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

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."

Comments

You can't fix stupid

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

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 Of course...by the time they get that worked out, THAT paradigm will be technologically outdated, so people will be having this exact same conversation.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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[Lumpy]

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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[darkain]

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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[JaredOfEuropa]

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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[invid]

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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[fustakrakich]

Psychopaths, and scourge or not, society rewards them very highly.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

"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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[SeaFox]

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.

Re:You can't fix stupid

[tlhIngan]

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...

Just enough effort

[NotDrWho]

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.

Re:Just enough effort

[phishybongwaters]

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.

Not doomed

[110010001000]

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.

Re:Not doomed

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

Most people use a paid VPN service. Those services will be the ones to go around the problem.

Re:Not doomed

[myowntrueself]

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.

Re:Not doomed

[Aaden42]

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...

Re:Not doomed

[dgatwood]

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.

Re:Not doomed

[B1]

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.

Note to content providers:

[the_other_one]

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

no it isn't

[slashmydots]

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.

Re:no it isn't

[i.r.id10t]

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.

Re:no it isn't

[Ambassador Kosh]

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.

Re:no it isn't

[PRMan]

Not really the end. Do you hate the military? Because their credit cards are usually in the US but they are overseas.

Re:no it isn't

[agm]

It does to those that own the content. The licensing agreements are about geographical location, not where the account holds primarily lives.

Why are they bothering with this?

[mark-t]

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.

Re:Why are they bothering with this?

[rahvin112]

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.

You're talking about the studios right?

[SuperKendall]

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.

BBC too

[ThatsNotPudding]

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!

Re:Netflix would love to be able offer...

[Aaden42]

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.

Re:VPN is a terribly overweight solution

[duke_cheetah2003]

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.