Netflix's Doomed Battle Against VPNs Begins (venturebeat.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix's Doomed Battle Against VPNs Begins (venturebeat.com)

Posted by Soulskill on Friday January 22, 2016 @07:36AM from the cry-havoc-and-let-slip-the-meh-of-war dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Australian unblocking service uFlix recently announced that Netflix has begun implementing its plans to block users who take advantage of web proxies and VPNs to get around location restrictions on content. Shortly afterward, the service rolled out a fix to restore service, despite Netflix's efforts. The article makes the case that Netflix is probably just fine with this: "Netflix, ultimately, is caught between a rock and a hard place. The company has gone on record many times criticizing the way content licensing deals are negotiated globally. Of course, Netflix would love to be able offer a consistent library of content around the world. But it also has to stay on-side with those who hold the rights to the content, otherwise they may threaten to pull shows and movies altogether. The result is that Netflix is going through the motions of blocking VPNs, even though it understand perfectly well that these measures are doomed to fail."

106 of 159 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

You can't fix stupid by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-01-22 07:39 · Score: 4, Interesting

And by stupid I mean the licensing deals. We're in 2016 and there's still idiots out there who can't understand that people can't subscribe to 10+ services to watch everything they want.
That's why I'm staying with Netflix. Either they get the deals and also my money, or nobody gets it. This is entertainment, we can live without it.
1. Re:You can't fix stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 07:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The current crop of media tycoons are too old to figure that out. They are stuck in a prior generation's way of managing content, and they are doing everything they can to keep the rest of the world trapped in it too, to their own detriment.
  Eventually they will die off and be replaced by a new crop of tycoons who, though just as evil, have a better understanding of how data moves and breathes, and so they will get on board with a more reasonable (and ultimately more profitable) plan. Of course...by the time they get that worked out, THAT paradigm will be technologically outdated, so people will be having this exact same conversation.
  Policy always lags a decade or two behind tech.
2. Re:You can't fix stupid by Lumpy · 2016-01-22 08:02 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It's not idiots, It's scumbags that are the scourge of society.
  Call them what they are, It's malice and greed, pure and simple.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
3. Re:You can't fix stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 08:05 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  This isn't that different in my mind than Apple's preventing copying music directly off an iPod or their original iTunes protected music files. There were very simple workarounds (for the iPod you could access a hidden subfolder and copy off the files which were all renamed to a random string but otherwise contained the needed attributes to load correctly in iTunes on the destination computer, for the iTunes store protected tracks all you had to do was burn them to an audio CD and re-import them... although you'd have to manually re-enter the track info.)
  It was useful to demonstrate to the content providers that basic steps had been taken to protect their interest but these weren't serious impediments to anyone who wanted to circumvent them.
  Of course, in this era, in some places it's likely some kind of illegal computer hacking to access content outside it's licensed market if you do it via VPN.
4. Re:You can't fix stupid by darkain · 2016-01-22 08:06 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The problem isn't "policy" though. Dealing directly with content publishers, the problem more often then not has to deal with regional laws. This is the same reason why games are region locked with slightly varying content between regions. It comes down to censorship laws as well as copyright and trademark laws in particular regions. This is why names of games or shows or movies are often times different between each region, or certain scenes which may either up the rating of the content for that region or be outright banned in that region are removed. No amount of corporate policy change will fix this, only updating regional laws to have more of a global standard can address this issue.
5. Re:You can't fix stupid by JaredOfEuropa · 2016-01-22 08:41 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Thankfully the Pirate Bay has none of those issues.
  
  I rather liked the policy long held by Dutch legislators: "We don't like piracy, but until there's a reasonable legal alternative, we're not going to do anything about it". This held for a good while for downloadable music and still held for movies when this policy sadly was abandonded. And it seems that at least a few politicians are getting increasingly pissed off about DRM, regional licensing and region codes. I'd like to see the old policy revived and applied per work: if certain content is available in other countries but not here (at similar prices), it's ok to pirate it. Sadly international agreements probably preclude such a policy, and if TTIP is implemented, publishers could sue the Dutch government for this in secret court.
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
6. Re:You can't fix stupid by invid · 2016-01-22 08:42 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I'm afraid of what the new crop of tycoons will do to manage content. I'm imagining the following nightmare scenario:
  Mr. McMoneypants: I know there are people out there watching my intellectual property for free and it frosts my balls!
  Prof. Techflunky: You know, if we monitored everything everyone watched then we could send them a small bill every-time they enjoyed your IP. We could make the fee small enough for them to afford it, but have a huge penalty if they refused.
  Mr. McMoneypants: Is that even possible?
  Prof. Techflunky: It's all just engineering. The first step is to eliminate anonymity from the internet. Since this will lessen hacking and terrorism I'm sure we can get the necessary government backing.
  Mr. McMoneypants: Holy Christmas! As it just so happens I own a few politicians! Here's a billions dollars! Put together a team!
  Prof. Techflunky: As you wish master.
  
  --
  The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
7. Re:You can't fix stupid by Sir_Eptishous · 2016-01-22 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  And by stupid I mean the licensing deals. We're in 2016 and there's still idiots out there who can't understand that people can't subscribe to 10+ services to watch everything they want.
  That's why I'm staying with Netflix. Either they get the deals and also my money, or nobody gets it. This is entertainment, we can live without it.
  Boy you've got that right.
  It really is interesting when this topic comes up with people I know. Most people out there DO subscribe to multiple services so they can watch whatever/whenever. I don't, and never will. I also just go with NF.
  
  --
  We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
8. Re:You can't fix stupid by fustakrakich · 2016-01-22 09:23 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Psychopaths, and scourge or not, society rewards them very highly.
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
9. Re:You can't fix stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 09:27 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "The current crop of media tycoons are too old to figure that out."
  There are a lot of smart people out there and flexible despite their age. The reason why the move is so slow is because the old system can still be milked some more.
  They're not fighting a losing battle, merely stalling to get even more money. When the well is dry, they'll go online and unlike Netflix and others, with a full portfolio of media everyone wants to watch. They hold the content, they make the rules. We're ... just spectators.
10. Re:You can't fix stupid by kamapuaa · 2016-01-22 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  It's not like "have more content" is some revolutionary business model that requires young people to understand. It's just not licensed cheaply enough to really make sense. And no reason to license it at super-cheap prices, when there's other streaming services willing to pay.
  Really what has to change is consumer attitudes. It's not going to happen for $10/month, and many subscribers wouldn't pay $60/month due to cost expectations/competition.
  
  --
  Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
11. Re:You can't fix stupid by Darinbob · 2016-01-22 10:31 · Score: 1
  
  I think the CBS service is hilarious. Watching Big Bang Theory on the computer and it says "Watch 4 episodes for free, or subscribe to All Access and get 7 episodes for free!" Woo, three extra episodes! I laugh imagining that there's some executive over at CBS who honestly thinks that is a good deal.
12. Re:You can't fix stupid by SeaFox · 2016-01-22 10:32 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  And by stupid I mean the licensing deals. We're in 2016 and there's still idiots out there who can't understand that people can't subscribe to 10+ services to watch everything they want.
  No. They could subscribe to 10+ services to get everything they want, it's just very few people would do that because of the hassle of dealing with 10+ companies and the price for doing so.
  Consider the Roku and its customized "channels". There's no reason someone one couldn't have 10+ non-free channels on their device. If they want to search for a specific item and aren't sure where it is, like other streaming devices, the Roku will tell you which service has it of the ones you have.
  The real problem is every service wanting you to pay $8/mo or more for just their content and wanting to bill you directly. After about three services you're paying way to much for entertainment. If you only had to pay $2-3 dollars a month and could have all the billing details handled by Roku (or your Apple ID, or Amazon) people who be more willing to subscribe to multiple services to get what they want.
  Oooooo, a customized bundle $2-$3/mo services chosen by the consumer, but billed together and all accessed from a single device -- I'm suddenly describing a la carte cable.
13. Re:You can't fix stupid by Darinbob · 2016-01-22 10:33 · Score: 1
  
  There is a reasonable alternative, don't watch/listen to the content. That can actually do a lot to convince the content creators. Many of them are entirely convinced that they have a captive market who "must" get the content somehow and if they can't pirate it that they'll be forced to pay. It's not like this stuff is food which is necessary for survival. We can turn off the TV for a year and actually end up being better off for it.
14. Re:You can't fix stupid by Darinbob · 2016-01-22 10:46 · Score: 1
  
  Because Netflix is 1/10th of the cost of cable or less? If you get 10 subscriptions then you're back to overpaying for content again. The thing is, Netflix has 95% of what most people want to watch, so the added value of each additional subscription is greatly diminished. For example, to me another $8/month for watching exactly one TV show is overpriced. If I wouldn't add crappy services like HBO or Showtime for that much money when I had satellite, why would I do the same thing after cutting the cord?
  That's why I can see a value with bundling. Because if you had to pay for each episode you watched then people will start counting the pennies. Maybe they'll skip that episode, or ask a friend if it's worth the fifty cents. Any new series will be avoided because they're big unknowns. As in, "hmm, iZombie sounds vaguely interesting, let me watch that..." followed by "omygod, give me my money back now!" Whereas a flat highly affordable subscription fee that comes with a huge warehouse of choices has plenty of value.
  As another example, some of the best movies I've seen are not things that I would have ever rented from Blockbuster back in the day, but only saw because they were on TV anyway for no extra cost, and some of the worst movies I ever saw were things I rented for $5. Ala-carte has some advantage but don't forget the disadvantages as well. To me, ala-carte means getting an entire channel, like BBC America, and not just one show.
15. Re:You can't fix stupid by tlhIngan · 2016-01-22 10:47 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  And by stupid I mean the licensing deals. We're in 2016 and there's still idiots out there who can't understand that people can't subscribe to 10+ services to watch everything they want.
  Actually, they're intentionally doing it.
  Because they don't want another Apple to happen.
  Remember way back, over 10 years ago when Steve Jobs started eslling music online? And how iTunes grew to become THE source for music? And how Apple managed to bully the music industry? And how every attempt by the music industry to dethrone Apple failed?
  Well, it took them a long time before they took the nuclear option - DRM free. To which they granted it to Amazon so Amazon could sell music for iPods, and actually compete.
  And how because of this, the music industry regained control - neither Apple nor Amazon could dictate terms to them.
  Well, the content industry observed, and realized that movies and TVs were in the same boat. They could give their content to one big player and let the smaller players wither away, creating a monopsony (monopoly, the other way - many sellers, one customer). Or they could try to distribute as far and wide as possible, as well as ensuring that not everyone gets all the content so there will be no big player who can dictate the terms and conditions.
  Though if you really want stupid - you should ask why a show created by a provider like Amazon is not available where Amazon is available - I mean, Amazon created the show, so they have distribution rights. Why do they keep it within the US only? Everything Netflix produces is available on every Netflix site...
16. Re:You can't fix stupid by JaredOfEuropa · 2016-01-22 11:05 · Score: 1
  
  Most people in smaller markets will most likely continue to overpay to get their content later than anyone else. And even if enough of us stop watching and listening to hurt their pocketbook, they will just blame it on piracy anyway. Better that a government reminds them in no uncertain terms that intellectual "property" is not a natural right but an artificial privilege granted by society, and that society can revoke that privilege if it is abused.
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
17. Re:You can't fix stupid by mattack2 · 2016-01-22 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  This is the same reason why games are region locked with slightly varying content between regions.
  Do you mean consoles? I thought that the current generation (I'm counting PS4, Xbox One, Wii U) weren't _all_ region locked. I'm actually not sure if any of them are. I thought the Wii U _wasn't_, I'm less sure of the others.
18. Re: You can't fix stupid by slazzy · 2016-01-22 14:29 · Score: 1
  
  Same here, Netflix or it doesn't exist in my house.
  
  --
  Website Just Down For Me? Find out
19. Re: You can't fix stupid by buchanmilne · 2016-01-22 17:01 · Score: 1
  
  "Remember way back, over 10 years ago when Steve Jobs started eslling music online? And how iTunes grew to become THE source for music? And how Apple managed to bully the music industry?"
  And how did this come to pass? The music industry spent 5 years fighting MP3 downloads and trying to bankrupt their customers for 'piracy' when they could have spent the 5 years building their own online music store and dictating to music player manufacturers. They would have found thay instead of having to take their customer to court that their customers would happily give them money for the very minimal effort (no manufacturing or distribution costs etc.).
  So to me it looks mostly like they are repeating their mistakes (unless you count Hulu, but Hulu doesn't seem to have plans to launch in many other countries whereas Netflix is now available in mosy of the world).
20. Re:You can't fix stupid by thegarbz · 2016-01-22 22:44 · Score: 1
  
  That is not a reasonable alternative. Opting out of social pop culture indirectly opts you out of popular social circles as well. I always feel sorry for the random person who's unable to laugh at a table full of people who just mentioned a funny scene from some popular movie everyone has seen. It creates an awkward situation.
  Piracy on the other hand is a great alternative.
21. Re:You can't fix stupid by LVSlushdat · 2016-01-23 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  Oh.. You are a gloomy one.. But I fear you're 100% correct.. Witness the claims of FEMA camps all over the country, rumors of UN troops already here.. Sure, I'm sure some of it is just scare-mongering, but if even 10% is true, we're in deep shit soon...
  
  --
  THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
22. Re:You can't fix stupid by cybernanga · 2016-01-23 18:51 · Score: 1
  
  Everything Netflix produces is available on every Netflix site...
  Sadly, this is untrue.
  http://www.fin24.com/Tech/News...
  
  --
  www.Buy-Proxy.com - A "buyer-driven" global marketplace.
23. Re:You can't fix stupid by lsatenstein · 2016-01-24 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  The current crop of media tycoons are too old to figure that out. They are stuck in a prior generation's way of managing content, and they are doing everything they can to keep the rest of the world trapped in it too, to their own detriment.
  Eventually they will die off and be replaced by a new crop of tycoons who, though just as evil, have a better understanding of how data moves and breathes, and so they will get on board with a more reasonable (and ultimately more profitable) plan. Of course...by the time they get that worked out, THAT paradigm will be technologically outdated, so people will be having this exact same conversation.
  Policy always lags a decade or two behind tech.
  What do you do if you are the owner of "Crown Royal" whiskey, a cash cow, and you are bored, but want to get into the entertainment business? You sell that cash-cow for the right to buy into movie, DVD and video cassette distribution business. Well, "cash cow" is still pulling in prize money, and DVD and video cassette have vaporized. So you do your very best to protect your millions. Millions that are slip-sliding away.
  
  --
  Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
24. Re:You can't fix stupid by stoatwblr · 2016-01-24 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  "And even if enough of us stop watching and listening to hurt their pocketbook, they will just blame it on piracy anyway"
  Revenue for music (in particular) has been falling for decades. Albums overtook single sales in the early-mid 1970s and by the time CDs came along, revenues were declining at about 5% per year(*). CDs kicked that for a while as people restocked their collections but by the early 90s things were falling again (and faster than before).
  (*) This is one of the reasons labels tried charging TV for airing music videos but the comprehensive kicking they took in New Zealand over this made it clear that video exposure was driving sales and you interfered with that at your peril.
  Online piracy was actually associated with an INCREASE in sales, but the majors didn't like it because the sales field was more diverse, requiring them to invest more money in A&R + stock, instead of retiring product after a couple of years and relying on cash-cow megagroups for the majority of sales.
Just enough effort by NotDrWho · 2016-01-22 07:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

Netflix needs to make just enough effort to make the studios happy
The studios need to make just enough effort to make it a pain to circumvent, but not impossible (meaning that 99% of people won't bother).
The consumer needs to make just enough effort to see the material they want to see.

--
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
1. Re:Just enough effort by phishybongwaters · 2016-01-22 07:45 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Exactly. Netflix has never considered it's PAYING customers to be pirates. And that's who this will affect, paying customers. No pirate will be affected by these changes, only paying customers. It's the same with DRM protection on software, this only affects legitimate customers, pirates get the DRM removed for them before they download the software. In fact.... I'll admit to legally purchasing software then proceeding to use cracks released for the pirated version, to remove some of the nonsense DRM. It's sad but true. The same goes for media consumption. When I drop 400$ on the x-files boxset I assume every episode on every disk will play, out of the box. This isn't the case at all, and instead I need to go out and PIRATE the episodes on back chunks of the disk. I'm using netflix canada... I know, I know, I should be using a VPN to get the us version but really, I don't care, it has plenty of the shows I want in my catalog and anything that isn't there I can stream from an untold number of pirate sites. I'd prefer to pay 9$ to netflix a month so everything is above board. Once they can provide me the full catalog I'll be able to remove adblock and just use netflix. This will never happen because of the bullshit licensing laws out there. But hey, Netflix Canada gets streaming rights to The Force Awakens before anyone else, so it's not ALL bad.
2. Re:Just enough effort by Junta · 2016-01-22 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  While I agree with the sentiment, the reality is that all this nonsense does manage to make the vast majority of 'common folk' not know how to circumvent or to even find infringing content. It also makes it more straightforward to identify distributors of infringing content, sending ominous legal threats, and discouraging those that at least know where they could go. As much as we love to point to how quickly people *really* invested in not paying to get things, if you pick out a random folk on the street, they won't know how, but they would have netflix, maybe some DVDs.
  It also means that I'm stuck with streaming provider X's crappy app, and having to juggle multiple applications to do the same thing, just with differently licensed content. Oh what a world it would be if I could just explore and enjoy content through Kodi with plugins without being in a DRM fight with the providers I have gone to the trouble to be properly entitled for.
  
  --
  XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
3. Re:Just enough effort by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 09:31 · Score: 1
  
  The studios need to make just enough effort to make it a pain to circumvent, but not impossible (meaning that 99% of people won't bother).
  Not exactly. You only need 1 person to productize an easy way to circumvent then every joe sixpack can do it.
4. Re: Just enough effort by slazzy · 2016-01-22 14:42 · Score: 1
  
  I think it would be funny to make a film of someone watching a video only available in the US and stepping over the Canadian border and saying whoops, now I'm in violation, then back and forth a few times. Visualize the madness.
  
  --
  Website Just Down For Me? Find out
Not doomed by 110010001000 · 2016-01-22 07:40 · Score: 4, Interesting

It isn't doomed to fail. VPN blocking works. Sure, you can get around it, but for most people that is going to be a hassle. Just like Internet censorship, or fighting piracy. It isn't going to fail for most people.
1. Re:Not doomed by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-01-22 07:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Most people use a paid VPN service. Those services will be the ones to go around the problem.
2. Re:Not doomed by myowntrueself · 2016-01-22 07:49 · Score: 2
  
  Most people use a paid VPN service. Those services will be the ones to go around the problem.
  I imagine there'd be less risk using your own VPN service, ie renting a cheap VPS somewhere in your target country and setting up your own VPN.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
3. Re:Not doomed by Aaden42 · 2016-01-22 08:01 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  This type of VPN usage isn’t risky right now. You’re thinking of downloading bad stuff over VPN and trying to prevent nastygrams from your ISP. In that case, you’ve got a copyright owner or a LEO with subpoena power who can follow the paper trail back to you with minimal effort.
  This is people paying for VPN’s for paid Netflix subs to stream content that’s not normally available in their market.
  Is there law breaking going on? Probably, but thus far it’s not something that content providers have made the effort to send copyright cease & desist or whatever the local equivalent of DMCA letters for this type of stuff to end users. As for the VPN providers (where the money’s going), they’re arguably doing nothing wrong. They’re just moving packets from A to B, with ‘B’ being a frequently moving target, for Reasons.
  Sure there’s a paper trail, things could get messy some day, but for the time being, paying for this service on your own credit card and accessing Netflix is a very low risk activity.
  The VPN services getting paid have all kind$ of incentive$ to make sure they keep working with Netflix. It’s whack-a-mole with well funded & highly motivated moles. Not likely that any blocks will suceed for very long.
  I’ve little doubt some law or top-secret treaty will attempt to add legal clout to close the loophole; but for now it’s not something that’s likely to get in you trouble. Enjoy it while it lasts...
4. Re:Not doomed by 110010001000 · 2016-01-22 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  Doubtful. Netflix will target the biggest paid VPN services first.
5. Re:Not doomed by wisnoskij · 2016-01-22 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  And more to the point, all Netflix usage is linked to a Netflix account with credit card information and residence, and you use netflix software on your end to receive the stream and display it. Netflix does not have to expend any effort at all to region lock their content. They know where you live, they just have to stop accounts set up in Canada from accessing American content.
  
  --
  Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
6. Re:Not doomed by Strider- · 2016-01-22 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  They know where you live, they just have to stop accounts set up in Canada from accessing American content.
  Ahh, but what if I travel to the US and want to watch netflix? What content are they going to show me then?
  
  --
  ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
7. Re:Not doomed by wisnoskij · 2016-01-22 09:52 · Score: 1
  
  Well, why would they offer you any coverage if you are travelling? It is not like they would have to make accounts cheaper if their was a clause in them that they would only work in the country of purchase. Then they can offer special travelling packages, which are extra expensive because of the extra effort required to verify your location.
  
  --
  Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
8. Re:Not doomed by 110010001000 · 2016-01-22 09:56 · Score: 1
  
  I would assume they would show you US content. I am assuming they do it by IP, not what country you setup the account in. Might be wrong.
9. Re:Not doomed by dgatwood · 2016-01-22 10:10 · Score: 2
  
  Is there law breaking going on? Probably ...
  Depends on what you mean by law breaking. If you mean criminal law, probably not, actually. Copyright law (as upheld by the SCOTUS in Kirtsaeng, DBA BlueChristine99 v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.) doesn't recognize any right to block the import of something that was legally manufactured for sale under license somewhere else. It might, however, qualify as breach of contract, which brings the possibility of civil liability.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
10. Re:Not doomed by B1 · 2016-01-22 10:27 · Score: 2
  
  This would be much simpler than using a GeoIP database and trying to play whack-a-mole with VPN providers. I'd be surprised if Netflix hasn't already considered this and decided against it. Usually if a company is not using a technically obvious and simple solution, it is because there is a business reason in the way.
  It's possible that content providers want the content controlled by viewing location, rather than the subscriber's billing address. Today, if you are a US subscriber and you visit Canada, Netflix will only show you its Canadian content while you're traveling. Similarly, if your DSL modem's IP address changes and the new one is incorrectly listed as being in the UK, you will see content from the UK instead of the US (ask me how I know this! :) )
  If your account were tied to your billing address, it would be very easy to swap your login with friends in other countries to get around the content locks. To prevent this, Netflix would have to make your account work only in your home country, making it impossible to travel with Netflix. That becomes a customer satisfaction issue.
  In any case, I don't think Netflix believes there's a foolproof way to prevent content from being viewed outside of its authorized regions, because anybody who understands the problem knows it's impossible to be perfect. However, it's reasonable to make a good faith effort to try, as this is probably required by their licensing agreements. I think that's what Netflix is trying to do here.
11. Re:Not doomed by Darinbob · 2016-01-22 10:53 · Score: 1
  
  The problem isn't the piracy, or the VPN, or cable vs streaming. The problem ultimately is the moronic idea of time/location based restrictions, which for some reason seems to be a major focus of the content owners. There would be a drastic cut in movie piracy if the DVD/blu-ray/whatevers were all released at the same time all over the world. No one would need VPN workarounds if Netflix were allowed by the content owners to show the same stuff in all locations.
12. Re:Not doomed by jaa101 · 2016-01-22 11:09 · Score: 1
  
  If you mean criminal law, probably not, actually.
  In Australia there seems to be no legal problem, to judge by
  
  Film studios and TV companies should not use legislation that allows them to get piracy sites blocked in Australia to "inappropriately threaten" to block access to geoblocked services, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) chairman Rod Sims has said.
  The ACCC is an official government body but they appear to be firmly on the side of the consumer even when you feel the government isn't comfortable with their stance. For example, the ACCC seems to positively encourage consumer grey-marketing of books and DVDs/BDs (i.e., buying them from places like Amazon) as well as the use of VPNs to fight both the old and the new forms of geoblocking.
13. Re:Not doomed by jaa101 · 2016-01-22 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  I think you're correct. Mostly, Netflix doesn't geoblock by credit card address because they don't really want to win this battle. Also, having made this decision long ago, it's hard to change policy now without seriously annoying a high percentage of customers. While it is possible for people for obtain credit cards in other countries to work around such a block it's substantially harder than just buying a VPN service. The first sign that content providers are winning will be when selected new content is restricted by credit card address.
14. Re:Not doomed by Ramze · 2016-01-22 16:46 · Score: 1
  
  The problem isn't even that -- the root problem is the entire reason for the market segmentation is to extract as much money as possible from individuals around the globe who have different disposable incomes in terms of US Dollars. The content creators/distributors would be happy to release everything globally simultaneously if it meant that they'd still get the same amount of money or more from the deal. Thing is, they won't. People in Russia, China, and other various countries in Africa an Asia aren't going to pay the same for a DVD in US Dollars as someone in the USA, parts of the EU, or Australia -- or rather some would, but not the same percentage of the population as in those countries. As long as the content is released globally simultaneously with no regional restrictions, you're essentially saying that there will only be one price -- because anyone can shop around to buy it at the lowest price if prices are set differently (except for perhaps shipping).
  Price affects the number of people who buy your product or service. Generally, if you raise it, you lose customers, drop it, you gain... but maybe not enough to make up for the loss in volume. They are happy to segment the world so that those with larger disposable incomes pay more for the exact same product which they'll also sell at a lower price in another area to extract the most money from that area as well and so on.
  Price discrimination is an ancient technique for extracting money from customers. Just look at your local theater - perhaps it has regular price for adults, cheaper tickets for children, and also cheaper tickets for students, veterans, and/or elderly. It's the same service, but with different pricing in an attempt to get the most money from different market segments. Global distribution without location restrictions would dissolve price discrimination -- except perhaps unless they were to release only the languages and subtitles for a region and require higher payments for wealthier regions. Say, you want the English version w/ English audio and subtitles... well, that's $50 for a Blu Ray of that. If you want the Portuguese version, that's cheaper, but there will be no English track or dubbing included so the USA will still pay $50 for theirs while Brazil likely pays less for the Portuguese version, etc.
15. Re:Not doomed by Darinbob · 2016-01-22 17:12 · Score: 1
  
  However note that they don't do this within a country. Netflix has same content and prices for California versus Alabama, Texas versus Alaska, even though those regions have different abilities to pay. And yet gasoline sells for different prices in different regions. DVD sales however tend to be pretty much the same price across the country, barring differences because a local store can change prices. That's because it's a pain to adjust prices regionally when you're a centralized company, and partially it's too easy to just cross a border or mail the product to a different state (legally).
  It does make a little sense to do this nationally with actual goods since you generally must have a national distribution anyway, there are stricter border controls, and it's a lot harder and more expensive to transport goods across international borders. You can even morally buy the DVD in country A and mail it to country B, though it may be illegal in some countries. It makes a lot less sense with digital only items, as the internet doesn't respect borders. That's why the media industry spends so much time and effort attempting to enforce regional differences for digital items as if they were physical items. DVD regional encoding was stupid and trivially broken, essentially ineffective. So they upped the ante with bluray/hddvd, with a really ridiculous DRM system (update your players firmware every time you enter a new disc). Now with streaming it's even sillier, as they're really never going to be able to clamp down on ways to proxy your location (and even if Netflix were only $1/month in Nepal, the lag if you were to route through there would be horrible).
  Then what about Canada vs US? Demographics are very similar. This is not third world prices versus first world prices, so why the angst from media companies about streaming from the wrong side of that border? If you can pick up broadcast TV from the other side of the border then why not allow streaming?
16. Re:Not doomed by thegarbz · 2016-01-22 22:46 · Score: 1
  
  Is there law breaking going on? Probably,
  Negative. There's a breach of terms of service but ultimately you as the end user and the VPN provider are not doing anything against the law. There's no law requiring you to view licensed content from only your own country.
17. Re:Not doomed by CCarrot · 2016-01-23 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Sure there’s a paper trail, things could get messy some day, but for the time being, paying for this service on your own credit card and accessing Netflix is a very low risk activity.
  Erm...who uses their personal credit card to pay for VPN services?
  I thought that's what those nice, anonymous VISA and MC gift cards were made for...and yes, my name really is Tom Jones (no relation), zip code 90210 (just a coincidence, really) ;-)
  
  --
  "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Note to content providers: by the_other_one · 2016-01-22 07:44 · Score: 5, Interesting

Let me pay to have your product streamed into Canada. Otherwise I will just get the shows free by other means.

--
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
1. Re:Note to content providers: by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-01-22 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  They won't because they love their stupid licensing deals more than money.
no it isn't by slashmydots · 2016-01-22 07:45 · Score: 2

Does the credit card reside in the same country as their IP address? THE END.
In fact, take their credit card billing address and just use that for zone licensing and ignore their IP address. It's rather difficult to get a credit card with a billing address in a country you don't reside in and aren't a citizen of.
1. Re:no it isn't by i.r.id10t · 2016-01-22 07:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  In fact, take their credit card billing address and just use that for zone licensing and ignore their IP address. It's rather difficult to get a credit card with a billing address in a country you don't reside in and aren't a citizen of.
  This.
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
2. Re:no it isn't by Ambassador+Kosh · 2016-01-22 08:02 · Score: 2
  
  I would love this.
  Steam recently started doing this and it is great. I am in Germany and I can still buy US games on my US account in US prices.
  All I want from Netflix is to watch the USA version with my USA account.
  
  --
  Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
3. Re:no it isn't by PRMan · 2016-01-22 08:04 · Score: 2
  
  Not really the end. Do you hate the military? Because their credit cards are usually in the US but they are overseas.
  
  --
  Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
4. Re:no it isn't by Aaden42 · 2016-01-22 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  You’ve heard of pre-paid debit cards perhaps? Easy to buy a US-based one over the interwebs and send to your address wherever. Sure, you can block those providers, but you risk pissing off legit in-country customers who use them. They’re also about as plentiful and quickly created as new VPN services, so you have the same whack-a-mole problem if you try to police which credit card prefixes you block.
  Also, odds are good you can find a US friend willing to pay your sub for you on their credit card. You can buy year long Netflix gift certificates and send them wherever you like. Gimme a $10 premium, and I doubt I’d think twice of buying a gift cert & emailing you the code.
5. Re:no it isn't by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  So travelling abroad, I should be locked out of my Netflix account? Short-sighted "I have the solution" thinking like this is what's causing problems, not solving them.
6. Re:no it isn't by saikou · 2016-01-22 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  You mean any prepaid bought-in-a-pharmacy card?
  Those allow any physical US address to be used as a "billing" address.
  Though I suppose they could try to block prepaid cards in their billing system
  Or a Netflix "gift" balance (one of those "Buy Galaxy S6 phone, get free Netflix for a year")
  I presume primary way to beat VPNs are "is this a retail ISP block" and "are there more than N streaming connection request for distinct users coming from the same IP address". If both are "true" - voila, you have a VPN that is masking Netflix users.
  And while VPN could theoretically get an IP address for each user, it would be quite expensive for them (for IPv6 this would also work, as you have one routable block exhibiting requests from a bunch of random users with vastly different billing addresses)
  
  --
  Hyperom.com
7. Re:no it isn't by Midnight+Thunder · 2016-01-22 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  Not everyone is geographically static. People travel, that includes international travel. The challenge is blocking VPNs, while not blocking paying customers that are travelling. They are certainly doing this to appease the local distributors, but it is a fine line they need to tread. Hopefully they don't resort to the cell phone model, where you get charged extra for roaming time.
  
  --
  Jumpstart the tartan drive.
8. Re:no it isn't by gmack · 2016-01-22 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  When you do this you get intermediaries who subscribe for you and send you your login info. In Spain there were a few satellite people who did this +vpn.
9. Re:no it isn't by myowntrueself · 2016-01-22 08:35 · Score: 1
  
  You mean any prepaid bought-in-a-pharmacy card?
  Those allow any physical US address to be used as a "billing" address.
  Though I suppose they could try to block prepaid cards in their billing system
  Or a Netflix "gift" balance (one of those "Buy Galaxy S6 phone, get free Netflix for a year")
  I presume primary way to beat VPNs are "is this a retail ISP block" and "are there more than N streaming connection request for distinct users coming from the same IP address". If both are "true" - voila, you have a VPN that is masking Netflix users.
  And while VPN could theoretically get an IP address for each user, it would be quite expensive for them (for IPv6 this would also work, as you have one routable block exhibiting requests from a bunch of random users with vastly different billing addresses)
  They could easily get an IP per user. IPv6
  The 'VPN' provider could just act as an IPv6 tunnel broker.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
10. Re:no it isn't by mocm · 2016-01-22 08:48 · Score: 1
  
  They cannot do that, because you are not allowed to watch US content when you are in Canada, even if you live in the US and are just on vacation. So they have to show you Canadian content or nothing, and guess how world travelers would love the latter.
  
  --
  ***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
11. Re:no it isn't by agm · 2016-01-22 08:51 · Score: 2
  
  It does to those that own the content. The licensing agreements are about geographical location, not where the account holds primarily lives.
12. Re:no it isn't by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  A friend of mine (and family) was stationed in Korea. Here's what they did:
  1.) Military family network - provided by the Army to the families - it was (I believe) a VPN through a US ISP. When using this link, they were US as far as NetFlix was concerned.
  2.) Korean ISP - normal ISP in that country - this looked like a Korean IP so they could be blocked from US content streaming.
  Important not though... In Korea, it wasn't illegal to pirate stuff. So, not showing on US NetFlix? No problem, switch back to Korea and just pirate it. Credit card origin wasn't even part of the equation. No laws broken in either country.
13. Re:no it isn't by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 09:54 · Score: 1
  
  Why do you think that anything would be unfairly blocked by selecting content by the user's billing address? In fact, nothing would change when I travel to another country - I would get the same content as at home.
14. Re:no it isn't by Midnight+Thunder · 2016-01-22 12:25 · Score: 1
  
  You may be right, though there may be other issues, such as where the files are stored geographically (for both lag and limitation defined by content companies) and local laws defining what content is available, based on rating and content type?
  
  --
  Jumpstart the tartan drive.
15. Re:no it isn't by fatwilbur · 2016-01-22 20:27 · Score: 1
  
  No, then people would cancel their Netflix subscriptions when left only with their country-of-origin content. Netflix doesn't want that, and I think they're putting up a false fight.
16. Re:no it isn't by thegarbz · 2016-01-22 22:50 · Score: 1
  
  It's rather difficult to get a credit card with a billing address in a country you don't reside in and aren't a citizen of.
  You've never tried this have you? There are whole companies who offer exactly this kind of service. I remember using it years ago to get around Google Wallet's arbitrary restrictions and use it in Australia. Naturally my billing address included the only post code anyone in Australia knows Beverly Hills, 90210. Google did exactly that kind of check and I had to get a .... fake is the wrong word .... credit card (prepaid of course) in America to link my wallet to.
17. Re:no it isn't by trabby · 2016-01-23 04:25 · Score: 1
  
  and pick your favourite US hotel for a billing address
Netflix would love to be able offer... by xxxJonBoyxxx · 2016-01-22 07:46 · Score: 1

>> Of course, Netflix would love to be able offer a consistent library of content around the world.
Attribution needed.
Most businesses would prefer to slice-and-dice their prospects so that each pays the absolute maximum that they would be willing to pay for a particular tier of service (e.g., India and US customers would have different rates since $8/mo means different things to them). Furthermore, Netflix "for India" should have different content than Netflix "fer 'Merica" (e.g., you have to be high to enjoy most Bollywood movies...unless you grew up on it...in which case Hollywood's sex-and-violence turns you off).
1. Re:Netflix would love to be able offer... by Aaden42 · 2016-01-22 08:13 · Score: 2
  
  Nearly all of that slice-and-dice is driven by US producers. It’s not reciprocal.
  Considering the US market is generally the highest paying and also the largest amount of big & copyright region restricted content, if Netflix was able to get world-wide customers to pay the US price (which it would seem they can to some degree), it’s likely they’re making more money than if they try to offer a tier more suited to local markets in India for example.
  I doubt most Bollywood producers would complain for a second to have their content available world wide and get paid for it at US rates. Maybe not such a huge market (stoner set aside), so not worth it to Netflix to buy the content. But for better or worse, everyone seems to want to stream Hollywood’s blockbusters. No accounting for taste I guess.
Why are they bothering with this? by mark-t · 2016-01-22 07:52 · Score: 2

If they insist on restricting content based on location, just use the friggin' geographical location of the subscriber's billing address. If the subscriber happens to be in another country than their billing address, so what? That's still where they are billed, so it shouldn't matter. As a marketable feature, this also gives subscribers access to all of the same content that they would enjoy at home while they may be visiting another country. Note further, that I say *BILLING* address, not mailing address. While getting an out of country mailing address to send stuff to for drop shipment or even for out-of-country pickup is quite common (I have one myself), that's not at all the same thing as a person's billing address.
While this won't stop people who explicitly decide to try and get a credit card with an out-of-country billing address to get around this, I do not think that such conditions should hardly be considered the norm until proven otherwise, and it might even be easier for them to police anyways, if they are so inclined.

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
1. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by BarbaraHudson · 2016-01-22 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  This would still violate their distribution and licensing agreements with the content producers - you can't "ship" the streaming video outside the licensed area.
  And it's not hopeless. When there's enough money involved, solutions WILL be found.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
2. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by known_coward_69 · 2016-01-22 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  they could do this, but it will cost Netflix more money to send more content over backbone networks than locally
3. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by rahvin112 · 2016-01-22 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  Most credit cards will let you add fake addresses that if queried will report as valid. This works because you can't ask the credit card company for the billing address, you can only ask them if the billing address you were supplied is correct.
  The card companies do this because they recognize that there are some merchants that won't ship to anything but the card company verified address so the credit card companies have provided a work around in the form of a "fake" address that they will verify is correct even though it's not the actual billing address. It's trivial to add these, you just have to call and ask to add an address to the account.
  Though this would likely work because most people aren't aware you can do this it wouldn't be long before word spread.
4. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by mark-t · 2016-01-22 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  Most credit cards will let you add fake addresses that if queried will report as valid.
  Name one that Netflix accepts.
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
5. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by known_coward_69 · 2016-01-22 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  every major bank card in the USA does this for people who want to ship stuff to friends and family with no fraud alerts. it just puts the customer on the hook for any fraud purchases made online and shipped to that address
6. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by dgatwood · 2016-01-22 10:20 · Score: 1
  
  This would still violate their distribution and licensing agreements with the content producers - you can't "ship" the streaming video outside the licensed area.
  I would argue that this is no different from shipping a physical DVD to a customer in the U.S. who then chooses to carry it with him or her to watch while on vacation overseas, other than the need to carry a physical object around. You're shipping it to a customer in the U.S., and whether that customer chooses to then take the content outside the U.S. is the customer's decision, and shouldn't be in the hands of the IP owner. Were this anything other than a streaming service, this would be open-and-shut, and the IP owner would have no right to prevent such a temporary export. I think it is way past time for the public to demand that streaming be treated just like a physical sale or rental, with all the same consumer rights.
  Customers shouldn't even need to use a VPN. The fact that they do is inexcusable. The fact that these companies are now trying to block customers who use VPNs to protect their most basic consumer rights is unconscionable.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
7. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by rahvin112 · 2016-01-22 11:26 · Score: 2
  
  Visa, Mastercard, American Express. I'm not sure about Discover card or Diner's Club and some of the more fringe ones.
  I've done this on all three I listed. It's extremely common and trivially easy to do.
8. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by mark-t · 2016-01-22 11:45 · Score: 1
  
  The first few (I think it's 6) digits on the card will still indicate which country the issuing bank happens to be in. Getting a credit card from a bank located in another country from where you actually live tends to be rather complicated.
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
9. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by rahvin112 · 2016-01-22 12:03 · Score: 1
  
  I'd be surprised if you could reliably pin down location by the number, as there are a large number of banks that are multi-national and operate out of dozens of countries.
  The first digits indicate the issuing bank, but if the bank is multi-national that's utterly worthless as a reliable indicator of location.
10. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by mark-t · 2016-01-22 14:40 · Score: 1
  
  The first digits indicate the issuing bank, but if the bank is multi-national that's utterly worthless as a reliable indicator of location.
  That assumption is incorrect. A bank may be multinational, but barring jumping through a lot of hoops to get a card from a bank outside of the nation where one lives, the card will still be issued from a bank in the user's own country and reflected in the first few digits of the card.
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
11. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by BarbaraHudson · 2016-01-22 15:14 · Score: 1
  
  DVDs are region-coded. Streaming services aren't. So your comparison is really off.
  Next you'll be arguing that they don't have a right to region-encode DVDs, when they clearly do.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
12. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by Ash-Fox · 2016-01-22 18:44 · Score: 1
  
  The first few (I think it's 6) digits on the card will still indicate which country the issuing bank happens to be in.
  Back when Netflix was a US only thing, I used a pay as you go credit card to setup a Paypal account a and random US addresss. Then I would periodically send myself money from my 'real' paypal account to pay for Netflix.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
13. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by mark-t · 2016-01-22 19:08 · Score: 1
  
  Pay as you go credit cards are also easily identifiable as such from the first 6 digits. Oh and the country of origin is still identifiable. Sure, you can buy a pay-as-you go credit card while in another country and use it to your hearts content from somewhere else, but then you are talking about doing something that requires doing real work.
  Right now, people watch out-of-nation Netflix because it's easy to do, when something is inconvenient enough you won't stop the people that are determined to still do it, but those tend to represent a pretty small percentage of the population.
  Oh, and the unrealistic expectation that either a system should be absolutely perfect or else not utilized at all is a classic false dilemma fallacy. Certainly it would probably be far more effective than trying to ban known VPN's.
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
14. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by rahvin112 · 2016-01-22 19:46 · Score: 1
  
  Given that you are the same idiot that claimed you can't add any address you want to your account you will have to prove your statements You lied once, I'm not going to take anything you say as truth without backup. I don't believe that the first digits of a credit card number indicate country of origin. The numbers on a card are two things, they are a bank identifier and an account identifier. The bank identifier is in no way tied to any country unless that bank only exists in one country.
  I could call my bank tomorrow and ask them to add a name and address in China to my account and if someone tried to use that as a valid card address the merchant system would validate it.
  There is no way for a merchant that accepts credit cards to determine the location or origin of any card holder other than to submit an address received from the customer and have the bank validate it. No merchant has access to any of the personal information of a card holder unless they get it from the card holder themselves. And any card holder can add any information to their account they want including names and addresses.
15. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by mark-t · 2016-01-23 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  I think that you failed to notice the point that I had made in my very first remark, where I explicitly said that it may be easier for Netflix to police situations where people are using fake billing addresses out of country in cases where it *DOES* happen, if they are so inclined.
  So to the matter at hand, I didn't lie, I really made an overbroad generalization. It may indeed be possible, as you have asserted, but it is almost certainly detectable for any card issuer I've heard of, and as such, impractical for any purposes of trying to actually hide where a person lives, or at least their country of origin, and why it should still generally be adequate for Netflix.
  But you've said you don't believe it, or me... so google credit card number BIN and research it yourself. There is actually *FAR* more information that can be extracted from a credit card number than just the issuer, bank, and account number. Among the fields in the first half-dozen or so digits (depending on the issuer), a code for the specific country of origin is there as well. You've asked me for proof, and I've tried to offer the back-up on that point that I know exists, what evidence can YOU offer that suggests that the country code that is part of the BIN is *NOT* tied to specific country that the user acquired it in?
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
16. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by Ash-Fox · 2016-01-23 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  Pay as you go credit cards are also easily identifiable as such from the first 6 digits. Oh and the country of origin is still identifiable. Sure, you can buy a pay-as-you go credit card while in another country and use it to your hearts content from somewhere else, but then you are talking about doing something that requires doing real work.
  
  As PayPal verifies this, I actually had to order a pay-as-you-go card from the States despite living in Europe. I remember searching online and ordering it was relatively painless.
  
  Right now, people watch out-of-nation Netflix because it's easy to do, when something is inconvenient enough you won't stop the people that are determined to still do it, but those tend to represent a pretty small percentage of the population.
  
  If people find VPNs easy, what I did was is easy too honestly.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
17. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by dgatwood · 2016-01-23 07:44 · Score: 1
  
  DVDs are region-coded. Streaming services aren't. So your comparison is really off.
  I was thinking more along the lines of "carry a DVD and watch it on your own laptop". Region-coded DVDs will still play on your U.S. laptop even if it isn't physically in the U.S.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
18. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by mark-t · 2016-01-23 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Again, however, pay as you go cards are verifiable as such by the merchant. I have seen places that will refuse online processing of pay-as-you-go card that are not tied to any particular billing address, although this is usually done by merchants that are not immediately billing for the full amount that may be expected to be paid. While certainly entirely legitimate use exists for pay-as-you-go cards, the arguments for genuinely needing such a card to pay for absolutely everything, especially utilities, when other payment options may exist such as simple monthly invoicing, or even cheque-free billing/automatic payments are tenuous, at best.... specious at worst.
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
19. Re:Why are they bothering with this? by Ash-Fox · 2016-01-23 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Again, however, pay as you go cards are verifiable as such by the merchant. I have seen places that will refuse online processing of pay-as-you-go card that are not tied to any particular billing address, although this is usually done by merchants that are not immediately billing for the full amount that may be expected to be paid.
  Being someone that has worked on payment systems before, I never saw any merchant APIs that revealed this information on this side of the pond.
  
  when other payment options may exist such as simple monthly invoicing, or even cheque-free billing/automatic payments are tenuous, at best.... specious at worst.
  I said before, I was using Paypal. The card was just a way to get a working U.S. Paypal account.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Doomed to benefit by penguinoid · 2016-01-22 07:59 · Score: 1

Looks like Netflix is doomed to get paid by people who officially shouldn't be able to pay them.

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
You're talking about the studios right? by SuperKendall · 2016-01-22 08:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

It should be noted that it the media companies who "love licensing deals more than money" as Netflix would be happy to show content everywhere if they could.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
BBC too by ThatsNotPudding · 2016-01-22 08:08 · Score: 2

Let this colonial commoner pay a 'license fee' and access your far superior content in a timely fashion, FFS! Cash on the table! Pick it up and get the Torrie scum off your back!
1. Re: BBC too by ian_billyboy_morris · 2016-01-22 13:28 · Score: 1
  
  Sadly, the beeb allowing non uk residents to pay a license fee would have the exact opposite effect on the Tories. They would scream unfairness that the beeb is directly competing in a market and use it as an excuse to close them down. The only way they would get away with it is if the BBC were virtually given away to the Murdock family, then the Bbc/sky/Fox Conglomerate could do what ever they want with the backing of the Tories.
would LOVE that job by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 08:19 · Score: 1, Funny

Boss: Implement a system to block VPN
Me: Sure boss. What are the requirements
Boss: It has to look like it works, but it is better for the business if it doesn't work. You won't be rated badly if the project doesn't work and your stock price will probably go up if your project fails.
Me: .... so basically, write docs and look busy?
Boss: sounds about right.
Netflix could easily block users if they wanted by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-22 08:45 · Score: 1

Just make users prove their location via billing and if you don't have a US verified account you don't get US only programming, if they cared, but they don't, it's just smoke and mirrors for them to claim they were duly diligent in their attempting to uphold their contractual obligations... and that works for me. They cover their ass and we all continue to laugh at content restrictions.
VPN is a terribly overweight solution by edtice1559 · 2016-01-22 09:40 · Score: 1

You end up encrypting and decrypting traffic when all you really need is a proxy server. I think I need to go into business selling the use of proxies ostensibly for the use of geolocation testing but actually for this type of purpose. As long as the proxy can rewrite the requests sufficiently, the VPN encryption doesn't really add anything but it must chew up an insane amount of CPU time somewhere. It's a testament to modern hardware that this can even be done in realtime for an HD stream. Of course I don't actually use VPN for this purpose. I watch whatever is included with Amazon Prime and that's about it.
1. Re:VPN is a terribly overweight solution by duke_cheetah2003 · 2016-01-22 12:18 · Score: 2
  
  As long as the proxy can rewrite the requests sufficiently, the VPN encryption doesn't really add anything but it must chew up an insane amount of CPU time somewhere.
  Given how easily modern CPUs can handle encrypting/decrypting VPN traffic.. it's really not a big deal. Overkill? Sure, but I personally love seeing the internet's tubes flooded with lots of encrypted traffic. The more the better. Keeps the spooks busy.
Hmmmmm by wwalker · 2016-01-22 09:43 · Score: 1

I understand why Netflix is doing this. I don't understand the logic of the companies that license content to Netflix and force them to do that. Someone who's tech savvy enough to use a VPN service, and who gets cut off, what do you think they are going to do? Go buy a DVD in their local store or go torrent what they want? What's more likely? I know what I would do. So the goal of the studios, who could be getting some money from Netflix, to get zilch point bupkis dollars for their content? What's the logic here?!
I use VPN from USA by send2cbd · 2016-01-22 10:13 · Score: 1

I often use public wireless here in US. As such, I subscribe to a domestic VPN service. So, I get an IP address that is in SF area for my tunnel. Can Netflix tell if a VPN user is from US or international? If not, then they are denying service to valid Netflix subscribers in the US. My option would be to stop the VPN and allow my traffic to go across wireless network "not encrypted". Hopefully, I will remember to restart VPN when finished with Netflix streaming. Hey, I'm almost 70, so good luck on me remembering anything!
1. Re:I use VPN from USA by zwarte+piet · 2016-01-23 03:09 · Score: 1
  
  By definition they can't, that's the whole point of using a vpn, but they can just forbid to use vpns in their tos.
Credit card address by ubergeek65536 · 2016-01-22 11:01 · Score: 1

Why the need to block VPNs? If Netflix wanted to deal with the 'problem' they would allow content based on the street address of the credit card.
1. Re:Credit card address by zwarte+piet · 2016-01-23 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  Netflix doesn't care but the owners of the movies would like to control who sees what and when to maximize their profit and to comply with local legislation. Some countries allow no nipples to be shown, some countries no swearing or violence unless no access to minors is guaranteed, and some countries don't allow certain movies to be shown at all because they promote undesirable ideas.
It's you stupid by Stonefish · 2016-01-22 11:25 · Score: 1

Consumers are being had, a large single entity controlling distribution is not a good thing for you. If you look at how Dell buys components it shares its component sourcing among a variety of manufacturer, it buys more cheap ones than expensive ones however it ensures that competition remains.
From a technical perspective Netflix can limit content based upon your location. No if or buts. Netflix don't limit your content for a couple of reasons.
1 It makes their service more attractive.
2 Technically it may require changes to their infrastructure and software stack. (but its not difficult)
3 They are well aware of the first mover advantage.
4 You subscibe and authenticate.
5 Your money come from a country
Netflix know that in the future they will limit by geographical location and the reason for this is simple, licensing and profit, but first any hint of competition should be eradicated.
Re:Fuck regions. by zwarte+piet · 2016-01-23 02:07 · Score: 1

Some regions more than others.
Re:Locating users via billing address by zwarte+piet · 2016-01-23 03:06 · Score: 1

But if you use that US account you paid with the US creditcard in another country than the US, you will still only get the content that is licenced for the country where you are unless you use a vpn.