Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | ... | 70
2629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 106


  Reply # 1507084 6-Mar-2016 20:24
One person supports this post
Send private message

And isnt this what from a business perspective TPPA is there for? :-)


4646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2154

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1507123 6-Mar-2016 21:19
Send private message

TeaLeaf:

 

And isnt this what from a business perspective TPPA is there for? :-)

 

 

 

 

There are multiple clauses in the IP chapter that either blatantly (for example, the one that says bypassing protection measures is an offense even if the resulting use would otherwise be legal) are or could easily be interpreted as making geo-block bypassing illegal under the TPPA, as well as another clause that aims to make all offences under the TPPA into criminal offenses.

 

So, yes.





iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

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


70 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 53


  Reply # 1507126 6-Mar-2016 21:25
Send private message

There was another thread on this going "Netflix Crackdown - have you been affected?" - however it seems to be down - what could be causing that. Anybody notice this?


Meow
8021 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4008

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1507128 6-Mar-2016 21:27
Send private message

charliebrownnz:

 

There was another thread on this going "Netflix Crackdown - have you been affected?" - however it seems to be down - what could be causing that. Anybody notice this?

 

 

Yes - please read this: http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=151&topicid=192306





BDFL - Memuneh
61509 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12234

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1507129 6-Mar-2016 21:28
Send private message

charliebrownnz:

 

There was another thread on this going "Netflix Crackdown - have you been affected?" - however it seems to be down - what could be causing that. Anybody notice this?

 

 

More information here.





2077 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 24

Subscriber

  Reply # 1507173 6-Mar-2016 23:29
Send private message

Subscribed to usa Netflix and watching as usual.

No messages asking if I'm using a proxy or similar.

Only site that has star trek the animated series :P

Cheers





- Telstra HTC Touch Pro2 - Energy ROM WM6.5.5 20 Oct/Cyanogen Mod Froyo 2.2 - R.I.P
- AT&T Galaxy S Captivate 16GB on XT (now with brother)
- Samsung Galaxy S2 on XT- Runs ICS 4.0.3 Resurrection Remix 9.2
- Business Hours - Work In The Electricity Industry, After Hours - DJ/Turntablist - Will Scratch Vinyl For Free'
- What's next??? S3?

2629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 106


  Reply # 1507634 7-Mar-2016 17:19
Send private message

well thats the end of unotelly and netflix for the majority of us who dont know how to get it to work.


6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571


  Reply # 1507643 7-Mar-2016 17:29
One person supports this post
Send private message

Fred99:

SaltyNZ: The general consensus now is that those who have a working service should keep it to themselves, to avoid helping the bad guys.


 


Probably timely to note that the "bad guys" are not Netflix.


Working or not via unblocking methods, I'm happy to keep paying my subscription.



Who are the bad guys?

The people intentionally circumventing and breaching Netflix terms and conditions?

Or the people who are trying to uphold their contractual obligations?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

4646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2154

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1507672 7-Mar-2016 17:59
4 people support this post
Send private message

NonprayingMantis: Who are the bad guys?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.


I'll say, in order:

1. Horse drawn cart makers who don't want to build automobiles and insist nobody else should be allowed to either; and
2. Car salesmen who actively hurt their automobile customers for having the audacity to insist they don't want a horse drawn cart

I'm perfectly willing to pay. On the same terms as my car: once, from whomever and wherever I choose.




iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

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


1422 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 205


  Reply # 1507675 7-Mar-2016 18:03
Send private message

SaltyNZ:
NonprayingMantis: Who are the bad guys?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.


I'll say, in order:

1. Horse drawn cart makers who don't want to build automobiles and insist nobody else should be allowed to either; and
2. Car salesmen who actively hurt their automobile customers for having the audacity to insist they don't want a horse drawn cart

I'm perfectly willing to pay. On the same terms as my car: once, from whomever and wherever I choose.

 

 

 

If those automobiles arent allowed on the roads should the police stop them or turn a blind eye?

 

For the record I'm going to modify my vehicle and ignore the idea of getting a WOF for it - if I dont get caught then its okay.


70 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 53


  Reply # 1507690 7-Mar-2016 18:31
3 people support this post
Send private message

ockel:

 

SaltyNZ:
NonprayingMantis: Who are the bad guys?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.


I'll say, in order:

1. Horse drawn cart makers who don't want to build automobiles and insist nobody else should be allowed to either; and
2. Car salesmen who actively hurt their automobile customers for having the audacity to insist they don't want a horse drawn cart

I'm perfectly willing to pay. On the same terms as my car: once, from whomever and wherever I choose.

 

 

 

If those automobiles arent allowed on the roads should the police stop them or turn a blind eye?

 

For the record I'm going to modify my vehicle and ignore the idea of getting a WOF for it - if I dont get caught then its okay.

 

 

 

 

Hmmm - rights holders are like the mob forcing us to buy their services instead of cheaper alternatives that others can get legally elsewhere. Their rationale - "You will buy it through us, even though we add no value, and charge you more than people who get more options and a better service overseas", and the lawyers and politicians are the rights holders heavies with baseball bats and molotov cocktails. What is being done is bad for the economy, bad for the NZ public and ethically wrong - and when such an ethically corrupt practice is standard, grey and black markets flourish as is happening now.


1422 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 205


  Reply # 1507693 7-Mar-2016 18:47
Send private message

charliebrownnz:

 

ockel:

 

SaltyNZ:
NonprayingMantis: Who are the bad guys?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.


I'll say, in order:

1. Horse drawn cart makers who don't want to build automobiles and insist nobody else should be allowed to either; and
2. Car salesmen who actively hurt their automobile customers for having the audacity to insist they don't want a horse drawn cart

I'm perfectly willing to pay. On the same terms as my car: once, from whomever and wherever I choose.

 

 

 

If those automobiles arent allowed on the roads should the police stop them or turn a blind eye?

 

For the record I'm going to modify my vehicle and ignore the idea of getting a WOF for it - if I dont get caught then its okay.

 

 

 

 

Hmmm - rights holders are like the mob forcing us to buy their services instead of cheaper alternatives that others can get legally elsewhere. Their rationale - "You will buy it through us, even though we add no value, and charge you more than people who get more options and a better service overseas", and the lawyers and politicians are the rights holders heavies with baseball bats and molotov cocktails. What is being done is bad for the economy, bad for the NZ public and ethically wrong - and when such an ethically corrupt practice is standard, grey and black markets flourish as is happening now.

 

 

The rights holders for the US are selling product to you at zero incremental cost.  The rights holders that have paid for NZ rights are getting zero revenue.  Would be fine if the US rights holders approached and acquired the local rights too - but why bother when they can sell to you for maximum profit.  That sounds like profiteering, doesnt it?  And when that rights holder deems that it will enforce its geographical restriction to comply with the rights it has acquired then we all complain.  Market segmentation is not ethically wrong, its just market segmentation.  Lightbox doesnt charge you significantly more for its products and yet there are people that will watch Parks & Recreation via Netflix US rather than pay Lightbox for the right to watch it locally.  

 

Do you deem that having different pricing structures between stores for a supermarket chain is ethically wrong?  Or is that just a function of market segmentation?


70 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 53


  Reply # 1507701 7-Mar-2016 19:06
2 people support this post
Send private message

ockel:

 

charliebrownnz:

 

ockel:

 

SaltyNZ:
NonprayingMantis: Who are the bad guys?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.


I'll say, in order:

1. Horse drawn cart makers who don't want to build automobiles and insist nobody else should be allowed to either; and
2. Car salesmen who actively hurt their automobile customers for having the audacity to insist they don't want a horse drawn cart

I'm perfectly willing to pay. On the same terms as my car: once, from whomever and wherever I choose.

 

 

 

If those automobiles arent allowed on the roads should the police stop them or turn a blind eye?

 

For the record I'm going to modify my vehicle and ignore the idea of getting a WOF for it - if I dont get caught then its okay.

 

 

 

 

Hmmm - rights holders are like the mob forcing us to buy their services instead of cheaper alternatives that others can get legally elsewhere. Their rationale - "You will buy it through us, even though we add no value, and charge you more than people who get more options and a better service overseas", and the lawyers and politicians are the rights holders heavies with baseball bats and molotov cocktails. What is being done is bad for the economy, bad for the NZ public and ethically wrong - and when such an ethically corrupt practice is standard, grey and black markets flourish as is happening now.

 

 

The rights holders for the US are selling product to you at zero incremental cost.  The rights holders that have paid for NZ rights are getting zero revenue.  Would be fine if the US rights holders approached and acquired the local rights too - but why bother when they can sell to you for maximum profit.  That sounds like profiteering, doesnt it?  And when that rights holder deems that it will enforce its geographical restriction to comply with the rights it has acquired then we all complain.  Market segmentation is not ethically wrong, its just market segmentation.  Lightbox doesnt charge you significantly more for its products and yet there are people that will watch Parks & Recreation via Netflix US rather than pay Lightbox for the right to watch it locally.  

 

Do you deem that having different pricing structures between stores for a supermarket chain is ethically wrong?  Or is that just a function of market segmentation?

 

 

For me to get the breadth of content as netflix us I would have to buy Sky, Lightbox and Quickflicks - which is a huge price increase over netflix US, plus the actual value add they offer is quite low compared to Netflix. And forcibily segmenting the market along geographic lines using artificial boundaries like that is terrible and unethical - and its obvious plenty of people agree with me given the incredibly high rates of piracy or use of unblocking methods that are used. That is one reason why the grey market around unblocking content like this is so huge, and one reason why a huge number of people think piracy is OK.

 

I'm not too certain of the contractual terms netflix has with the content providers are but I would be surprized if it is just a static dollar amount - so it may not be at zero incremental cost. And regardless - the only way we are going to be able to get a fair service is if we use these methods to make the current model unappealing for content providers by making a fairer model more profitable. 

 

 

 

Lets think of this in terms of physical goods, a dvd retailer in Auckland wouldn't be allowed to charge $20 for a cd to an aucklander that walks through the door and then ask for $25 for that same cd to a Hamiltonian queued behind the aucklander - if its not illegal, it would certainly be unethical. The internet has no physical location, so your analogy of two seperate supermarkets is a swing and a miss.


1512 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 785


  Reply # 1507722 7-Mar-2016 20:17
2 people support this post
Send private message

charliebrownnz:

 

 

 

For me to get the breadth of content as netflix us I would have to buy Sky, Lightbox and Quickflicks - which is a huge price increase over netflix US, plus the actual value add they offer is quite low compared to Netflix. And forcibily segmenting the market along geographic lines using artificial boundaries like that is terrible and unethical - and its obvious plenty of people agree with me given the incredibly high rates of piracy or use of unblocking methods that are used. That is one reason why the grey market around unblocking content like this is so huge, and one reason why a huge number of people think piracy is OK.

 

I'm not too certain of the contractual terms netflix has with the content providers are but I would be surprized if it is just a static dollar amount - so it may not be at zero incremental cost. And regardless - the only way we are going to be able to get a fair service is if we use these methods to make the current model unappealing for content providers by making a fairer model more profitable. 

 

 

 

Lets think of this in terms of physical goods, a dvd retailer in Auckland wouldn't be allowed to charge $20 for a cd to an aucklander that walks through the door and then ask for $25 for that same cd to a Hamiltonian queued behind the aucklander - if its not illegal, it would certainly be unethical. The internet has no physical location, so your analogy of two seperate supermarkets is a swing and a miss.

 

 

Exactly what he said.  If the rights licensing model in use doesn't support selling cross-boundary, and can't extract revenue based on the number of viewers, then it's time to change the model.

 

How stupid would it be if Pak'n'Save had exclusive rights to sell Heinz, while Countdown had exclusive rights to sell Watties, and grey-importing Heinz sauce was deemed (by some) to be illegal?

 

The current model is nonsense and we as consumers need to say "No, you're not shafting me just because I happen to live in NZ"

 

I'm happy to pay UK/US Netflix subs (I currently pay UK rates) and I'm even happy to pay NZ GST.  But I'm not going to pay for a 3rd rate NZ service just because they bought "exclusive" rights to some material.


1422 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 205


  Reply # 1507723 7-Mar-2016 20:18
Send private message

charliebrownnz:

 

ockel:

 

charliebrownnz:

 

ockel:

 

SaltyNZ:
NonprayingMantis: Who are the bad guys?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.


I'll say, in order:

1. Horse drawn cart makers who don't want to build automobiles and insist nobody else should be allowed to either; and
2. Car salesmen who actively hurt their automobile customers for having the audacity to insist they don't want a horse drawn cart

I'm perfectly willing to pay. On the same terms as my car: once, from whomever and wherever I choose.

 

 

 

If those automobiles arent allowed on the roads should the police stop them or turn a blind eye?

 

For the record I'm going to modify my vehicle and ignore the idea of getting a WOF for it - if I dont get caught then its okay.

 

 

 

 

Hmmm - rights holders are like the mob forcing us to buy their services instead of cheaper alternatives that others can get legally elsewhere. Their rationale - "You will buy it through us, even though we add no value, and charge you more than people who get more options and a better service overseas", and the lawyers and politicians are the rights holders heavies with baseball bats and molotov cocktails. What is being done is bad for the economy, bad for the NZ public and ethically wrong - and when such an ethically corrupt practice is standard, grey and black markets flourish as is happening now.

 

 

The rights holders for the US are selling product to you at zero incremental cost.  The rights holders that have paid for NZ rights are getting zero revenue.  Would be fine if the US rights holders approached and acquired the local rights too - but why bother when they can sell to you for maximum profit.  That sounds like profiteering, doesnt it?  And when that rights holder deems that it will enforce its geographical restriction to comply with the rights it has acquired then we all complain.  Market segmentation is not ethically wrong, its just market segmentation.  Lightbox doesnt charge you significantly more for its products and yet there are people that will watch Parks & Recreation via Netflix US rather than pay Lightbox for the right to watch it locally.  

 

Do you deem that having different pricing structures between stores for a supermarket chain is ethically wrong?  Or is that just a function of market segmentation?

 

 

For me to get the breadth of content as netflix us I would have to buy Sky, Lightbox and Quickflicks - which is a huge price increase over netflix US, plus the actual value add they offer is quite low compared to Netflix. And forcibily segmenting the market along geographic lines using artificial boundaries like that is terrible and unethical - and its obvious plenty of people agree with me given the incredibly high rates of piracy or use of unblocking methods that are used. That is one reason why the grey market around unblocking content like this is so huge, and one reason why a huge number of people think piracy is OK.

 

I'm not too certain of the contractual terms netflix has with the content providers are but I would be surprized if it is just a static dollar amount - so it may not be at zero incremental cost. And regardless - the only way we are going to be able to get a fair service is if we use these methods to make the current model unappealing for content providers by making a fairer model more profitable. 

 

 

 

Lets think of this in terms of physical goods, a dvd retailer in Auckland wouldn't be allowed to charge $20 for a cd to an aucklander that walks through the door and then ask for $25 for that same cd to a Hamiltonian queued behind the aucklander - if its not illegal, it would certainly be unethical. The internet has no physical location, so your analogy of two seperate supermarkets is a swing and a miss.

 

 

Netflix have negotiated a static cost by series.  They do not and will not disclose, even to the production company that they paid the rights for, the number of streams of that content.  Hence every person that watches a US copyrighted product in another jurisdiction is giving Netflix incremental revenue at no incremental cost.  It is unpalatable for the content providers as it devalues the product in other markets - and as such they are attempting to enforce their rights by making Netflix enforce its terms and conditions.  If Netflix want to offer additional products in NZ it should pay for those rights.  To supply them at zero cost without right to sell them is in my mind unethical.  It hasnt paid for the right to supply - if it wants to offer those rights either globally or locally by acquiring them it can.  And yet it hasnt.

 

A DVD retailer may have two stores - one in Auckland, one in Hamilton.  They may charge different prices in those two stores based on customers ability to pay, cost structure or any other reason it seeks.  Thats not unethical, thats business.  Supermarkets have been doing it for years - and still do with different pricing structures in different stores.  Telecom used to "pocket price" services depending on whether TelstraClear had cable down a particular street.  If you lived one street over and didnt have access to cable services you would pay more for the same product.   And the ComCom deemed this an acceptable market behaviour.  To say that this time its different because of the internet fails to appreciate that someone's intellectual property has real value purely because of a delivery system.


1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | ... | 70
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.