Video on Geo Blocking if used in a real world situation, a must watch.

Forums › Online streaming services › Video on Geo Blocking if used in a real world situation, a must watch.

DeepBlueSky

384 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 40

Topic # 195186 9-Apr-2016 13:41

3 people support this post

I came across this video while surfing and thought it worthy of a post, I'll be interested in your comments.

https://youtu.be/WbiacSD13qk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbiacSD13qk&feature=youtu.be

1 | 2

400 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 137

Reply # 1529015 9-Apr-2016 14:36

Saw this in the week. Sums the situation up brilliantly.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571

Reply # 1529131 9-Apr-2016 18:23

One person supports this post

Not a very well thought through analogy IMHO.

Using this bakery example, they get it very very wrong. They are trying to charge differently based on people's national origin.,But Geoblocking *isn't* based on where you are from. It's based on where you are *located*
Those are two very different things.

I.e. French people in America are totally free to sign up and use Netflix USA. They just can't use it in France.
As a British person in NZ I am not entitled to use Netflix UK, but I *am* entitled to use Netflix NZ.

So for the bakery example to be valid, they would need to be a London bakery receiving a call or email from, say, Belgium saying "I always bought your bread when I lived in London. Could you please deliver some bread to my Belgian address now I love there.".
Then If the bakery responds with "sorry we don't deliver to Belgium from our London bakery". Then that would be pretty close to how geoblocking works.

Maybe they could even add in "...but you're welcome to order bread from a bakery in Belgium. We actually buy our ingredients from the same global suppliers. The end result isn't exactly the same and might be priced differently, but that is your only option I'm afraid."

But then a London bakery refusing to ship bread to Belgium wouldn't produce the same emotional response they are looking for......

richms

21735 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4520

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1529206 9-Apr-2016 20:09

Also, geoblocked sites do not ask for ID, they do the equivalent of seeing which door you walked in to make a best guess about where you came from. If they asked for ID and used that as the basis of what you get, then there would be far less problems for people travelling etc.

Richard rich.ms

DeepBlueSky

384 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 40

Reply # 1529984 11-Apr-2016 11:33

2 people support this post

I agree with the comments NonprayingMantis and richms at a technical level; but I also can see past this, what these guys are trying to do is take technology out of this equation and make an analogy of a situation of a bread shop blocking sales based on where you come from, its a very clever way of putting the case across I feel.

tdgeek

14275 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2634

Trusted

Reply # 1530038 11-Apr-2016 13:09

One person supports this post

DeepBlueSky:

I agree with the comments NonprayingMantis and richms at a technical level; but I also can see past this, what these guys are trying to do is take technology out of this equation and make an analogy of a situation of a bread shop blocking sales based on where you come from, its a very clever way of putting the case across I feel.

I dont think the first two responders are talking about it on a technical level. I feel that you are wanting to believe in the "blocking", as that is an aggressive word, this to push your case. Back in the day, we could only rent certain video tapes. NOTHING HAS CHANGED. That we have the internet makes no difference. It aids distribution, but still, the new owners of the content have rights. The same valid reaosons apply, the content was sold to various purchasers. If you want no blocking, put forward a model where everyone gets everything on the same day, content owners get the same revenue, rightsholders get the same revenue, I'll remove advertisers as there will be no advertsing as the content is now valueless. All this will happen in time, a new model, bringing the wider and faster choice, with other challenges. "Have you only got 7 STB's and 11 subscriptions?"

My opinion only, but lets see how it plays out. When blockimg goes, please no negative posts on STB's , fragmentation

PhantomNVD

2499 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 685

Reply # 1530059 11-Apr-2016 13:41

agree on the analogy... equal prices and content for all EQUALLY

since the internet allows distribution costs to be equal (from the supplier side anyway) why on earth can anyone justify charging more to some customers than others (not counting exchange rates)

if the internet is now a "human right" shouldn't internet equality be also?

Imagine telling woman they only get the vote if they are in an urban region (and use the NZ post random allocation of if they even are rural/urban)???

Shindig

644 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 50

Trusted

Reply # 1530068 11-Apr-2016 13:51

Great video, thanks for the link

The little things make the biggest difference.

Beccara

1004 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 178

UberGroup

Reply # 1530073 11-Apr-2016 14:10

So to flip this around, Would you all be against drug companies charging less for HIV med's in Africa than say NZ? After all they are just charging more for us Kiwi's for no reason

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

shk292

1567 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 813

Reply # 1530075 11-Apr-2016 14:23

Beccara:

So to flip this around, Would you all be against drug companies charging less for HIV med's in Africa than say NZ? After all they are just charging more for us Kiwi's for no reason

That's a tough one - should all things be priced as a multiple of GDP per capita? Or should they be priced on a cost plus reasonable profit? Either way it's tough to see why kiwis should get much poorer value streaming than US or UK

Or should it be "what the market will bear", which in this case I would interpret as "the point where x% of people torrent instead of subscribing"? In which case we're not going to get better value for money until more people say "no" to region-blocked SVOD and revert to torrenting.

Personally, I've given up on UK Netflix but still subscribe because there's material on the NZ site that is of value to me and family. However I have no qualms about using alternative means to access material I was recently viewing on UK Netflix.

Dairyxox

1435 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 375

Reply # 1530078 11-Apr-2016 14:29

NonprayingMantis: Not a very well thought through analogy IMHO.

Using this bakery example, they get it very very wrong. They are trying to charge differently based on people's national origin.,But Geoblocking *isn't* based on where you are from. It's based on where you are *located*
Those are two very different things.

I.e. French people in America are totally free to sign up and use Netflix USA. They just can't use it in France.
As a British person in NZ I am not entitled to use Netflix UK, but I *am* entitled to use Netflix NZ.

So for the bakery example to be valid, they would need to be a London bakery receiving a call or email from, say, Belgium saying "I always bought your bread when I lived in London. Could you please deliver some bread to my Belgian address now I love there.".
Then If the bakery responds with "sorry we don't deliver to Belgium from our London bakery". Then that would be pretty close to how geoblocking works.

Maybe they could even add in "...but you're welcome to order bread from a bakery in Belgium. We actually buy our ingredients from the same global suppliers. The end result isn't exactly the same and might be priced differently, but that is your only option I'm afraid."

But then a London bakery refusing to ship bread to Belgium wouldn't produce the same emotional response they are looking for......

Even then its not quite right...

You can pay in any location, and get served in any location, but you're only allowed a specific selection of goods, based on where you consume.

tdgeek

14275 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2634

Trusted

Reply # 1530101 11-Apr-2016 15:18

Dairyxox:

NonprayingMantis: Not a very well thought through analogy IMHO.

Using this bakery example, they get it very very wrong. They are trying to charge differently based on people's national origin.,But Geoblocking *isn't* based on where you are from. It's based on where you are *located*
Those are two very different things.

I.e. French people in America are totally free to sign up and use Netflix USA. They just can't use it in France.
As a British person in NZ I am not entitled to use Netflix UK, but I *am* entitled to use Netflix NZ.

So for the bakery example to be valid, they would need to be a London bakery receiving a call or email from, say, Belgium saying "I always bought your bread when I lived in London. Could you please deliver some bread to my Belgian address now I love there.".
Then If the bakery responds with "sorry we don't deliver to Belgium from our London bakery". Then that would be pretty close to how geoblocking works.

Maybe they could even add in "...but you're welcome to order bread from a bakery in Belgium. We actually buy our ingredients from the same global suppliers. The end result isn't exactly the same and might be priced differently, but that is your only option I'm afraid."

But then a London bakery refusing to ship bread to Belgium wouldn't produce the same emotional response they are looking for......

Even then its not quite right...

You can pay in any location, and get served in any location, but you're only allowed a specific selection of goods, based on where you consume.

Because the rights owner of those goods has rights that allow him to sell his way, in his area. That may involve advertising, partnerships with other local providers,

it could be that you will in fact get that content to watch, but not right now.

If all content was available to everyone, that breaks the whole model. The content will in fact be worthless. There is no premium that the rights buyers will pay as its everywhere, its common as sh^t. There is no reason for advertisers to supplement the revenue train, as they will have to advertise on every possible provider to get coverage

It will happen and I'd say it wont be cheap, and I think that those who support all this will be torrenting as they will now refuse to buy 5 or 6 subscriptions as that might be needed to cover everything right here and right now.

PhantomNVD

2499 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 685

Reply # 1530108 11-Apr-2016 15:41

Beccara:

So to flip this around, Would you all be against drug companies charging less for HIV med's in Africa than say NZ? After all they are just charging more for us Kiwi's for no reason

Which example are you 'flipping this around'? I'd say your "just charging us more for no reason" shows your answer too BUT

Physical product have delivery and production costs, a digital product has a single cost to produce and no difference in delivery cost wherever in the world it goes (though the user may pay differently for their access, the supplier pays the same for the content bandwidth, wherever it ends up 'delivered' to)

thus it may be cheaper to supply the drug in Africa, due to many factors like:

1) the distance from the Production base

2) 'bulk' delivery generally cost less (as they have a MASSIVE market for HIV drugs and we do not)

3) 'bulk' production cost less also (if, for example its produced n RSA in massive quantities, and in Aus in much smaller quantities)

and so on....

Why then do [b]should[/] the following apply?

- Digital books have the same 'production' cost, NO printing costs and a minuscule delivery (bandwidth) cost but vary widely in price across the world?

- Netflix (media) have similar subscription fees, but widely different catalogue offerings

- Apple store products (music/media/books) have widely varying prices and availability across the world 'regions' and the

- Amazon store products (music/media/books) have widely varying prices and availability across the world 'regions' too!

Publishers want to maximize profits, and gouge whatever they can from the different (artificially created) digital markets, and THIS is what we seek to end with geoUNblocking is it not?

Talkiet

3816 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2355

Trusted

Spark NZ

Reply # 1530111 11-Apr-2016 15:47

One person supports this post

I saw the title and immediately thought it was a clickbait headline. "You won't believe what happens next!"

So I didn't click.

Cheers - N

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571

Reply # 1530112 11-Apr-2016 15:50

PhantomNVD:

if the internet is now a "human right" shouldn't internet equality be also?

Imagine telling woman they only get the vote if they are in an urban region (and use the NZ post random allocation of if they even are rural/urban)???

Imagine telling US citizens they only get to vote in the NZ election if they are resident in NZ!

Oh wait, that makes complete sense. sometimes analogies are good. sometimes they are terrible.

The 'right to vote' analogy to geoblocking is utterly terrible - worse than the bakery one - because voting, at it's heart, has geoblocking built in, and rightfully so. (yeah yeah, some minor exceptions like servicemen posted overseas, but for the most part you must live in NZ to vote in the NZ election)

PhantomNVD

2499 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 685

Reply # 1530113 11-Apr-2016 16:01

NonprayingMantis:

PhantomNVD:

if the internet is now a "human right" shouldn't internet equality be also?

Imagine telling woman they only get the vote if they are in an urban region (and use the NZ post random allocation of if they even are rural/urban)???

Imagine telling US citizens they only get to vote in the NZ election if they are resident in NZ!

Oh wait, that makes complete sense. sometimes analogies are good. sometimes they are terrible.

The 'right to vote' analogy to geoblocking is utterly terrible - worse than the bakery one - because voting, at it's heart, has geoblocking built in, and rightfully so. (yeah yeah, some minor exceptions like servicemen posted overseas, but for the most part you must live in NZ to vote in the NZ election)

Ok fair call, I was going for the (obvious) inequality slant with that one ... but see my recent post now too?

1 | 2