Bell Media President Says Canadians Are 'Stealing' US Netflix Content

iONiUM writes: Today the Bell Media president claimed that Canadians are "stealing" U.S. Netflix, saying the practice is "stealing just like stealing anything else." She went on to say that it is socially unacceptable behavior, and "It has to become socially unacceptable to admit to another human being that you are VPNing into U.S. Netflix. Like throwing garbage out of your car window, you just don't do it. We have to get engaged and tell people they're stealing." Of course, I'm sure the fact that Bell Media profits from Canadian content has nothing to do with these remarks.

Comments

Socially Acceptable

[bigfinger76]

No, it's socially acceptable behavior. The industry may have disdain for it, but it is absolutely not frowned upon by society.

Re: Socially Acceptable

[Mister Transistor]

The president of Bell Media is a woman.

Re:Socially Acceptable

[Austerity Empowers]

Not only not frowned upon, it's actively beneficial to all parties. The "problem" is market based pricing and region lockouts. That actively is socially unacceptable, unfortunately that doesn't really stop the idiots in question.

Re:Socially Acceptable

[Grishnakh]

Not only not frowned upon, it's actively beneficial to all parties. The "problem" is market based pricing and region lockouts.

Wrong, this "stealing" is detrimental to certain media companies who seek to profit from region lockouts and market based pricing. That's why they want to make it socially unacceptable to use a VPN to evade region lockouts.

Re: Socially Acceptable

[rsilvergun]

You wouldn't steal a policeman's helmet, shoot him, take a dump in the helmet, give it to his widow, then steal it back, would you?

Re:Socially Acceptable

[Jumunquo]

And how will they do that? Oh right, in the article, she says they are going to inform people, and then social opinion shall be so! Wow! She should run for president!

I agree that region locking is absolutely beneficial to media companies because it allows them to charge different prices to different markets. If you remember Econ 101, as you raise the price, your demand drops, but there is still demand. What if you could charge only those people that higher price? That's what media companies are trying to do. What if you could exclude other suppliers, e.g. control supply? That's also what they are trying to do. Unfortunately, it totally screws compatibility of playback devices and is generally just a pain to deal with. However, they want you to think it's socially unacceptable to try to get around it because they want to make more money. Okay, good luck with that, free speech and all.

Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Tiniest violin in the world playing for this woman.

Re:Right.

[TsuruchiBrian]

That had better be a Canadian violin, or else you are stealing.

Re:Right.

[Em Adespoton]

That had better be a Canadian violin, or else you are stealing.

The curious want to know: what is she playing on the violin? And does she have licenses to a) have a copy of the music and b) perform in public?

Re:Right.

[flopsquad]

That had better be a Canadian violin, or else you are stealing.

And God help you if the sheet music isn't in French.

This is ridiculous

[ZorinLynx]

- You are paying for the content. The same amount a customer in the US would pay.

- You are watching the content.

Why is this suddenly "stealing" if you are in Canada? It's the same content, and the content makers are getting the same money.

Re:This is ridiculous

[Ryanrule]

no, you are paying for access to a content library, which is licensed by netflix for your region.

Re:This is ridiculous

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Apparently, the head of a company that produces Canadian TV is butthurt about the fact that Canadians will go to extra inconvenience to avoid being stuck with her product and gain access to the US market. Intellectually dishonest and largely nonsensical argument; but the motives are clear enough.

Re:This is ridiculous

[Penguinisto]

Because the packets crossed an imaginary geophysical line to get to you, that's why!

Now be a good citizen and support proper balkaniz^M taxatio^M patriotism!

Re:This is ridiculous

[Dunbal]

Why is this suddenly "stealing" if you are in Canada? It's the same content, and the content makers are getting the same money.

Because Bell Media which owns a television statement and has paid money for episodes of, say, Futurama, is pissed off that you can watch Futurama in Canada via Netflix and not only do they not get a cut, but they don't get to claim you as an ad viewer so they can bilk I mean charge their ad customers for you. They are a middleman, a dinosaur, and part of a broadcasting system that is increasingly irrelevant. If anyone is "stealing" it's these middlemen that produce no content and add no actual value, yet manage to slink their hand in your pocket every month.

Re:This is ridiculous

[Dunbal]

Unfortunately it works the way the money says it does. I wouldn't be surprised if the Canadian government suddenly sees the light and is persuaded to enforce criminal charges on VPN streamers. After all, who knows what other dirty little tricks they are getting up to on their VPNs. They're probably all terrorists anyway.

Re:This is ridiculous

[Zalbik]

then you're probably doing something wrong.

I fail to see the immorality of my actions due to the fact that I circumvent a licensing agreement that I was not party to.

Great, so Bell paid for an "exclusive" license for NBC content in Canada. Why should their agreement have anything to do with what sites I access? Last time I checked, Bell Media is not the governing body of Canada.

For the end user this is neither a copyright violation nor a licensing violation. It may violate Netflix terms of service, but I do not believe that violating a websites terms of service is necessarily immoral.

Re:This is ridiculous

[Em Adespoton]

No, you misunderstand... Bell Media owns the Canadian equivalent of Hulu. They're trying to knock NetFlix Canada out of action, but then realized that most people are watching NetFlix US anyway.

Re: This is ridiculous

[0xA]

If they offered a similar level of service then I could understand but their service sucks. I can't get an HBO Now subscription because I'm in Canada and they sold the rights for their shows to Bell's Crave TV. Ok so I'll get me a Crave TV subscription but I can't do that either because I don't have a cable or satellite subscription with one of the Crave TV partners. So if I want to stream the Sopranos I have to switch cable providers, but all new cable boxes and hope there isn't some some other exclusive I'm missing Yeah..... Not gonna happen.

Good luck with that.

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

She is going to need a downright brilliant propaganda team to convince anyone that paying for netflix is 'stealing'; just because she doesn't like it.

There's really not much difference between using a VPN to gain access to US electronic markets and using a car to gain access to US malls. Is it 'stealing' when a Canadian drives across the border and buys something in the US? Even by the standards of self-interested bullshit from incumbent monopolist assholes, this is unimpressive work.

Re:Good luck with that.

[Quirkz]

Well, if they "throw garbage out the car window" on the way to the American mall, apparently that's like stealing. According to her analogy, at least.

Re:Good luck with that.

[Dunbal]

Yeah you'd think these media giants would come out with their own streaming services instead of trying to fight the tide. Old-school top down TV is dead. People are sick of their shows being time-slotted according to some arbitrary station policy, are sick of having to wait weeks for the "next episode", are sick of not being able to re-watch a favorite episode and are sick of ads. Internet streaming is the future. Adapt or die.

Re:Good luck with that.

[Zalbik]

Yeah you'd think these media giants would come out with their own streaming services instead of trying to fight the tide

Uhhh...they have. That's the whole point. She's trying to paint US Netflix with the "it's illegal and immoral" brush so people sign up for Bell Media's streaming service.

Problem is she's wrong on both counts (it being neither illegal nor immoral).

Re:Good luck with that.

[swb]

If a Canadian drives to the US to buy products in a US store, don't they have to declare them to customs? I think they mostly don't care about the bottle of Coca-Cola in your cup holder, but if you buy something expensive they might charge you some kind of import duty and/or taxes on it.

I think this is the kind of argument the Bell Media person was more or less trying to make. She owns the exclusive rights to a basket of content in Canada. If someone is going overseas to acquire this content, they are doing basically the same thing that a physical shopper is doing when they go to the US to buy a product that some Canadian store also wants to sell.

I think the purpose of tarrifs and duties is to specifically hinder this kind of ad-hoc cross-border arbitrage. Of course it's well nigh impossible to do for intellectual content.

There are good arguments to be made that Bell Media is just greedy and using monopoly position to extract rent from Canadians.

But there may be other arguments -- Bell's costs may be higher for reasons outside their control (ie, higher taxes, weak exchange rate, etc).

Re:Good luck with that.

[Em Adespoton]

If a Canadian drives to the US to buy products in a US store, don't they have to declare them to customs? I think they mostly don't care about the bottle of Coca-Cola in your cup holder, but if you buy something expensive they might charge you some kind of import duty and/or taxes on it.

I think this is the kind of argument the Bell Media person was more or less trying to make. She owns the exclusive rights to a basket of content in Canada. If someone is going overseas to acquire this content, they are doing basically the same thing that a physical shopper is doing when they go to the US to buy a product that some Canadian store also wants to sell.

I think the purpose of tarrifs and duties is to specifically hinder this kind of ad-hoc cross-border arbitrage. Of course it's well nigh impossible to do for intellectual content.

There are good arguments to be made that Bell Media is just greedy and using monopoly position to extract rent from Canadians.

But there may be other arguments -- Bell's costs may be higher for reasons outside their control (ie, higher taxes, weak exchange rate, etc).

Actually, NAFTA means that Canadians/Americans/Mexicans generally don't have to pay customs fees when crossing the border. What Canadians pay when coming back from the US is GST (federal tax) on the value of the products purchased outside the country.
And if a Canadian buys a NetFlix subscription, the GST is added on in Canada. So there's no theft from this angle.

Amnesty

[Anonymous Coward]

I suggest an amnesty period in which any Canadian can return stolen content without penalty.

Slander laws

[Dunbal]

How tough are slander laws in Canada? She just called legitimate Netflix subscribers thieves. I think she should be prepared to have some evidence of theft being committed, or face the consequences in court.

Re:Hu ?

[amiga3D]

She didn't get her cut.

It's not stealing.

[danbob999]

It might be a copyright violation however, since the intent of the distributor is to offer the content only in the USA.

Re:It's not stealing.

[danbob999]

The thing is that you are not buying Netflix in the US. You are buying it in Canada. And by using a VPN service, you are faking that you are travelling to the USA (where, by Netflix standards, you have the right to more shows). Netflix has distribution rights for the USA only on certain shows. By using VPN, you and/or Netflix are doing a copyright violation. Again, that is not stealing.

Re:It's not stealing.

[TechyImmigrant]

Who implied that is what is going on. Netflix US is presumably getting paid for US content, by Canadians. Netflix is entirely capable of preventing a Canadian Netflix account working on a US server. If they don't limit access in that way then they are explicitly supporting the practice.

LOL

[kuzb]

Bell, talking about "socially acceptable behaviour" and "theft".

Has anyone had a look at Bell Canada's pricing and services lately? They epitomize theft.

Region locking is socially unacceptable

[Xelios]

Sounds to me like region locking content has become socially unacceptable in this globally connected age. These people are not only paying for the content, they're paying extra on top of it just to get around your arbitrary restrictions.

Maybe it's time for people like her to join us in the 21st century.

Demonizing for fun and profit

[HangingChad]

We don't like Canadians VPNing Netflix content it but it's really not that bad. So, let's call it stealing and make it sound worse than it is. Like calling abortion murder. Demonize the things you don't like.

"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[duckintheface]

And this is the problem with industry thinking. It is NOT stealing. Copyrights, patents, and trademarks are separate types of law. They are NOT property law. If they were, we would not need a separate part of the Constitution (Art. 1, Sec 8) to define what they mean.

Violating copyright is NOT stealing because the copyright is NOT property. The term "intellectual property" is an intentional obfuscation designed to blur the difference between universal ideas of property ownership and the proposition that ideas can be owned. Ideas can NOT be owned. Copyrights are just temporary monopolies for the purpose of encouraging the arts and sciences. They do NOT exist because "Hey, that's mine". They do not exist for the benefit of the copyright holder. They exist for the benefit of society as a whole. Don't believe me? Read Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[msauve]

" Don't believe me? Read Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution."

I don't believe you when you imply that the US Constitution applies to Canada, which is what the article covers. You'd do better to refer to the Statute of Anne, as Canada is a Commonwealth country.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[Zalbik]

And this is the problem with industry thinking. It is NOT stealing

No, the problem in this case is not only is it NOT stealing, it is not actually illegal.

Accessing US Netflix outside of the US may break terms of use (which Netflix would have a VERY hard time winning a lawsuit over), but does not currently break any Canadian laws. No more than using a VPN to access any other website.

This whole thing is bloody retarded. In this case, Canadians:
- Pay for the content
- Pay for the VPN to access the content

At least if nothing else, this has convinced me to NEVER sign up for any Bell services.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[FredGauss]

"At least if nothing else, this has convinced me to NEVER sign up for any Bell services."

And of course this "moral stand" has nothing to do with subscriptions for Bell services...
or maybe the fact that Bell is actively trying to gain traction for their own brew of Netflix (CraveTV) is mere coincidence.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[dysmal]

Try calling Bell for service some time. Their call centers will make you realize that Bell truly is a 4 letter word!!!

Disclaimer: I'm an American and had to work with Bell on a project. I only have the likes of Comcast, TWC, and AT&T to compare Bell to.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[BitterOak]

Accessing US Netflix outside of the US may break terms of use (which Netflix would have a VERY hard time winning a lawsuit over), but does not currently break any Canadian laws.

I wish that were true but it isn't. You'd be breaking copyright law. You're importing copyrighted content from someone without the legal authority to distribute said content in Canada. It isn't unusual for different companies to have exclusive rights to distribute in various countries, and the U.S. Netflix has no rights to distribute this copyrighted content in Canada. Therefore, in transferring the data from your VPN in the U.S. to your computer in Canada, you're copying copyrighted content which you have no authorization to do. That's illegal. I'm not saying I agree with this law, but it is wrong to say that what you're doing isn't illegal.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[TechyImmigrant]

> You're importing copyrighted content from someone without the legal authority to distribute said content in Canada.

I thought both the US and Canada were signatories of the Berne Convention. So you're good to go paying for and importing individual works for personal consumption.

It's not only not illegal. It's protected by treaty.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[vux984]

You're importing copyrighted content from someone without the legal authority to distribute said content in Canada.

Hence the VPN. They are delivering the content to the US. The Canadian is then transporting it across the border, for person use (not redistribution).

This is exactly as illegal as buying a DVD and a book from Sam's in the states, and then driving it home to Canada with you across the border. Which is to say, "not even slightly illegal".

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[Zalbik]

Many lawyers disagree with you (see the section headed "But is faking a U.S. IP address illegal?")

Specifically:
"Prof. Fewer said he doubts that the use of a VPN qualified as the breaking of a digital lock on a device designed to prohibit unauthorized copying, since it merely cloaks a user’s IP address."

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[Mister Transistor]

It can't even be imagined as "stealing" in my mind. Since it's paid for in the U.S., I fail to see the difference if you had driven to the U.S. and purchased something to take back to Canada. it might be "smuggling" if anything, by way of avoiding paying whatever bullshit tariffs Canada might be able to levy, if there even are any that apply.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[bobbied]

You're importing copyrighted content from someone without the legal authority to distribute said content in Canada.

Hence the VPN. They are delivering the content to the US. The Canadian is then transporting it across the border, for person use (not redistribution).

This is exactly as illegal as buying a DVD and a book from Sam's in the states, and then driving it home to Canada with you across the border. Which is to say, "not even slightly illegal".

Not exactly the same thing and by law it *could* be illegal to buy a DVD in the US and then import it into Canada depending, but moving a physical copy of a work which you rightfully purchased for personal use is usually an exception.... But remember, when you do Netflix over a VPN, you are not importing a physical disk, but the logical data. It's very likely you are violating the terms of your Netflix subscription as well as infringing on the copyright holder's rights to control where the work can be streamed. As this is a civil law thing and not a criminal law thing, you might not be arrested for a crime, but the copyright holder can sue you to recover damages.

Re: "stealing just like stealing anything else"

[bobbied]

Awh come on people... Copyright infringement is a CIVIL law issue not a criminal offense.

So the police may not be knocking down doors to stop you... However, they may be knocking ON your door to serve you with the lawsuit brought by the copyright owners and later assisting in the confiscation of damages when you have a judgment entered and have to pay.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[AK Marc]

How do you steal a widget if the law in the location you stole it from defines it as not stealable? So yes, the US law matters when talking about stealing US things.

And commwealth has nothing to do with law, so the Statute of Anne may or may not apply. I'm in a commonwealth country, and it doesn't apply. So your corrections are incorrect. "Member states have no legal obligation to one another". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[vux984]

But remember, when you do Netflix over a VPN, you are not importing a physical disk, but the logical data. It's very likely you are violating the terms of your Netflix subscription

No question its a violation of my netflix subscription. But that is not even slightly illegal. They are welcome to terminate me as a customer if they don't want my money.

as well as infringing on the copyright holder's rights to control where the work can be streamed

Nope. Its being streamed in the USA. Once it hits my VPN its on my private network. The copyright holder has no streaming rights on the flow of information from the point at which i receive the stream to the point at which i view it. Just as I don't need a streaming license to transfer the data from the computer along a vga cable to the TV.

but the copyright holder can sue you to recover damages.

Sure. What damages though? I paid them for content that wasn't otherwise available; that I consumed in the privacy of my home. What material harm are they going to show the court exactly?

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[LinuxIsGarbage]

It can't even be imagined as "stealing" in my mind. Since it's paid for in the U.S., I fail to see the difference if you had driven to the U.S. and purchased something to take back to Canada. it might be "smuggling" if anything, by way of avoiding paying whatever bullshit tariffs Canada might be able to levy, if there even are any that apply.

You actually set up a Netflix Canada account, and pay in Canadian Dollars. Connect by VPN (or DNS proxy), and Netflix thinks you're "visiting" the US. Regardless of where you registered your account, Netflix will provide the content library of the country you appear to be in. Netflix will do this no problem even though you were just in Canada moments earlier, and even though you apparently travel to the states for months at a time, and are coming from the same IP as hundreds or thousands of other Canadians (and other international customers).

Netflix very much turns a blind eye to this. There's no way they don't know about how many people are bypassing region locks, but they turn a blind eye because they know people will pay to sign up for the crappy Canadian content, with the intention of VPNing into the US content. They try to do the bare minimum to make content creators think that they are trying to block it, without really doing anything.

Myself, I use TVUnblock It's free, and it's just a DNS setting. To get it to work on Chromecast, I set the router DNS to TVUnblock, and I set a firewall on the router to prevent Chromecast from connecting to Google's DNS servers (8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4) causing it to fall back on the router's DNS settings.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[LinuxIsGarbage]

The agreement was that you would not only pay the fee but also pay it from United States soil and remain on United States soil while viewing works available through the service. What makes such a contract invalid?

No. I setup a Netflix Canada account. A courtesy they provide to all Netflix users is to provide the content library of the region you appear to be in, regardless of where you registered your account. They just think me, and thousands of other Canadians, and UK, and Australians, are just visiting the USA for months at a time, from the same IP.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[Darinbob]

They have fewer words in the Canadian language. For convenience, all civil violations regarding copyright issues are called "stealing" there.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[WCLPeter]

Bell is actively trying to gain traction for their own brew of Netflix (CraveTV) is mere coincidence.

Except that they're really not, they only offer it to people who already have a Bell - or one of their partners - subscription to a Satellite package. You literally cannot sign up for Crave unless you have one, they won't let you, and I'm not paying the metric fucktonne of money Bell requires to get a Satellite package - not to mention they'd likely want me to sign up for their internet too. Did I also mention you can't even sign up for the service unless you have third party tracking cookies enabled by default on your browser? Fuck that noise.

Shomi, the Rogers equivalent, is pretty much the same except you need - you guessed it - a Rogers, or other partner, cable service in order to get it. And again, they'll likely want you to get their internet on top of it.

So for about $100+ per month I could spend $4 to get a streaming service that has a few extra shows than the Canadian Netflix does or I can save my hundred bucks and spend $8 on Netflix. I cancelled my Bell internet a few years ago, went with Teksavvy - totally worth it, and signed up for Netflix while sticking an antenna on my roof for OTA HD. I honestly don't miss cable, Netflix / Youtube covers nearly all my visual entertainment needs, and for what it doesn't cover I get either OTA or use an iiTunes Seasons Pass for the rest.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[Pi1grim]

The problem is that Bell Media would want that money for themselves and could do with a little less competition from better services. But they can't prohibit VPNs, so they are just trying to convince people that it's socially unacceptable to watch Netflix if it's not available in your country.

Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else"

[rikkards]

Except Netflix is available in Canada but with a more limited selection due to agreements with the varying media houses. Bell and Rogers can compete with Netflix Canada, they can't with Netflix US hence why they are bitching about it.

Bell runs a competing streaming service...

[Dzimas]

What the article neglects to mention is that Bell recently started a competing streaming service called CraveTV. They have licensed some shows that are available on the US Netflix, so the only way for Canadians to watch them is to subscribe to CraveTV or use a VPN to access the American version of Netflix.

Where things get really stupid is that Bell's $4 CraveTV service requires potential customers to subscribe to a Bell (or partner) cable or satellite TV plan in an effort to protect their traditional business. Have an OTA antenna on your roof instead? Tough. You don't qualify for their service.

Moron thinks all crimes are theft

[gurps_npc]

They are not stealing.

They are illegally importing.

I am sick and tired of shmucks that rip people off trying to 'upgrade' the crime of not being ripped off into 'theft'.

Is it stealing if I watch US netflix while in US?

[aristotle-dude]

Apparently she does not understand how netflix works. If I travel to the US, I can only watch US content while visiting there without using a VPN to pretend to be in Canada even though I have a Canadian Netflix account. If I travel to the UK, I can only watch UK netflix and so on.

Market Segmentation should be socially unacceptabl

[foreverdisillusioned]

Anyone who has passed an economics 101 class (micro or macro) should be grasp how this consumer discrimination stuff works: if the producer is able to discriminate against certain customers and offer different prices (and/or different products) then they are able to keep more surplus for themselves. It's blatantly anti-capitalistic in method and intent. If they are able to prevent arbitrage, if they can select and choose who has to pay how much and how (with no option of second sale), the free market breaks down entirely and what you end up with is simply one group fleecing another.

It's unfortunate that the left doesn't have a good pejorative (as with "socialist" or "communist") to describe the right's anti-capitalist bullshit. Phrases like "corporate greed" are way too vague for this kind of thing.

What is actually socially unacceptable

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, its socially UNACCEPTABLE to do the following

Use copyright law to hold a piece of music (happy birthday) or a cartoon character (mickey mouse) as yours in perpetuaty

Set up the identical service in different countries, with vastly different content, and then PREVENT users outside that country any way to pay for or access that service

Release movies on different dates, and expect people in other countries to wait weeks or months to pay to see that movie in their local theatre

The digital economy is here to stay, don't fight it, embrace it. If you fight it, your users will just find a way to get around your stupid protections. And there is simply NO way to write proper protections, since everything boils down to a yes/no question, and I can trivially NOP out the method used to determine the answer, and just always pass back a YES.

So long as you have to log into a Netflix account.

[Applehu Akbar]

...It's not possible to "steal" Netflix. All users are paying for it.

Let me guess...

[CliffH]

.... they also want their internet money too?? Internet Money

Re:Market Segmentation should be socially unaccept

[laddiebuck]

There is - the f-word, or 'fascist' - but it is, if possible, even more overused than 'communist'. These are pretty much meaningless synonyms for the word 'bad' at this point, with no real semantic value left.

Re:Market Segmentation should be socially unaccept

[foreverdisillusioned]

Yeah, that did briefly occur to me but fascist is more frequently interpreted as a synonym for dictatorial or totalitarian states. Fascism as an economic policy was never well defined; it was just some nebulous form of state-corporate cooperation or melding. And it's also worth noting that it arose in a radically different legal context, when exclusivity agreements tended to be rarer and much harder to enforce in practice.

Hilarious..

[Rick in China]

Like many here, the socially unacceptable portion makes me laugh so hard. I live in China, I'd gladly pay for content I happily enjoy -- but if it's not available legally for me within reasonable methods, then fuck it, VPN first, piracy second. I found myself watching lots of Hulu content at one point and tried to upgrade to their premium service.......had no feasible way whatsoever, even via VPN, because I was trying to pay with a Canadian credit card and mailed them on the topic to see if I could legally pay for it, answer was "no, it's not possible.". If people can't pay for content and watch it legally what do these corporations expect?

I'd say it's more than socially acceptable, it's socially desirable. Many I've met who haven't got the technical means to access particular content wants to know how. That's just how it is. Companies like this and dumb bitches who complain about circumvention tactics in order to access content need to learn to deal with it by making content easily accessible for all..then, perhaps, they'll have at least one leg to stand on when soap boxing.