Slashdot Mirror
More Unblocking Companies Give Up Their Fight Against Netflix (techspot.com)
Earlier this year, Netflix announced it was going to block the VPN services that were circumventing the streaming service's geoblocking technology, and it seems in the months since many of the top VPN players have given up on finding ways to workaround Netflix's block tech. From a report on TechSpot (condensed): Australian company uFlix discovered that some of its users could no longer access Netflix. It said that a fix was coming soon, but, uFlix announced recently in a recent blog post that it has given up the fight. "As of today we are going to stop supporting Netflix as an unblocked channel. Unfortunately every time we set up a new network or find a workaround it is getting blocked within hours." Uflix isn't the only service to throw in the towel -- most of the other unblockers have quietly decided to stop trying to evade Netflix's geoblocks, as more customers complain they can no longer watch the streaming site. Popular VPN TorGuard had assured customers that the crackdown wouldn't affect them. But there is no mention of Netflix on TorGuard's website, and its shared Netflix server was taken offline four months ago.
Contact Netflix and tell them you are cancelling your subscription due to this action on their part. That's really the only leverage you have over them. It is not in the customer's interest that they are doing this.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
As a bonus, the VPN does a great job of neutering threats.
I pay Netflix because I hate the media companies. Netflix will win.
Netflix is not the enemy. The rent-seeking copyright holders are; so hit them where it hurts.
If they don't want my money.. the Torrents doth provide.
..don't panic
many of the top VPN players have given up on finding ways to Netflix's block tech.
Maybe they could try to accidentally Netflix's block tech.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
So next year we'll be seeing the stats that piracy is increasing again since hollywood and so on decided that region locking was a really good idea. I know of quite a few people here in Canada who've simply cancelled their netflix subs, kept the VPN and now pirate everything like they did a few years ago.
Om, nomnomnom...
Between this and the smaller selection every year, it does seem to have less value every time you turn around.
I've found that most of the better stuff from Netflix is available by torrent. I guess people need to stop paying netflix and head off to the pirate bay. If they don't want your money then stop paying them.
Do people understand that it is a product of whether Netflix wants to or even can buy the rights to a show in a particular reason. I find it hard to believe they are in the business of pissing off customers intentionally.
Yup, because you're entitled to someone else's work.
Typical thief.
Thief - Someone who makes a copy of something that someone won't sell to them.
Is that how you're defining it now. Piracy has never, ever been thievery, at least since you stopped needing a boat and an eye patch anyway.
Plenty of people went to netflix from the piratebay because it had all the content they wanted for one price. Was easy, convenient and fair. Yet with every step they erode that deal, one could say it's getting worse all the time. It might be ok in America where you have all the good content but try look out side where they charge more and give less. Australia gets a particularly raw deal as I understand it.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
To start running OpenVPN and letting anyone they know personally abroad connect in and view the content they want. My connection should be able to handle 2 or 3 more regular HD Netflix streams in and out. They block my IP? Big deal, I can convince the ISP's DHCP server to assign me a new one. Once they've blocked enough dynamic residential IPs to piss everyone off, they'll most likely just give up.
It's easy to play whack-a-mole when there are only a handful of very visible moles. Put millions of them underground and see how much effort the rent-seekers are willing to spend on blocking.
1) Securing your own network from a foreigner connecting to it would be a pain.
2) Data caps in the US make this untenable.
3) Why should US citizens pay so that foreigners can watch our videos? Shouldn't you just unsub from Netflix and let them know why?
Yup, because you're entitled to someone else's work.
Typical thief.
Capitalism doesn't work without scarcity. Once something can be reproduced at near-zero marginal cost, it loses value in the marketplace. That's true regardless of how much money or effort went into producing it. It's just the way the system works.
You can argue against it on moral or ethical grounds, and you'll have a good point. But really, if morality or ethics ruled the day the world would be a very different place. A technological lack of scarcity doesn't seem to be a problem for businesses when they can drive down labor costs by replacing people with robots or computers. So I don't shed a tear when the same dynamic affects their bottom line. I do feel bad for the artists who actually do the work to produce the content. But then again I gave up on a career in music because I could see there was no money in it.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Who cares whether or not it's up to Netflix? If the content's not legally available, it's certainly still available.
...where people will go when they cannot access their desired content through approved channels.
Theft, in law, a general term covering a variety of specific types of stealing, including the crimes of larceny, robbery, and burglary. Theft is defined as the physical removal of an object that is capable of being stolen without the consent of the owner and with the intention of depriving the owner of it permanently.
theft | law | Britannica.com
https://www.britannica.com/top...
We have a word for copying something. "copying". We have a term for doing it without the legal permission to do so "copyright infringement". Theft is a very different crime which is in no way related to copyright infringement in any way.
I have decided that I'm not going to break a law... even if it's some kind of trivial, asinine law.. just to watch a Hollywood movie. They're not even worth it.
Dark Reflection
Well why don't we call it "murder" or "rape" while we're at it? They are also illegal, if that's what we're doing, lumping all illegal acts in together?
Why don't we call it jaywalking instead? Also illegal. But doesn't fit the narrative the studio's want to portray of it being a heinous act.
The point is that by conflating one crime with another you push an obvious agenda to try to make it seem more serious than it is.
Words do matter. And you can't have an honest discussion about a subject while using dishonest or misleading terminology.
Because the people that made the content signed a deal with a distributor in Canada saying that nobody in canada (including you) may view the content unless it's being broadcast or streamed by them. You really want to be blaming the people making the content for signing those deals.
"Old man yells at systemd"
How come any time a non-commercial entity takes a stand, it seems to be against the law?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
No, "copyright infringement" doesn't "murky the waters" it describes EXACTLY What is happening. the only ones trying to "murky the waters" are those calling it Theft when it doesn't meet even the most basic definitions of such.
It's precisely because people know that theft is wrong, and understand WHY it is wrong (depriving someone of their property) that it is extremely dishonest to call copyright infringement theft. When talking to non-technical people, you don't need to come up with a completely unrelated example. Talk to them about photocopying books, they're all familiar with that, and it's exactly the same thing. Trying to pretend it's different is extremely dishonest.
I'm not getting in to value judgement of whether copyright infringement is right or wrong, but you can't have an honest discussion about it when you intentionally try to prey on people's feelings in regards to a completely different issue to cause them to feel that same way about this one.
The bar for malware is:
- User must be savvy enough to install torrent software and know about torrent sites
- User must be savvy enough to install a video player which can playback files
- User must be non-savvy enough to click on torrents that have executables instead of movie files
I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but unless instructed extremely bad by those helping you set this stuff up, the surface area for malware is lower than you make it out to be.
This to verify when using ANY legal/illegal torrent:
- Use a torrent distribution site which is 'somewhat' reputable
- Only download mainstream files from users who are 'verified' on said sites
- Only download mainstream files that have a large pool of seeders vs. others.
- When downloading niche content not in large distribution, be VERY sceptical of the torrent's contents before downloading (use said torrent site's description of the contents to make sure there aren't exe's etc.)
- (advanced) If you specifically download executable files (highly discouraged), have a VM and every antivirus/malware software known to man in there and launch the executable before giving it a chance to infect your main system.
- ISO's should only be downloaded from distribution sources directly or direct links from their web pages. If in doubt, you could always view the ISO contents, mount the file systems, extract the contents, etc..
Bye!
These customers were trying to actually *pay* for the content they wanted, as opposed to just pirating it, and still the asshole executives stuck in the 20th century insist on trying to block it. This is so incredibly disappointing. Surely we can continue to band together to oppose these absurd geo-restrictions. I have no doubt that the people at Netflix are very talented and will continue figuring out ways to stop it, but we have the numbers behind us. If media companies want to prevent piracy, they need to stop trying to control how and where we can access the media we have voluntarily chosen to pay for. They need to start treating us like actual *customers* instead of fighting us like the enemy.
Netflix could buy the rights for any show in any area. They just choose not to.
This isn't true at all. A lot of content has existing distribution deals in different regions, some of these may go back decades. Others are new deals but they can be in place before Netflix even has a chance to buy the content (bundled with broadcast rights to local TV networks, for example). I'm sure there is some content they could but chose not to buy the rights to in specific reasons, but it's definitely not "any show in any area".
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.