2016 23:08

Hi all,

So I've been loosely following this thread and admit that I haven't read each and every post, so apologies if I repeat something that has already been said.

It seems to me that everyone agrees that use of geo-unblocking services are a breach of the T&Cs and so a breach of contract. Since when has breaking a contract not been a big deal!?

In my opinion, the analogies of people comparing the parallel import of a physical product via you shop or other means doesn't hold weight. You are comparing something tangible with something intangible. As far as I'm aware, in the dvd example, the money you pay for the DVD essentially buys you a 'copy' of the movie on physical media. You are free to watch that movie as many times as you want. You own a copy of the movie (of course with conditions).

The difference with Netflix/streaming services on the other hand is that you are essentially renting/streaming a copy of the movie. You do not own a copy of the movie. You are essentially granted a license to watch said movie. The license to watch the copy is subject to conditions as stipulated by rights owner. This to me is not parallel importation.

Copyright is complex. It was created to help authors/artists/content creators protect their work (and hopefully make them some money too). Copyright is there to stop production of unauthorised copies. It's the same for the big guys (movie studios) as it is for the little guys. I truly believe that the content creators should be free to choose how they want their work to be distributed. It's a business. It's someone's livelihood. Should they not be free to choose the option that makes them the most money? Who are we to tell an entire industry how to operate?

That's where I believe exclusive regional agreements come in. We might not like it, but it most likely earns the content owners more money (no concrete facts, just opinion). If you think about it, having various networks going through a bidding process to get that exclusive title on their network is likely to earn more money than just going through a global distributor. Rinse and repeat for each region. It sucks for the end consumer, but why would you do it differently to how it's done now? I would add that, just because you have a global distributor, doesn't mean you're going to reach everyone. Last time I checked, Netflix was operating in just over 40 counties. Where does that leave the other 150 or so other countries? Would the content owner be bound to stick with the one global distributor?

I think 'exclusive' agreements are unavoidable. The last thing we want is for one network/provider to hold everything. That's a monopoly. We all know how great monopolies are...

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475790 20-Jan-2016 23:31

Yep, the supporters of breaching T+C's don't answer these questions. Bandy words like bullies, outdated, no rights payments, no exclusivity, and so on. Except Netflix uses exclusivity, restrictions.

Why would anyone use restrictions? Money. Its business as you say. Why wasn't Star Wars on SVOD the same day as the movie theatres? Rights payments, restrictions, exclusivity. Its standard, its not outdated. Some don't want rights payments, thats silly, thats the revenue stream. SVOD pays rights to host, same as everyone. So, rights stay. If you want to remove restrictions,the industry has to allow no exclusivity. If any company wants a series or movie, they all pay for it. So, every item of content will be everywhere, either on some or most of the providers. Movies will be cheaper. SVOD might be dearer, there will be many many SVOD options, they will be everywhere. But to make that work, the overall revenue will be the same, just spread over more operators, and with a higher monthly cost. It will still be spread over the same global viewing population. Star Wars? It will be at the cinema as no one can afford the rights on release. Other known movies maybe they will be on some SVOD, maybe there will be a niche on release SVOD operator. See, no one has an issue with removing restrictions, it just has to pay its way. Sky users can enjoy some Netflix produced contact too. Win-Win

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16312

Lifetime subscriber

#1475802 21-Jan-2016 02:22

It's all been said before. I respectfully disagree, for the reasons I have already made clear. Time to stop hammering the same old nail, methinks.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

hashbrown

463 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 131

#1475826 21-Jan-2016 06:55

Let's take another swing at a morality argument. American content producers have benefited from a borderless global economy. They produce content in the country where it is cheapest and extort tax breaks out of governments with the threat of moving production to the next cheapest country.

Now when it comes to distribution they want to throw all the borders back up? No thanks! I buy US Netflix in US dollars with a US registered account. When Netflix buy content for their X million US subscribers I am one of that X million, and content producers should price their US rights accordingly.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1475837 21-Jan-2016 07:35

Rikkitic:
It's all been said before. I respectfully disagree, for the reasons I have already made clear. Time to stop hammering the same old nail, methinks.

Are you saying that those who hold a view different to yours should stop hammering ?

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475851 21-Jan-2016 08:09

Rikkitic:

It's all been said before. I respectfully disagree, for the reasons I have already made clear. Time to stop hammering the same old nail, methinks.

Bullies, outdated, old technology, way of the future, thats all been said, with zero detail.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475852 21-Jan-2016 08:12

hashbrown: Let's take another swing at a morality argument. American content producers have benefited from a borderless global economy. They produce content in the country where it is cheapest and extort tax breaks out of governments with the threat of moving production to the next cheapest country.

Now when it comes to distribution they want to throw all the borders back up? No thanks! I buy US Netflix in US dollars with a US registered account. When Netflix buy content for their X million US subscribers I am one of that X million, and content producers should price their US rights accordingly.

yep, so why does Netflix restrict the contect it produced? Why isnt all of that on every Netflix source? Why is it not on Lightbox, neon, BBC, and any other SVOD? Netflix use geoblacking for their own contect, restrictions, no globalisation. What you are putting forward, is what Netflix does. It isnt the old business model vs the netflix or SVOD business model, they all do it. Im sweet with breaking all those barriers. It applies to EVERYONE

SaltyNZ

8866 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9546

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1475854 21-Jan-2016 08:15

tdgeek:

Rikkitic:

It's all been said before. I respectfully disagree, for the reasons I have already made clear. Time to stop hammering the same old nail, methinks.

Bullies, outdated, old technology, way of the future, thats all been said, with zero detail.

Well, my point of view is very simple, and I set it out clearly in the original post. I pay for something I could choose not to pay for. In doing so, everyone who's going to get paid at all, gets paid. The law needs to be clearer, but in the meantime it does not prohibit the activity, and indeed there are very good legal arguments (put forth by very good lawyers) that it would, in fact, be declared legal if it ever went all the way in court. Therefore I see no issue doing what I'm doing.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1475855 21-Jan-2016 08:17

MikeB4:
Rikkitic:

It's all been said before. I respectfully disagree, for the reasons I have already made clear. Time to stop hammering the same old nail, methinks.

Are you saying that those who hold a view different to yours should stop hammering ?

Thats correct. Discussion, banter, debate is good. But when its anger words to push the point, with zero detail, and no reposnse to any facts put forward by the opposers, except posts like that, it's not really a discussion. Ive asked many times about how does the reveu gatheriong chnahes when it all goes global and no restrictions, so any service can purchase any content. I think tjhe best I got was its an old business model LOL.

I'd prefer an active discussion on the pros and cons of both. How a move to unrestricted content (yes, even you Netflix) would change the way we do things. It doesnt have to be a A vs B argument.

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 21