Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix Teams With LG For 'Prepaid' Streaming Worldwide (engadget.com)

Posted by samzenpus on from the watching-everywhere dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Netflix CEO Reed Hastings announced at CES that the service had gone live in 130 additional countries including India, Russia, and Saudi Arabia. He called the expansion "the birth of a global TV network." Partnering with LG, the company hopes to expand its reach by providing prepaid access worldwide. China remains the most notable holdout for the streaming service but Hastings is hopeful saying, "We are continuing to work on that and we are very patient."

32 comments

  1. Netflix vs Hulu, Amazon, etc. by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Netflix is available in a lot of countries.

    Hulu and Amazon are only available in a handful of countries and their list doesn't even include Canada.

  2. converse with ed snowden channel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    another netflix original series?

  3. Don't they own House of Cards? by Torp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Apparently it's not available in the newly opened 130 countries... or at least in some of them.

    --
    I apologize for the lack of a signature.
    1. Re:Don't they own House of Cards? by SeaFox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, that's gonna be the joke here.

      Netflix exists in all these countries. But due to this licensing restriction or that contract, will there be anything to actually watch on it?

    2. Re:Don't they own House of Cards? by Torp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I haven't started the free trial yet, but the comments of people who did that in Romania are... disappointing.
      Their flagship isn't available, the old movie collection is limited too... 3 titles for each of de Niro, Pacino, and other great actors?

      --
      I apologize for the lack of a signature.
    3. Re:Don't they own House of Cards? by r1348 · · Score: 2

      Netflix started here in Italy last November, but House of Cards is not part of the catalogue because they already sold broadcasting rights to Sky.

    4. Re:Don't they own House of Cards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Czech Republic is one of the markets they just added, but they may as well have not opened it at all here. The films and TV shows available here are "disappointing" to say the least, and I imagine that it's going to be the same everywhere else outside of the "major" markets.

      So back to torrent for me!

  4. Region Locking Still in Place by Forgefather · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those whoa re wondering about the continued use of region locking, that nonsense will still be in place.

    from http://www.wtoc.com/story/3090...

    "Although Netflix is now virtually worldwide, not of all its entertainment will be available everywhere. For instance, a prized licensing contract that gives Netflix the rights to Walt Disney films after their theatrical release will be limited to the U.S. and Canada as part of a deal negotiated several years ago. Hastings told reporters Wednesday that Netflix is hoping to expand those rights into other countries."

    They are still in negotiations for global rights to all of their content, but being available in many more countries should increase their bargaining power in that endeavor.

    --
    "There are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics"
    1. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was about to say

      The only reason I hit streaming sites at all is so I can watch content that otherwise won't be broadcast for days/weeks. Having internet means serials get spoiled as they air which is just not going to work for anyone.

      I find myself in a situation where there's actual TV I want to watch but the limiting factor for me actually paying for the content either directly or indirectly through subscriptions / advertising is that for whatever reason there are invisible borders to content that add delay for god only knows what reason (likely to line somebody's pocket) ...anyway the internet has found the blockage and routed around it

      Thanks Internet

      Thinternet

    2. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by Tukz · · Score: 1

      days/weeks.

      Years here for some TV Shows. They are 2-3 years behind seasons.

      And in one instance, a shows was taken off Netflix before we even got the last season!
      What's the point then?

      --
      - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
    3. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Cable companies with captive networks wont just give up their deals with series and movies as the regional broadcasted for material for a set time.
      Global content works great on a brands own network but third party series often get long term regional rights deals.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      They are still in negotiations for global rights to all of their content, but being available in many more countries should increase their bargaining power in that endeavor.

      Unlikely, actually.

      In fact, being available in more countries will likely result in more difficulty for Netflix - the problem being that the content industry is trying to avoid another Apple.

      For those who don't know, the iTunes music store is wildly successful. So successful in fact that Apple was able to dictate the terms of the agreement to the music companies. The music industry tried and tried and they could not break Apple - Apple sold the most popular players and people were buying up music for that player at an astounding rate. So much so that Apple had all the power - if the record labels disagreed with Apple's terms, Apple said "tough" and didn't carry them. Which basically meant you either ripped it or pirated it.

      Well, the only way the record labels and RIAA could break Apple was to do the nuclear option - DRM free. With that one move, they established Amazon as a viable competitor to Apple, and with this, it meant the labels/RIAA was now back in charge, not Apple. Apple could no longer dictate the terms, because they could simply move their offerings to Amazon. And likewise, Amazon couldn't dictate terms to them either, because then they'd move their offerings to Apple.

      Hollywood saw what' went on, and they know they're not going to allow any one player to become too big or dominant. So Netflix may be big, but Hollywood is going to make it so Netflix won't grow TOO big and be a threat.

      At best, they will help them secure rights from the local distributor.

    5. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Only so many hours in the day mate. So the pigoplists can carry on any way they want, in the end people will have only so many hours to waste on sucking down content. So they want to dick around, big whoop, people will just skip that content and send producers bankrupt due to lack of reach. So how is netflix complete with the oft annoying youtube, all kinds of weird content, who gets the most hours of consumer eye balls.

      Yep, the can run up all the crazy pscyho ideas they want of unlimited profits but it does not mean they will get any of it. Right now, at this time, interactive content is slowly but surely chewing away more and more consume time away from empty passive content. Netflix did not gain market share by what it did, Netflix gained that share because of how consumer demands have shifted and what they are willing to tolerate. So reality, meh crap on cable, turn on the gaming machine and play instead, that happens often enough and they simply uplug the cable and use netflix because it provides enough to fill the gap and they simply do not care about content they might have missed ie so what, what a few years until the series finishes and binge watch it, from start to finish, fresh and never watched.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    6. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by Forgefather · · Score: 1

      Good point. I had forgotten about the music industry history with apple causing consternation. At some point I can understand their reasoning. For some one in the production side the idea of a Walmart for movies must seem like a fairly terrifying prospect, and I think your argument points out a less discussed motive for using DRM: a vendor lock-in to prevent certain music distributors from gaining the power to become a Walmart like entity.

      Ultimately the he record labels argument is still false because any file that has been digitized is inherently worthless. With infinite supply and finite demand the value of any digital file approaches zero. It is only because of intrinsic value that a customer places in the file, such as wanting to support the author or the convenience of a service, that a digital file gains any value at all, and what value it does gain is solely determined by the potential customer.

      With that in mind the way to make your digital files more valuable has to be to place it on as many services as possible to increase the convenience proposition to customers, and by extension increase the intrinsic value. This was the way that iTunes ultimately killed off Limewire, with the power of convenience. DRM is a failed method of enforcing artificial scarcity because producers don't understand why the digital economy works the way that it does, and they are attempting to impose an older method of business by restricting supply and outlets to drive business how they choose. They are trying to recreate the music store or the movie store on the internet, and the internet simply doesn't work that way. Value is driven by size and convenience.

      So if anyone asks you why we call them dinosaurs this is the reason. They are trying to impose a scarcity on a product that has infinite supply because they only understand physical goods, not digital goods.

      --
      "There are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics"
    7. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      There is an infinite supply of copies (or streams or viewings or whatever) of movies, but there is definitely not an infinite supply of unique movies. New movies require actors, producers, writers, editors, etc.. This impedence mismatch means a bridging mechanism is necessary.

      The mechanism can be to impose artificial scarcity on the copies of movies. Or it can be some form of patronage -- maybe Coca-Cola buys a movie directly, or more subtly has product placement, or the patronage is lower-level and is just a bunch of doofuses donating their time as actors, or a pure honour-system donation model of patronage, or whatever, but *something* has to solve the mismatch or else new content cannot happen. And I am deeply doubtful that the donation model will scale to more than the occasional super niche low budget production, and totally convinced that there's a limit to quality content from people getting no benefit.

      If it's truly inherently worthless then you will not get content.

    8. Re:Region Locking Still in Place by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      There is an infinite supply of copies (or streams or viewings or whatever) of movies, but there is definitely not an infinite supply of unique movies.

      The supply is close enough to infinite; there is already more content in existence than anyone could reasonably hope to sample in their lifetime. Even if the creation of new movies were to cease (along with all copyright restrictions), no one would lack for entertainment.

      It's true that if people want new content beyond what people naturally choose to produce for their own amusement they will need to pay for its production. However, that is merely a "want", not a "need", and as you yourself pointed out there are plenty of ways to fund development without violating the right to freedom of speech.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
  5. Offline viewing by StirlingArcher · · Score: 1

    The service isn't complete until I can play stuff offline, like on the 9 hour flight from London to Vancouver last week.

    1. Re:Offline viewing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The service isn't complete until I can play stuff offline, like on the 9 hour flight from London to Vancouver last week.

      Can you say "DVD/BluRay"? Sure, I knew you could...

    2. Re:Offline viewing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are so last century. Say MKV!

    3. Re:Offline viewing by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it's a feature coming in the future but like every challenge with copyright they need approval. The nice thing about Netflix is that they are now in a position to bully copyright holders.

    4. Re: Offline viewing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vudu or iTunes

    5. Re:Offline viewing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you say "industry standard"? I guess you can't because MKV is only used by bad men and hackers.

      MP4 works everywhere.

    6. Re:Offline viewing by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Funny thing is netflix says copyright is not why they don't offer it. http://gizmodo.com/the-real-re...
      "According to Neil Hunt, Netflix's Chief Product Officer, Netflix users won't be able to handle the complexity the added choice will bring."
      Apparently us consumers are too dumb to handle one more choice after being given the choice of a few thousand things too watch herp de duur.

      Although I have to admit a few months ago I had to explain to someone that they had to have internet service to use netflix for whatever reason they just couldn't seem to grasp that all the stuff on netflix wouldn't fit on a ps3...So Maybe in a few months netflix will drop everything but house of cards. That would simplify things. With the added bonus the entire catalog would fit on a ps3.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  6. LG? by jetkust · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OK, I read both articles and I still don't have a clue what LG has to do with any of this. What are they doing again?

    1. Re:LG? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, my thoughts also.

      Appears to be a mutual praise piece released for free advertising from places like this.....

      EPIC captcha: nutshell

    2. Re:LG? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably having the app pre-installed on their smart TVs, with account credentials in the box for free Netflix access.

    3. Re:LG? by hanzoach · · Score: 0

      They are one of the main player in TV business. They showcase a rollable OLED display at CES. Their "Smart" TV feature WebOS platform, which Netflix want to use as access leverage.

    4. Re:LG? by hampaidenvalkaisu · · Score: 1

      OK, I read both articles and I still don't have a clue what LG has to do with any of this. What are they doing again?

      I agree..

  7. Youtube was the first global TV network by greggman · · Score: 1

    Sorry Netflix. You're #2

  8. Hulu is a joke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hulu is a fucking joke compared to Netflix or Amazon. They know this and try to pretend they aren't a joke by dismissing any comparisons (even though their name wouldn't come up under any other circumstances).

    Their core codebase started from spaghetti from some Chinese students and their attempt to branch out into Japan was such a shitshow that they quietly sold it off after much fanfare.

    1. Re:Hulu is a joke. by Number42 · · Score: 1

      You forgot that Hulu Plus still has ads.

    2. Re:Hulu is a joke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a no-ads Hulu Plus version that costs just a little more. You might accurately point out that it still has ads before something like 5 shows, but I don't watch those so it's functionally ad-free.

      Hulu Plus is much better than Netflix or Amazon for current TV, and a lot of TV just doesn't seem to show up on Netflix at all. Netflix is much better for movies, and it has a lot of archival overlap for older TV shows. I kind of think Amazon is the joke here, but they do have some interesting original content, and their paid content is fine. The only reason I bother with Amazon is because of the Prime delivery.

      I have no idea whatsoever what Hulu's codebase is like and inasmuch as I'm a consumer I don't really care.