Canadians are ‘stealing’ U.S. Netflix content: Bell - Page 5 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

 47Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #61 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 12:08 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newb777 View Post
There's a big difference between corporate VPN and private (consumer) VPNs.
@Newb777 ,

Interesting.

I've been writing software that is based on computer networking since writing BBS software back before the consumer Internet was a thing. I've been doing it most of my life, since I started when I was 14. And I'm not even aware of any differences between a corporate VPN and a consumer VPN.

Could you please explain to me the relevant technical differences between the two? Here I thought that it was the exact same code that Windows uses when I connect to a corporate VPN vs connecting to any other VPN.

I used to use VyprVPN, and when you look at their instructions on how to connect a Windows machine to their VPN server their instructions were almost identical to how you connected to, say, the Government of Alberta's VPN. It's just a different username/password.
audacity is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 12:12 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilN View Post
But no music streaming site was as popular in Canada as Netflix is.
I'm fairly certain that YouTube is more popular both in unique visitors and total number of videos watched. Because, you know, it's free. I know some people who stream music videos from YouTube all day on their computer.

I find it interesting that artists are rather upset at the Spotify streaming model (paid), but they're more than happy to put up their own music for free on YouTube.
audacity is offline  
post #63 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 12:36 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,363
I think there is a very important point here that people are missing in this discussion.

Internet IP addresses were never intended to have any sort of relationship with the physical location of the computer. It's not in the design. You often can often correctly infer someone's physical location based on their IP, but it is also very often wrong. For instance, with my home Telus IP address is often guessed that I live in places that are are a 3+ hour drive away from me.

Proxy servers and VPN networks are completely legitimate network technologies. Anyone who thinks that it is realistic for such things to be made illegal in any sense is just showing their ignorance of how pervasive these technology are today. You can't make a law that wishes the Internet works differently than it does, and then it would just "be so".

Given the fact that geographic position and IP addresses weren't ever meant to be closely mapped to one another, I don't think any technically savvy individual would feign surprise when it doesn't work. I also think that because the Internet will soon be (if it's not already) the dominant video content distribution system, that content licensing deals will soon map closer to how the Internet works, rather than how the the old rusty BDU systems of the past worked. In fact, I think we'll see situations where content owners and creators will "go direct" to the consumer and these "middle man" content marketing deals will be a thing of the past.

When that happens, this whole "OMG, my IP database guessed your location wrong" issue will just go away.
Obed and Eldar3333 like this.
audacity is offline  
 
post #64 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 12:54 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by habskilla View Post
Bell managed to get decrypting foreign satellite signals illegal as in criminal code illegal. Don't put it past them to somehow someway to do the same thing with VPNs.
The difference is that there are many, many legitimate uses for VPNs that would make it virtually impossible to outright bar their use, even just among consumers. But even if they did, or just made it illegal to use them to circumvent geoblocking, how could they possibly enforce that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by habskilla View Post
This was their opening public shot across the bow. God only knows how much lobbying they've already done in the backroom.
I think the reason they are making public pronouncements like this is a sign that they're not getting anywhere with their backroom deals. If they thought they had a handle on stopping this, they would stay quiet until it's done.
Obed likes this.

Rules of the Forum | DHC Help Desk
DHC now supports Tapatalk for mobile devices!
TorontoColin is offline  
post #65 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 12:56 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 5,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by audacity View Post
In fact, I think we'll see situations where content owners and creators will "go direct" to the consumer and these "middle man" content marketing deals will be a thing of the past.

When that happens, this whole "OMG, my IP database guessed your location wrong" issue will just go away.
These are good points.

Right now I believe the issue is that the content owners are still stuck in a "license by geography" mode. I'll use HBO as example.

I believe they currently license all of their content, irrespective of delivery medium, via geography. If they changed that so that only broadcast, via cable or satellite, was geo-restricted and "online" content came directly from them then Bell would have no leg to stand on since their license is specific to the form of distribution.

Of course, when the broadcast people own the internet distribution now they get upset because their internet customer are denying them an extra revenue stream.

Android rocks!
jvincent is offline  
post #66 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 02:54 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by audacity View Post
In fact, I think we'll see situations where content owners and creators will "go direct" to the consumer and these "middle man" content marketing deals will be a thing of the past.

When that happens, this whole "OMG, my IP database guessed your location wrong" issue will just go away.
Given the increasingly complex ways in which film and television shows are financed and distributed, that's not likely to happen anytime soon. One single entity owning worldwide distribution rights for any given title is very much the exception nowadays, not the rule.
worth is offline  
post #67 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 04:16 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post
One single entity owning worldwide distribution rights for any given title is very much the exception nowadays, not the rule.
Citing the past isn't a good way to make a case against forward looking predictions.

Yes, I know that's not how things are done today. I'm just saying that there will be a shift over to the new model of "going direct". Middle men were necessary with the old model because content creators had no mechanism of getting their content directly to consumers. They didn't own cable TV networks, they didn't own theatre chains. Ubiquitous broadband Internet changes the conversation completely.
Obed likes this.
audacity is offline  
post #68 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 04:58 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kanata, ON, Rogers Digital
Posts: 1,656
wprager is offline  
post #69 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 05:13 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,939
My favourite part is the guy in the comments who cites an article from The Beaverton as contradictory evidence.
Jake and Wheelman like this.

Rules of the Forum | DHC Help Desk
DHC now supports Tapatalk for mobile devices!
TorontoColin is offline  
post #70 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 07:47 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Calgary Area
Posts: 2,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post
Given the increasingly complex ways in which film and television shows are financed and distributed, that's not likely to happen anytime soon. One single entity owning worldwide distribution rights for any given title is very much the exception nowadays, not the rule.
It works for Netflix. If HBO and a few others slowly transition to the Netflix model of selling their own content direct to end-customers through their own service (worldwide) then this will all become a moot point. There's really only a handful of companies that would need to do this and +90% of the need to bypass geoblocking would be gone.

It will happen in time......
North_of_Calgary is online now  
post #71 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-08, 10:58 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43° N, 81.2° W
Posts: 6,614
The difference is that Netflix operates in Canada and streams content it has licensed for streaming in Canada but HBO does not. HBO chose to sell all its programming rights to Bell/BCE. HBO has no interest in selling directly to Canadians and would violate its contract with Bell if it did. Netflix has no contracts with Bell or any other broadcaster in Canada that I an aware of
ExDilbert is online now  
post #72 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-09, 01:15 AM
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Nepean, ON
Posts: 369
What I find interesting is that the Bell executive even has Netflix at home (or at least admits to it). Not the best endorsement for Bell's own CraveTV.
qrwteyrutiyoup likes this.

"A bank is a place that will lend you money if you can prove that you don’t need it"
metalhawk is offline  
post #73 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-09, 07:23 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kanata, ON, Rogers Digital
Posts: 1,656
But isn't that like the head of NBC admitting that he has CBS? Netflix and Crave have different content (or at least that's what I thought).

By the way, Showtime in the US is going directly to the consumer. Those deals the US content owners struck with Bell Media for distribution rights in Canada are not forever and there may be out clauses (very likely they have out clauses). If going direct works for Showtime I could see it working for HBO, too. Right now there is one show I want to watch on HBO, and that's GoT. But I refuse to sign up to The Movie Network @ $25/month to get it. I've considered just signing up for one month and watch them all on demand (have to verify that the latest season is available On Demand first). They usually have a deal where the first two months are half price or something like that.

In any case, I'm sure I'm not the only one who chooses not to get HBO precisely because of the cost/content ratio. Would I subscribe to HBO on its own for $10/month? Probably not as I still have young kids in the house and, let's face it, there isn't a single show on HBO that is kid-friendly.

I really like the Netflix arrangement where I can watch past seasons of shows. Sure, you miss the week-to-week discussions on the message boards, but you also don't have to wait a week between episodes or the dreaded 6-8 months wait between seasons (for some shows). And, yes, that applies to most "Netflix Originals" as well.
wprager is offline  
post #74 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-09, 08:37 AM
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,457
Why wouldn't the bell exec have Netflix?

Crave is ONLY TV content.

Netflix carries many other things.. Movies.. exclusives, etc.. beyond what cave has.


I would just assume, that he is NOT using a VPN to access US Netflix :P

GDKitty
Rogers 9865, LG 47LV5400 LED TV, Onkyo HT-R690.
gdkitty is offline  
post #75 of 84 (permalink) Old 2015-06-09, 09:43 AM
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 33
Quote:
Internet IP addresses were never intended to have any sort of relationship with the physical location of the computer.
Agreed. I don't think that was intentional rather they simply had to reduce scope to get the basics working. I'm sure if they started anew, it might be considered.

For history buffs, from RFC 791 which was published in Sept 1981 (bolding by me)

Quote:
The internet protocol is specifically limited in scope to provide the functions necessary to deliver a package of bits (an internet datagram) from a source to a destination over an interconnected system of networks. There are no mechanisms to augment end-to-end data reliability, flow control, sequencing, or other services commonly found in host-to-host protocols.
tech40 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome