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 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | ... | 70
1354 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 694


  Reply # 1472819 16-Jan-2016 20:09
One person supports this post
Send private message

I think the fundamental problem is the concept of exclusive regional rights. Why are these needed for videos? We don't see them for anything else: books, music, clothes, general goods. Why can't the content producers sell rights to a range of distributors for onward selling to consumers using a commercial model that works regardless of location? Imagine if you could only listen to certain record labels on specific radio stations, or buy specific publishers' books at specific book shops. This regional exclusivity is anachronistic nonsense designed to fleece the consumer and I'll ignore it, bypass it or use alternative sources. If Netflix decide to reduce the value of their offering, that's their decision but they'll lose customers just like Sky

1366 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 143

Subscriber

  Reply # 1472822 16-Jan-2016 20:13
Send private message

shk292: I think the fundamental problem is the concept of exclusive regional rights. Why are these needed for videos? We don't see them for anything else: books, music, clothes, general goods. Why can't the content producers sell rights to a range of distributors for onward selling to consumers using a commercial model that works regardless of location? Imagine if you could only listen to certain record labels on specific radio stations, or buy specific publishers' books at specific book shops. This regional exclusivity is anachronistic nonsense designed to fleece the consumer and I'll ignore it, bypass it or use alternative sources. If Netflix decide to reduce the value of their offering, that's their decision but they'll lose customers just like Sky


Because the content right holder simply can.  They own the rights, they can dictate to who and how their sold.  Sure, it may be an old model, but for them it generates the most revenue and that is what they want.  They still sell the rights, they simply get more for them as a price war occurs.  A consumer isn't entitled to anything, they purchase what they can within the realms of the rights holders requirements; be it through a middleman e.g. Netflix or directly such as the HBO service.  If the rights holder wishes to control the flow of content then it can and it is legally allowed to.

 
 
 
 


1354 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 694


  Reply # 1472828 16-Jan-2016 20:21
One person supports this post
Send private message

Benoire:
shk292: I think the fundamental problem is the concept of exclusive regional rights. Why are these needed for videos? We don't see them for anything else: books, music, clothes, general goods. Why can't the content producers sell rights to a range of distributors for onward selling to consumers using a commercial model that works regardless of location? Imagine if you could only listen to certain record labels on specific radio stations, or buy specific publishers' books at specific book shops. This regional exclusivity is anachronistic nonsense designed to fleece the consumer and I'll ignore it, bypass it or use alternative sources. If Netflix decide to reduce the value of their offering, that's their decision but they'll lose customers just like Sky


Because the content right holder simply can.  They own the rights, they can dictate to who and how their sold.  Sure, it may be an old model, but for them it generates the most revenue and that is what they want.  They still sell the rights, they simply get more for them as a price war occurs.  A consumer isn't entitled to anything, they purchase what they can within the realms of the rights holders requirements; be it through a middleman e.g. Netflix or directly such as the HBO service.  If the rights holder wishes to control the flow of content then it can and it is legally allowed to.

That's just fine, but consumers like me will therefore just pirate the content and the producers will get nothing instead of a fair price. No skin off my nose. Exactly the same as I refuse to be ripped off for global days roaming and use a local sim instead

4753 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 79

Trusted

  Reply # 1472833 16-Jan-2016 20:42
Send private message

TeaLeaf: how could they block by credit card country location? i can use my visa internationally, likewise my german or aussie visas. thats why i pay a fee to have the things.

i tell you, along with a livestream sport subscription, online TV kills the sky tv deals. surely they have to get with the times. id be happy to subscribe to sky, if they provided more content on demand, no adds and sport for 1/3 the current package prices.


Easy enough. They can tell the country of the issuing bank from the number and just not accept the card. On more than one occasion I have tried to buy something from a US site only to have them reject my NZ CC saying they only accept US cards. The reverse is easily enough done.

Many have reported the AirNZ OneSmart card looks like a US CC to Netflix. I guess if they really wanted they could block that too but the volume would be rather low I would imagine.




System One: Popcorn Hour A200,  PS3 SuperSlim, NPVR and Plex Server running on Gigabyte Brix (Windows 10 Pro), Sony BDP-S390 BD player, Pioneer AVR, Raspberry Pi running Kodi and Plex, Panasonic 60" 3D plasma, Google Chromecast

System Two: Popcorn Hour A200 ,  Oppo BDP-80 BluRay Player with hardware mode to be region free, Vivitek HD1080P 1080P DLP projector with 100" screen. Harman Kardon HK AVR 254 7.1 receiver, Samsung 4K player, Google Chromecast

 


My Google+ page 

 

 

 

https://plus.google.com/+laurencechiu

 

 


15331 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4045

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1472839 16-Jan-2016 20:50
Send private message


That's just fine, but consumers like me will therefore just pirate the content and the producers will get nothing instead of a fair price. No skin off my nose. Exactly the same as I refuse to be ripped off for global days roaming and use a local sim instead


So when the new iPhone comes out, and it doesn't meet your price and availability, do you intend to break in and steal that as well?

Let's be clear. Pirating is THEFT. You are STEALING when you do this. 

Access to Content is not your RIGHT, it's a privilege same way anything you don't get for free is.


1354 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 694


  Reply # 1472842 16-Jan-2016 21:02
Send private message

networkn:

That's just fine, but consumers like me will therefore just pirate the content and the producers will get nothing instead of a fair price. No skin off my nose. Exactly the same as I refuse to be ripped off for global days roaming and use a local sim instead


So when the new iPhone comes out, and it doesn't meet your price and availability, do you intend to break in and steal that as well?

Let's be clear. Pirating is THEFT. You are STEALING when you do this. 

Access to Content is not your RIGHT, it's a privilege same way anything you don't get for free is.


Not strictly true, theft is defined as depriving someone of something which is theirs, which applies to your iPhone analogy, but not to making a copy of digital material. You'll never be charged with theft for copyright beach, because it isn't theft

571 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 238

Subscriber

  Reply # 1472844 16-Jan-2016 21:05
Send private message

networkn:
So when the new iPhone comes out, and it doesn't meet your price and availability, do you intend to break in and steal that as well?

Let's be clear. Pirating is THEFT. You are STEALING when you do this. 



Not really. Copyright violation. They still have their copy.








15331 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4045

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1472846 16-Jan-2016 21:09
Send private message

shk292:
networkn:

That's just fine, but consumers like me will therefore just pirate the content and the producers will get nothing instead of a fair price. No skin off my nose. Exactly the same as I refuse to be ripped off for global days roaming and use a local sim instead


So when the new iPhone comes out, and it doesn't meet your price and availability, do you intend to break in and steal that as well?

Let's be clear. Pirating is THEFT. You are STEALING when you do this. 

Access to Content is not your RIGHT, it's a privilege same way anything you don't get for free is.


Not strictly true, theft is defined as depriving someone of something which is theirs, which applies to your iPhone analogy, but not to making a copy of digital material. You'll never be charged with theft for copyright beach, because it isn't theft


Err I hate to break it to you sport, but you are depriving them of something they value considerably, that would be INCOME!



15331 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4045

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1472847 16-Jan-2016 21:10
Send private message

gbwelly:
networkn:
So when the new iPhone comes out, and it doesn't meet your price and availability, do you intend to break in and steal that as well?

Let's be clear. Pirating is THEFT. You are STEALING when you do this. 



Not really. Copyright violation. They still have their copy.



Yes, REALLY. You are depriving them of income they would otherwise derive from said material.

I presume you don't mind stealing other forms of art, such as books, and paintings as well?

1354 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 694


  Reply # 1472849 16-Jan-2016 21:12
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:
shk292:
networkn:

That's just fine, but consumers like me will therefore just pirate the content and the producers will get nothing instead of a fair price. No skin off my nose. Exactly the same as I refuse to be ripped off for global days roaming and use a local sim instead


So when the new iPhone comes out, and it doesn't meet your price and availability, do you intend to break in and steal that as well?

Let's be clear. Pirating is THEFT. You are STEALING when you do this. 

Access to Content is not your RIGHT, it's a privilege same way anything you don't get for free is.


Not strictly true, theft is defined as depriving someone of something which is theirs, which applies to your iPhone analogy, but not to making a copy of digital material. You'll never be charged with theft for copyright beach, because it isn't theft


Err I hate to break it to you sport, but you are depriving them of something they value considerably, that would be INCOME!



That still doesn't make it theft. If I take the bus home instead of driving, I'm depriving a taxi driver of income, but I'm not stealing from him. You may have swallowed the piracy is theft line, but that doesn't make it true
I'm not saying it's not illegal, but it's not theft

15331 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4045

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1472853 16-Jan-2016 21:18
Send private message

shk292:
networkn:
shk292:
networkn:

That's just fine, but consumers like me will therefore just pirate the content and the producers will get nothing instead of a fair price. No skin off my nose. Exactly the same as I refuse to be ripped off for global days roaming and use a local sim instead


So when the new iPhone comes out, and it doesn't meet your price and availability, do you intend to break in and steal that as well?

Let's be clear. Pirating is THEFT. You are STEALING when you do this. 

Access to Content is not your RIGHT, it's a privilege same way anything you don't get for free is.


Not strictly true, theft is defined as depriving someone of something which is theirs, which applies to your iPhone analogy, but not to making a copy of digital material. You'll never be charged with theft for copyright beach, because it isn't theft


Err I hate to break it to you sport, but you are depriving them of something they value considerably, that would be INCOME!



That still doesn't make it theft. If I take the bus home instead of driving, I'm depriving a taxi driver of income, but I'm not stealing from him. You may have swallowed the piracy is theft line, but that doesn't make it true
I'm not saying it's not illegal, but it's not theft


LOL What? I'll let you just think about how nonsensical that comparison was.

1693 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 72


  Reply # 1472860 16-Jan-2016 21:30
Send private message

lchiu7:
Easy enough. They can tell the country of the issuing bank from the number and just not accept the card. On more than one occasion I have tried to buy something from a US site only to have them reject my NZ CC saying they only accept US cards. The reverse is easily enough done.


really? never had a problem with any of my CC's, here or overseas.

imo netflix is this is what they choose to do are entitled to do what they want. im entitled to go elsewhere for TV/Movies etc.

i guess its still being discussed because people are really not sure if its a "this is happening" vs "we should say this"

719 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 127


  Reply # 1472862 16-Jan-2016 21:31
2 people support this post
Send private message

Would be much simpler / fairer for consumers if geoblocking itself was banned / outlawed, in much the same way as parallel importing of goods is legal in NZ. The EU is investigating the possibility of geoblocking reform.

 

 

Of course because such a move would help consumers, rather than corporates, it probably has a snowflake's chance in Hell in succeeding. Changing the law(s) would help people like networkn who feel bound and morally guided by what laws say in this regard.

1366 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 143

Subscriber

  Reply # 1472868 16-Jan-2016 21:39
Send private message

TeaLeaf:
lchiu7:
Easy enough. They can tell the country of the issuing bank from the number and just not accept the card. On more than one occasion I have tried to buy something from a US site only to have them reject my NZ CC saying they only accept US cards. The reverse is easily enough done.


really? never had a problem with any of my CC's, here or overseas.

imo netflix is this is what they choose to do are entitled to do what they want. im entitled to go elsewhere for TV/Movies etc.

i guess its still being discussed because people are really not sure if its a "this is happening" vs "we should say this"


I've bolded the bit of your post which I believe is wrong.

You're not entitled to any content you don't own.  You can enter in to an agreement with a supplier of content (Netflix, Sky, HBO etc.) but you're at the mercy of their conditions as either resellers or owners of the content.  The only thing you're entitled to is your own content, of which you can do what you will.  As has been said many times before in the numerous posts on geoblocking, the contents rights holders are the ones who can decide how you consume the content they sell and how they sell the content no matter how old fashioned it may be.

1693 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 72


Reply # 1472871 16-Jan-2016 21:43
Send private message

Benoire:
I've bolded the bit of your post which I believe is wrong.

You're not entitled to any content you don't own. 


ummmm arent you bolding exactly what im saying, i can go elsewhere, as in another provider

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | ... | 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:





News »

New Zealand hits peak broadband data
Posted 18-Jan-2018 12:21


Amazon Echo devices coming to New Zealand early February 2018
Posted 18-Jan-2018 10:53


$3.74 million for new electric vehicles in New Zealand
Posted 17-Jan-2018 11:27


Nova 2i: Value, not excitement from Huawei
Posted 17-Jan-2018 09:02


Less news in Facebook News Feed revamp
Posted 15-Jan-2018 13:15


Australian Government contract awarded to Datacom Connect
Posted 11-Jan-2018 08:37


Why New Zealand needs a chief technology officer
Posted 6-Jan-2018 13:59


Amazon release Silk Browser and Firefox for Fire TV
Posted 21-Dec-2017 13:42


New Chief Technology Officer role created
Posted 19-Dec-2017 22:18


All I want for Christmas is a new EV
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:54


How clever is this: AI will create 2.3 million jobs by 2020
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:52


NOW to deploy SD-WAN to regional councils
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:46


Mobile market competition issues ComCom should watch
Posted 18-Dec-2017 10:52


New Zealand government to create digital advisory group
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:47


Australia datum changes means whole country moving 1.8 metres north-east
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:39



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.