4 ms·

I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the ba

I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the bad guys for this? They're not the ones that make the content. If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. Unfortunately, that's not how things work and they have to bow to the demands of the content distributors (not creators, like some people have stated in other comments).

teej 10y ago
I get your argument but a larger portion than ever of Netflix's catalog is first party content.
- dkonofalski 10y ago
  That doesn't mean that the majority of their catalog is. Everything they do will be optimized for what they have the most of.
ndesaulniers 10y ago
> If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. That is SO UNTRUE. Netflix would never want their content to be distributed by anyone other than them, which is the point of DRM; absolute control over distribution, not copy protection. If Netflix was against DRM, then why release their first party content DRM ensnared?
- dkonofalski 10y ago
  That's not necessarily true. It may just be a matter of efficiency. Because all the other content requires DRM, they may have a processing workflow or other technology that just DRMs any and all content in a single, unified manner. Changing that workflow to bypass DRM may actually make it more complicated. You also have to consider that their first party content is rather new so this could absolutely be something that they're working on doing but never implemented because it wasn't an option when they weren't producing their own content.
  - ndesaulniers 10y ago
    That's a pretty big "what if" I'm not willing to grant. Given how complicated the MSE+EME stacks are, I have no doubt they would test just MSE without EME, since they can't guarantee EME compliance on any given browser. You're reaching.
    - dkonofalski 10y ago
      Ok, fine... then replace it with any other one of the innumerable reasons they could have. Maybe it's not a technical issue. Maybe it's a political issue. The fact is that no one here knows why they haven't taken a position, especially based on their historic behavior related to it, and the issue is likely more complicated than anyone is giving it credit for.
paulddraper 10y ago
Wait, who is forcing Netflix to use DRM for Netflix-produced content?
- AsyncAwait 10y ago
  I actually agree with you and am against DRM, but I think I've read that Netflix doesn't actually own all the rights to their content, which doesn't mean that they don't have a great amount of influence if they wanted to do it - obviously, they don't.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    Who else is competing with Netflix for Netflix-produced content?
    - pathsjs 10y ago
      Depends on the country. In Italy, Netflix cannot distribute house of cards because it sold the rights to do so to sky
- dkonofalski 10y ago
  I can't say for sure but rights are really complicated. I mean... if you look at a show like House of Cards, Netflix doesn't even own all the rights for that. It's not just a decision that they can make unilaterally.
criley2 10y ago
"I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the bad guys for this? They're not the ones that make the content. If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. Unfortunately, that's not how things work and they have to bow to the demands of the content distributors (not creators, like some people have stated in other comments)." We did a book study on a book called Clean Code where I work, and I reminded of a similar situation that the book explains when describing why we all write dirty and bad code. Why do we write bad code? Because our stakeholders and our product owners require it. Well, they push deadlines and expectations on us that mean we have to cut corners to make their promises become reality within the unrealistic time provided. But if you ask the stakeholder why they pust that on you, the stakeholder will say "well, it's the client". Or they'll say "marketing made a promise to the client". It's always upstream. There's always an upstream concern. In the book they talk about making a stand, as a developer. That you have a responsibility to explain to your stakeholders and the people above you that doing something the RIGHT way is worth it. That you are the subject matter expert, that it is your responsibility to raise these concerns and thus your responsibility to write good code. Netflix can pass the buck. "We do what we have to". But they have a responsibility as one of the premiere web companies to do more than pass the buck. A Good Internet doesn't happen accidentally, and it doesn't happen when stakeholders pass the buck. It happens when people make a stand for what's right and operate according to their values. So yes, it is Netflix's responsibility not to bend Mozilla into accepting a Studio's IP demands, but to bend the Studio into accepting humanity's internet demands. Why do we assume that Netflix can persuade Mozilla, but not a rightsholder?
- mentat 10y ago
  The balance of the power is with the rightsholder. They own the content that Netflix wants to sell and that people want to watch.
  - gech 10y ago
    Elvis is dead. His music should be free.
bubblethink 10y ago
> If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. What evidence do you have to back this ? It's not like Netflix's own content is available DRM free. Corollary: If you are a content owner and want your content to be available DRM-free on Netflix, will Netflix make a provision for you ? I hate these generalizations that people make. Just because a company (like Netflix) is more tech-savvy than the average media house and makes a few blogs and OSS projects that run on BSD or Linux, it doesn't make them any better for the end user.
gcb0 10y ago
1. they make content too. but regardless... 2. they are the middle man for content. they are exactly the group that benefit most from drm.

teej 10y ago

I get your argument but a larger portion than ever of Netflix's catalog is first party content.

dkonofalski 10y ago
That doesn't mean that the majority of their catalog is. Everything they do will be optimized for what they have the most of.

ndesaulniers 10y ago

> If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. That is SO UNTRUE. Netflix would never want their content to be distributed by anyone other than them, which is the point of DRM; absolute control over distribution, not copy protection. If Netflix was against DRM, then why release their first party content DRM ensnared?

dkonofalski 10y ago
That's not necessarily true. It may just be a matter of efficiency. Because all the other content requires DRM, they may have a processing workflow or other technology that just DRMs any and all content in a single, unified manner. Changing that workflow to bypass DRM may actually make it more complicated. You also have to consider that their first party content is rather new so this could absolutely be something that they're working on doing but never implemented because it wasn't an option when they weren't producing their own content.
- ndesaulniers 10y ago
  That's a pretty big "what if" I'm not willing to grant. Given how complicated the MSE+EME stacks are, I have no doubt they would test just MSE without EME, since they can't guarantee EME compliance on any given browser. You're reaching.
  - dkonofalski 10y ago
    Ok, fine... then replace it with any other one of the innumerable reasons they could have. Maybe it's not a technical issue. Maybe it's a political issue. The fact is that no one here knows why they haven't taken a position, especially based on their historic behavior related to it, and the issue is likely more complicated than anyone is giving it credit for.

paulddraper 10y ago

Wait, who is forcing Netflix to use DRM for Netflix-produced content?

AsyncAwait 10y ago
I actually agree with you and am against DRM, but I think I've read that Netflix doesn't actually own all the rights to their content, which doesn't mean that they don't have a great amount of influence if they wanted to do it - obviously, they don't.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  Who else is competing with Netflix for Netflix-produced content?
  - pathsjs 10y ago
    Depends on the country. In Italy, Netflix cannot distribute house of cards because it sold the rights to do so to sky
dkonofalski 10y ago
I can't say for sure but rights are really complicated. I mean... if you look at a show like House of Cards, Netflix doesn't even own all the rights for that. It's not just a decision that they can make unilaterally.

criley2 10y ago

"I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the bad guys for this? They're not the ones that make the content. If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. Unfortunately, that's not how things work and they have to bow to the demands of the content distributors (not creators, like some people have stated in other comments)." We did a book study on a book called Clean Code where I work, and I reminded of a similar situation that the book explains when describing why we all write dirty and bad code. Why do we write bad code? Because our stakeholders and our product owners require it. Well, they push deadlines and expectations on us that mean we have to cut corners to make their promises become reality within the unrealistic time provided. But if you ask the stakeholder why they pust that on you, the stakeholder will say "well, it's the client". Or they'll say "marketing made a promise to the client". It's always upstream. There's always an upstream concern. In the book they talk about making a stand, as a developer. That you have a responsibility to explain to your stakeholders and the people above you that doing something the RIGHT way is worth it. That you are the subject matter expert, that it is your responsibility to raise these concerns and thus your responsibility to write good code. Netflix can pass the buck. "We do what we have to". But they have a responsibility as one of the premiere web companies to do more than pass the buck. A Good Internet doesn't happen accidentally, and it doesn't happen when stakeholders pass the buck. It happens when people make a stand for what's right and operate according to their values. So yes, it is Netflix's responsibility not to bend Mozilla into accepting a Studio's IP demands, but to bend the Studio into accepting humanity's internet demands. Why do we assume that Netflix can persuade Mozilla, but not a rightsholder?

mentat 10y ago
The balance of the power is with the rightsholder. They own the content that Netflix wants to sell and that people want to watch.
- gech 10y ago
  Elvis is dead. His music should be free.

bubblethink 10y ago

> If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. What evidence do you have to back this ? It's not like Netflix's own content is available DRM free. Corollary: If you are a content owner and want your content to be available DRM-free on Netflix, will Netflix make a provision for you ? I hate these generalizations that people make. Just because a company (like Netflix) is more tech-savvy than the average media house and makes a few blogs and OSS projects that run on BSD or Linux, it doesn't make them any better for the end user.

gcb0 10y ago

1. they make content too. but regardless... 2. they are the middle man for content. they are exactly the group that benefit most from drm.