19 ms·

EU to move ahead with cultural quotas for streaming services

161 points by Kemet 8y ago

gonvaled 8y ago
Extremely good news: left unchecked, the "market" would let minority communities behind.
- beaconstudios 8y ago
  the market just matches providers with consumers. Netflix and other providers respond to demand - if they aren't showing the content you want, it's likely that (given any reasonable level of demand) someone else will be. Forcing providers to produce content with less demand is purely ideological because if the demand were high, they would already be producing content to match it. Which they do. What the EU is trying to do is coercively transfer wealth from Netflix to their member states, which I consider to be unethical.
  - gonvaled 8y ago
    Not even close to the truth. What you are describing is a perfect functioning market, with producers just interested in serving the needs of the customers. In reality, things are way more complex: - producers try to reduce costs - producers ignore customer demands as long as they are able to do it. In particular when the customer has no option because competitors are following the same cost-saving approach. - customers give up and start watching second-best options, and get used to them (tragedy of the commons) - there are synergy effects which allow producers to get away with sub optimal options: I will use my Amazon Prime account to watch videos, even if I am not entirely happy with the offer, because I am already paying for Prime for delivery. - the world is complicated, and consumers have little time and power, while producers can spend time writing 30 pages contracts. The only way to balance power here is to associate, but citizens are quite bad at it. The EU is an association, and I am happy that they are taking into account the consumer's interests. I wonder when will this fallacy of "the market works to fulfill the interests of the customers" die out ...
    - beaconstudios 8y ago
      All of these things are true, but that still doesn't make what the EU is doing, good. They're just forcing the providers to spend money in Europe. What makes you think European productions won't fall prey to exactly the same problems? This is purely an exercise in the EU seeing that it can control foreign companies using GDPR and thinking "hey, why don't we use this to force companies to give us money". Also: > I wonder when will this fallacy of "the market works to fulfill the interests of the customers" die out ... Just because it's flawed, doesn't mean it isn't mostly true. The market is far from perfect but that doesn't mean it doesn't still fulfil customer needs. It just doesn't fulfil all of them, fulfils them in an inoptimal way, and so on.
  - FearNotDaniel 8y ago
    > if the demand were high Culture is not just about satisfying demands, it's also about giving people the opportunity to stumble across things they weren't even looking for, and so enrich themselves in unexpected ways. As a teenager I had no particular desire to go looking for ancient harpsichord music, difficult jazz, sombre poetry, magnificent choral worship or even five-minute recordings of nothing but church bells ringing. But I found them just by twisting the radio dial late at night and discovering things that would never get airtime in a purely commercial setting. The fact that these things are paid for by a "tax" that many are still strongly opposed to, is something I would strongly support in a more modern media context.
    - bluGill 8y ago
      You have just made the opposite point you wanted to: by requiring 30% local culture you have prevented someone from stumbling across a different non-local culture, simply because the math cannot work out without censoring something else.
      - gonvaled 8y ago
        Nice utopia you are describing. The reality is that without rules, neither the 30% local culture nor the non-local culture gets offered.
    - beaconstudios 8y ago
      why would you expect Netflix to provide culture? Culture and commercialisation don't mix. Go find an independent organisation that is geared towards lifting up cultural works - trying to force commercial entities to publish obscure art by law is going to harm both the quality of the commerce and the quality of the art. Most people don't want to tune into Netflix to experience five minutes of church bells.
  - tenfold 8y ago
    Free markets are effective but need regulation at some point to prevent them becoming abusive monopolies. The EU collectively represents the interests of its citizens and is telling large media that if they wish to make money off EU customers then they should at least buy some local produce.
- FearNotDaniel 8y ago
  Not just minorities, but also anything that might enrich or challenge the mind in any significant way. BBC Radio 3 [0] would not exist in a free market, only dumbed-down 'pop classics' stations. The world would be significantly more stupid as a result. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Radio_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Radio_3
- Swinx43 8y ago
  Yes that is all well and good, until that "content" and its message also starts being dictated by whomever is in charge of the government. All of these things always sound like a great idea when you have good people in government. However almost everyone seem to forget that bad people do get into government too. Having governments dictate or force quotas and determining content always ends up biting the people in the long run.
comboy 8y ago
> So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. I'm in EU. A Good Thing is letting me watch whatever the fuck I want. It's a real dystopia if the state decides which movies you should or shouldn't watch.
- ethbro 8y ago
  It's hard to watch a movie that never gets produced. Let's not pretend there aren't strong tendencies towards centralization and homogenization in media. (That we could, most charitably, ascribe to efficiency and risk management) On the other side, yes, protectionism leads to a lot of otherwise unmarketable things being produced (looking at you, France). But balance doesn't seem like too much to ask. Because Hollywood is doing fuck all for diversity.
  - davedx 8y ago
    > But balance doesn't seem like too much to ask. Because Hollywood is doing fuck all for diversity. Six million Wakandans might disagree with you...
    - ethbro 8y ago
      I'm as much of a Black Panther fan as anyone... but how many Hispanic Marvel superheroes are there?
      - beobab 8y ago
        Loads? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latino_superheroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latino_superheroes
        ethbro 8y ago
        Let's be serious, Miles Morales (as post-Parker Spiderman) is probably the only Marvel superhero on that list people know. Maybe Robbie Reyes (as Ghost Rider) or Kyle Rayner (as Green Lantern).
dantheman 8y ago
Protectionism is bad in all its forms. Content providers want to capture the local market and should include local productions -- if that's what the subscribers want. Mandating a quota is backwards. If a state wants to sponsor work and make it available at low costs I'm sure content services would jump to provide it. All this does is either increase cost or reduce available selection in the affected markets. If the subscribers don't want the content they shouldn't be forced to pay for it. I live in Austria and do not want to have my selection reduced or more Austrian content. Countries should try to compete on the global market place -- entertainment is one area where good content easily jumps borders.
- v_lisivka 8y ago
  Protectionsm is bad in all its forms. USA wants to protect it markets, and English language is one of tools to do that. Same for Russian language. Google forces me to Russian and English sites even if local versions are exist and I explicitly say that I want local version via "lang:Ukrainian". Google just ignores me and my needs and drives traffic to Russian and English sites. Youtube tries to convince me with Russian clips for years. The only tool I have is to ban every Russian clip I saw, but it helps only partially. I cannot do that for English clips, so my Recommended page is 99% of English clips and few ones sometimes in Ukrainian. I have my own site: Linux.org.ua. At beginning, it was very popular site because it was the top national site about Linux. Then Google turned switch (in 2007?) and redirected all our national traffic to linux.org.ru, because 150M Russians is way more than 50M Ukrainians. Same for other sites, so almost all our niche national sites died.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  >If a state wants to sponsor work and make it available at low costs I'm sure content services would jump to provide it. // Who should they sponsor? By getting the people who are already efficiently producing programmes they at least seem to be targeting for efficient content production? In general I appreciate the sentiment - both financial and cultural - but the proposed implementation does seem barmy. A sensible quota would be something like 1%.
- michaelt 8y ago
  Protectionism is bad in all its forms. I read a book once that made an interesting point: 1. English-language films make more money than French-language films because there are more English speakers than French speakers. 2. Because of this, an English-language film can profitably have a bigger budget, allowing better production values. 3. Once a film has been produced, the rights will get sold in every foreign market - with the price set by auction, not by the film's production costs. If French broadcasters only bid $15 million for a $150 million film, they get it for that price. 4. The upshot of _this_ is English-language films look 10 times more expensive than French-language films that cost the same. 5. This makes it extremely hard for French language films to compete. The reason the French are so protective is because they believe, in the absence of such protection, the French film industry would get its ass kicked by the English-language film industry. Oh, and for 'English-language' and 'French-language' above, you can insert a bunch of stuff about national culture. How do the police and courts act in your film? What food do we see people eating? What attitudes to sex, violence and alcohol do the good guys show? What political systems are shown, and how do characters view and interact with them? What values motivate the lead characters? What sort of things does the military get sent to do? How do employees interact with their bosses? What do roads and cars look like? Is there literally a character named Captain America?
phyller 8y ago
> The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided (individual EU Member States could choose to set the content bar even higher, at 40%) 30% for each country seems really high to me. As usual for regulation, there will likely be high unintended consequences. While in the US and elsewhere there will be thousands of movies available, if Netflix can only get the rights to 90 Belgian films, they aren't going to pay through the nose to create or purchase many more movies. They will just trim down the available movies in Belgium to 300. After all, no competition will be able to do any better. Worst case scenario, someone may corner the market on digital rights to some country's movies, then they will be the only ones that can provide any sort of streaming service. That country will only have access to an expensive service with a limited selection. In those cases, the locals will just continue to pirate movies as the only way to reasonable access them online, and the local film industry will be no better off than before as their consumers will be accustomed to getting their movies for free. Imagine if every state in the US did this, what Netflix would look like. 30% of movies in Indiana need to be created in Indiana. Netflix would suck, ha.
- iDemonix 8y ago
  I'm amazed something this poorly thought out is about to be 'signed off'. I foresee shrinking catalogues and a massive increase in piracy. Go EU!
  - frockington 8y ago
    Probably going to need a license to pirate soon. That way they can ensure that all illegally downloaded content is culturally appropriate. I am only half joking with this comment, I could see it happening
- ethbro 8y ago
  I mean, Uwe Boll is European (German, specifically).
  - grimskin 8y ago
julesie 8y ago
How can this work in practice? Can the 30% be from any EU country? I'm Irish, we don't produce that much stuff. If it has to represent 30% of the catalogue, that catalogue is going to have to shrink massively.
- r3bl 8y ago
  Yeah, I'm failing to see the practice behind this as well. It was big news in Croatia that Netflix got a local TV show available in its catalogue a few months ago (The Paper, AKA Novine in Croatian). As far as I can tell, it remains the only one. In practice, does that mean that Netflix would have to reduce their Croatian catalogue to like three shows until they purchase the rights to reproduce additional domestic ones?
- bluGill 8y ago
  It can't work mathematically unless it is from any EU country. There are more than 3 EU countries, which means that eventually you will get some great content from some other country that you are not allowed to access. That is 30% Irish, 30% French, 30% German, and 30% Italian content already doesn't add up, meaning some things that you personally might want from a different country are on the list of things you are not allowed to access even though the streaming provider you are on has all rights. If it can be from any EU country, then the country will be France. France already has laws like this and has historically invested in their content industry, so it should be (should) fairly easy to license that content and fills the requirements.
  - iguy 8y ago
    Once you have an amazon.com account, you magically also have an amazon.de account, and an amazon.it account... and it's a few clicks to switch in the app. Maybe that's how it'll go?
    - bluGill 8y ago
      maybe. However in most countries the courts tend to see through such things. I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon doesn't risk this loophole. If they do (even accidentally) I expect some lawyer will sue - there are a bunch of EU countries to choose which to sue in, the results might be different in each.
akuji1993 8y ago
The 30% quota is ridiculous. What this will lead to is either providers shutting down the service for that country or just buy the cheapest, most available content they can get from some indie movie publishers and pushing it in one carousel on their site. This will not lead to bigger local productions or a bigger support for local film makers...
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Well I for one am looking forward to hearing of the production of the 200 episodes of "Norwegian log pile drying" and such (eg https://www.netflix.com/title/80119345 https://www.netflix.com/title/80119345 ?). Presumably that's what will happen -- unless they mandate hours viewed and then we in the UK will have to watch an hour of "puddle drying in Stratham" before we can watch a foreign movie. Of course the metric could be "catalogue hours", in which case one 500 hour showing of "Silence, a tribute to John Cage" might satisfy the requirement. TL;DR how will they define the quota, what constitutes a TV programme.
stringcode 8y ago
Don't worry comrades, it's for the greater good
- Ygg2 8y ago
  THE GREATER GOOD!
iDemonix 8y ago
The EU make a lot of stupid decisions, this is definitely one of them. All that happen is streaming providers will just shrink the catalogues massively for non-US customers. 30% is easy to achieve when the subscribers only get about 50 items to choose from in total.
AllegedAlec 8y ago
I've said this before, but the EU overstepped their intended mandate the very moment they decided that they were more than the ECSC. It is beyond me how those numbnuts in Brussels keep thinking up more stupid and useless plans each time. Not only is it completely up to streaming services what they do and do not offer in terms of content, now you force those services to split up what they show per country, decentralising their services, since it's not possible to adhere to the 30% rule otherwise.
- rocqua 8y ago
  I like the GDPR, I like many other EU rules. In short, I am quite in favor of a big EU. But this is simply stupid. This is straight-up protectionism / weird national pride.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  >It is beyond me how those numbnuts in Antwerp keep thinking up more stupid and useless plans each time You may question your sources of information.
  - AllegedAlec 8y ago
    Yeah, stupid mistake. I meant Brussels.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    Antwerp would be very fitting though (a "twerp" is an ignorant fool).
- mrkstu 8y ago
  Its also going to completely kill narrowcast specialized channels- trying to sell an Anime channel? Sorry, no can do. I assume BBC is going to be unable to sell their channel in European countries as a streaming service if the local to country restriction is real. No Canadian specific channel. You HAVE to have a wide based supply and therefore you have to be a large international company, likely American, since they will be the only ones who can source the most desirable content. This is going to be a disaster that will have consequences directly in opposition to the publicly intended ones.
Zenst 8y ago
So the prospect of shoestring country news channels or 24/7 streaming of a local clocktower as way to `statisticaly` claim compliance, cannot be ruled out. So this regional 30% could be just as riveting as a watching a chimney stack. Though may work in parts of Italy.
- r_smart 8y ago
  I, for one, welcome a future of 24/7 streaming of yule logs.
Frqy3 8y ago
I'm not an expert in media laws, but my understanding from the broadcast days was that TV broadcasters got access to radio spectrum for effectively zero or peppercorn rates and in return were required to broadcast a certain level of local content. Broadcast licences were also limited in number by the available spectrum. An on-demand catalog is also quite different from broadcast, being measured by content availability rather than transmission time, and a 30% (or higher) local content bar seems to me to be a rather high level for an on-demand service, however, I read elsewhere [0] that Netflix is already close to meeting this, so the restriction is not likely to be too onerous for them at least. [0] https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/04/eu-will-force-netflix-and-streaming-rivals-to-offer-30-local-content/ https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/04/eu-will-force-netflix-and...
pferde 8y ago
Meanwhile, nobody will force this 30% limit on pirates, who will, yet again, provide what consumers actually want.
martin-adams 8y ago
What's to prevent streaming services just underfunding projects to tick the boxes of getting the catalogue to 30%? Producers can secure rights to a movie that in order to retain the rights, the must produce a film - of any quality. That's how 1994 version of Fantastic Four was made. A low budget B-movie to prevent the rights being transferred back to Stan Lee. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrbFLJHeX8w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrbFLJHeX8w
cafard 8y ago
Will we see an equivalent of Second City TV's "Great White North"?
rocqua 8y ago
This does not read as neutral reporting. Consider phrases like: > cultural difference risks being steamrollered before it until nothing but tedious superhero tropes remain. > And, frankly, if you’ve seen one superhero movie you’ve seen them all. So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. > rather than just doing the easy thing of fencing yet more Marvel superhero movies. In fact, it seems so amateurish that I wondered if this was even real. Sadly, I see it reported by multiple sites.
- antidesitter 8y ago
  > So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. Wow. I’m suprised TechCrunch actually published this. Has their quality dropped that dramatically?
madshiva 8y ago
The main problem is copyright. I want do a film, and all the limitation that come with stop me for doing so. We can't film any part of the world without need to pay someone else. You have a car in your movie? ok go ahead and pay for "using it" This is non-sense. I watch too many low documentary that need to apply black stickers and this make me feel sad.
no1youknowz 8y ago
Does this affect other "streaming services" like Bitchute, Steemit and D-Tube? For them to evade this proposed regulation, is to ensure that they don't produce "THEIR" own content to sell? I suppose YouTube Premium falls under this?
rocqua 8y ago
> Netflix attempted to challenge the Commission’s support of Germany’s move to support its local film industry in the courts, arguing it countered EU law on state aid. But in May the European General Court dismissed its appeal against the EC decision — saying its action was inadmissible as Netflix has no legal standing to challenge the decision. It seems patently ridiculous that Netflix does not have standing here. The law directly affects Netflix, in a negative way. How could they not have standing?
jstanley 8y ago
How exactly is it going to be possible to make sure that 30% of the catalogue comes from the country the customer lives in? If they provide service in more than 3 countries (and, they do) then it is a mathematical impossibility to meet that limit in every single country. I don't get it.
- mrep 8y ago
  From the article "The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided". Presumably, that means they would only have to have 30% of content be from one's own country, the rest can be from anywhere.
  - jstanley 8y ago
    If I am a customer, and a person from France is a customer, and a person from Germany is a customer, and a person from Spain is a customer, how can they possibly satisfy that requirement? 30% from the UK, plus 30% from France, plus 30% from Germany, only leaves 10% left for Spain. EDIT: Are they saying they only want French content to be available in France, and they only want German content available in Germany, etc.? That seems nonsensical.
    - seszett 8y ago
      > Are they saying they only want French content to be available in France, and they only want German content available in Germany, etc.? That seems nonsensical. That's what techcrunch says but I think they misinterpreted the Vanity article they used as their source.
nicktelford 8y ago
An unintended consequence of this will be that streaming services will need to ring-fence European produced content from other European countries, as it would count towards the non-native quota. This has the potential to significantly reduce the viewership for European-produced content that might otherwise be watched elsewhere. For example: a German film might be kept out of the Austrian catalogue to prevent increasing the quota of Austrian content above what's available.
kevincox 8y ago
One interesting way to look at it is if some service wanted to provide access to all content they could only do this in countries which produce 30% or more of all content globally. I would assume that this means that no country in the EU would be able to access all US content.
towb 8y ago
> The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided Not possible and for sure nothing people even want. We have two or three channels in Sweden that makes original content that could go up on Netflix. And they don't really have more than one or two series (10 episodes max) running at a time per season. Two of the channels have their own streaming service (C-More, Viaplay), the third is public service who also puts it up there (SVT Play) for a good long time. There is plenty of really bad content that the tv channels can sell to Netflix though. A good way for a traditional tv company to stay alive a bit longer. But then there's HBO and others that needs exclusive rights to the content so probably still not possible.
- mrmekon 8y ago
  Well, TechCrunch says "made in each EU country where a service is provided"... but every single other report about this, including the Variety article that TechCrunch linked to and is simply repeating, says differently. https://advanced-television.com/2018/04/27/svods-set-for-eu-quotas/ https://advanced-television.com/2018/04/27/svods-set-for-eu-... > at least 30 per cent share of European content. https://www.neweurope.eu/article/eu-council-raises-eu-content-netflix-quota-30/ https://www.neweurope.eu/article/eu-council-raises-eu-conten... > to buy European content for the European market https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2018/04/27/eu-bodies-agree-30-european-quota-on-netflix-type-services/ https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2018/04/27/eu-bodies-agree-3... > a quota of 30% for European works on their platforms https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/26/eu-third-party-trader-amazon-google-ebay https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/26/eu-third-... > will have to dedicate 30% of their output to TV shows and films made in Europe etc, etc. Unless TechCrunch has some new inside information, this article is wrong. And given that it's TechCrunch... it's probably wrong.
yAnonymous 8y ago
I wish this was only protectionism and stupidity, but you can bet that big producers have been lobbying for this to get more visibility on their shitty content. If there's one thing where the German TV industry equals the American one, it's being corrupt pieces of shit. Source: German who pays about 20€ of media taxes and fees for services I don't need or want, every month.
vmsp 8y ago
I also feel like this isn't a good idea but who knows. In 2009 the Portuguese government introduced a mandatory quota of 25% Portuguese music in all radio stations. It was absolutely terrible at the time as all Portuguese music was invariably shitty. Flash forward 9 years and, in my opinion, things are much better. We still have a bunch of bad music but meanwhile a lot new quality artists appeared and became popular. Maybe it has nothing to do with the quota's but take it as you will.
xugo 8y ago
I'd rather EU forces stream providers to have one account valid for the whole of Europe. I'm French, lived 10 years in England and now in Spain, I want one iTunes account to give me access to the full EU library and not needing 3 seperate accounts. Same thing with Netflix and Digital TV. That would also help Europeans understand their neighbours better. These region-restricted distribution contracts should not exist anymore in Europe. It's from the video tape era, it belongs in a landfill.
- bhelkey 8y ago
  It seems to me that this will make that problem significantly worse. If at least 30% of content in an EU country is local to that country then this local content cannot be available in every EU country. The percentages simply wouldn't add up. I would bet that the majority of this local programming will only be available in the country where it is produced.
- swebs 8y ago
  I haven't used Netflix in a few years so I don't know if it works the same now, but the region restrictions were based on your IP address, not credit card info or anything. That meant you could easily turn on a VPN and easily access the worldwide Netflix library. They would blacklist IPs from public VPNs like Private Internet Access, but you could easily just set up OpenVPN on a Linode to get around that.
- iknowstuff 8y ago
  That was the plan as a part of the Digital Single Market (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/digital-single-market_en https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/digital-single-ma...) but they settled on, essentially, roaming for digital services for now: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4681_en.htm http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4681_en.htm
evertheylen 8y ago
I live in Belgium and was surprised to find out how regulated our media is. However, it is mostly for linear media (i.e. a single continous stream like traditional TV channels). The law is somewhat vague, requiring that "the largest portion of broadcast time be dedicated to European productions". Rules for nonlinear media like Netflix basically state that they have to promote insofar possible European productions, but without hard numbers. I can imagine that these vague rules are blatantly ignored by modern streaming providers, so at least in Belgium you could see this as simply a more specific wording of already existing rules. (I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this btw, I'm just providing some context for those interested.)
jdlyga 8y ago
Realizing too late in the game that the US is going for a cultural victory
- frockington 8y ago
  Everyone is going to be wearing those pesky American blue jeans soon
binmanthrowaway 8y ago
No thanks. I wish bureaucrats have limited their ideas to their own lives. Fascism is creeping in from all sides in the EU, but people seem to live in denial.
phobosdeimos 8y ago
Everyone here actively despises the local film industry. We do not need to inflict Dutch television on the world. Thats torture. Good shows should earn their ratings, not be force fed- if your culture is so great France and Germany you wouldn't need these subsidies. Netflix is not a public broadcaster.
- harperlee 8y ago
  When good shows are made, everyone wants to see them, and streaming services jump to offer them. There are a lot of examples of this working, such as Netflix buying Spain's "Money heist / la casa de papel", or german "Babylon Berlin", or belgian "Tabula Rasa". Also Netflix is actually opening a European production hub thus investing in local culture the good way.
- maxsilver 8y ago
  > Everyone here actively despises the local film industry. We do not need to inflict Dutch television on the world. Thats torture. I don't understand. Do the Dutch hate their own programmes? Why would they bother making shows they don't want to watch? > if your culture is so great France and Germany you wouldn't need these subsidies. I'm not sure they need them, just that it helps promote it. These shows might not necessarily be record-smashing-popular, but local film/TV from other countries routinely makes it's way to the US with sizable audiences (despite the US drowning in it's own media). Even childrens shows often have broad appeal. (as just a few examples, see 'Degrassi' from Canada, 'PJ Masks' and 'Miraculous' from France, 'Sarah and Duck' from Britain, 'Octonauts' from Ireland). Some of those are funded in part from "cultural quotas" (various implementations of similar ideas) such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content . But it doesn't mean they aren't popular or good on their own.
  - kodablah 8y ago
    > I don't understand. Do the Dutch hate their own programmes? Why would they bother making shows they don't want to watch? Same reason any culture creates art, by choice. Not all art has to be accepted (or forced) and many times the value to its creator and/or a small subset of patrons is enough to justify it. >> if your culture is so great France and Germany you wouldn't need these subsidies. Netflix is not a public broadcaster. > I'm not sure they need them, just that it helps promote it I added more context to the original quote. I assume the original poster didn't mean "subsidies" as financial assistance, but instead misused the word to mean restrictions on foreign content. I think most agree grants for the arts have value due to some forms of art being unsustainable on their own.
pluma 8y ago
I'd be fine with "30% from any country in the EU", but "30% from my country" is torture. I mean, have you even seen what movies Germany produces? If I could stand any of that rubbish, I'd be watching cable TV, not Netflix.
- probably_wrong 8y ago
  You mean "The lives of others"? "Run Lola Run"? "Goodbye Lenin"? "Wir Kinder Vom Bahnhof Zoo"? "Fack ju Göhte"? I know there are bad German movies. But with the biggest film studio in Europe being right next to Berlin, I think saying "there are no good German movies" it's a bit too much. The fact alone that there are decent German movies for children seems to me like a plus - I probably won't go see "Das schönste Mädchen der Welt", but I'm not opposed to it. Disclaimer: I liked Danni Lowinski, and would like to watch Deutschland 83.
  - tomjen3 8y ago
    That is less than 10 movies and Wir kinder.. is old enough that my mother saw it in the cinema as a youngster. You might find a few more, but "Der Untergang" is on Netflix, not because they were required to, but because it is good. I fear for the same as a Dane, Danish movies are crap.
    - Apocryphon 8y ago
      Danes made The Killing, though.
      - tomjen3 8y ago
        Yeah, I mean it is supposed to be really good, but I never got around to see it, partly because it is Danish.
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    >Wir Kinder Vom Bahnhof Zoo You had to reach back 37 years to fill out your list of... five movies. That's a bit telling, no?
sannee 8y ago
This is the side of the EU that foreigners usually don't see. This is the reason there are movements for quitting in every member state (with varying levels of success). The isolationism EU is beginning to display is starting to worry even me and the alternative is a bunch of UKIP-like nationalist which I am not really a big fan of.
- Ygg2 8y ago
  Interesting. What are you thoughts on DIEM 25?
- philwelch 8y ago
  This isn't all that different from the "Canadian Content" regulations in Canadian broadcasting, which is probably a contributing factor to the disproportionate number of Canadian popular music artists.
  - bepotts 8y ago
    It probably has more to do with the fact that Canada is close to the US, so Canadians have plenty of opportunities to mingle with the American cultural players.
    - philwelch 8y ago
      There are parts of the US that are in the US and don't produce quite as many actors and music artists. Though there are some other factors (e.g. Vancouver's generous film subsidies and variety of cool-looking architecture to use as outdoor film sets), there seems to be way more Canadians in entertainment than you'd expect, and I wouldn't dismiss the influence of Can-Con regulations. Of course, it probably helps that Canada has plenty of cultural and linguistic similarities to the United States. Preserving the native culture of, say, Denmark through Danish Content regulations on popular entertainment means producing content that isn't easily consumed outside of Denmark, whereas a ton of Canadian Content can be easily marketed in the United States.
- harperlee 8y ago
tinus_hn 8y ago
Also the EU wants Netflix to offer the same content anywhere, so 30% of it will have to be from Germany, 30% from France, 30% from Belgium, 30% from Spain etc. EU, ‘this one goes to 360%’
- chimeracoder 8y ago
  > Also the EU wants Netflix to offer the same content anywhere Literally the only way to do that would be for Netflix to take down movies for which they haven't secured the rights in every EU country. That'd mean they have to drop a massive chunk of their catalog, because media rights are sold piecemeal, so there are very few things for which they have distribution rights in every EU country[0]. [0] Ironically, this includes Netflix originals.
  - tinus_hn 8y ago
    Not if the EU invalidates provisions in contracts that state it is valid in one member state and not in another.
    - chimeracoder 8y ago
      > Not if the EU invalidates provisions in contracts that state it is valid in one member state and not in another. I look forward to the EU suddenly telling the current rightsholders that their distribution rights have been seized by the state.
  - gbear605 8y ago
    Couldn’t the EU just require distribution rights be sold for all EU countries collectively?
lostmyoldone 8y ago
Great, now Netflix in Sweden will have about 5 movies, unless they count painfully bad Swedish series as movies, then it will be a billion or so.
- ruiseal 8y ago
  Äkta människor was fun(ny).
jackconnor 8y ago
Question - how would this even work in small countries with limited local content? Is Netflix Latvia going to be just a small handful of movies/TV since they can only add 60% international content (aka a tiny part of their catalogue) to whatever few movies/TV get made locally?
- jackconnor 8y ago
  Follow up question: Doesn't this just screw over Latvians by limiting their content over other European countries?
Proven 8y ago
Damn socialists
adifferentname 8y ago
Your superior cultures results in terrorist cells and content. Your superior culture should pay it's own flipping bill (to handle it's miscreant externalities). Here's a flipping mirror. You're welcome What is the word for "To look down one's nose And expect others to solve one's own country's problems at others' expense." Here are some topics That you're preferred, local, must-carry content MUST address in order to be considered for publication in this journal: - Ethnocentrism - Nationalist bigotry - Editorial discretion "You know, we're going to make these successful Americans do our bidding; so that we're not forced to voluntarily pay for their inferior American content" You can start your own flipping platform. You can add a tax in order to subsidize a privately or state-owned competitor for these services. But you will not flipping tell these companies what content to carry. And while you're at it, add a tax to pay for filtering content uploaded by the outcast miscreants your region of the world produces. Freedom of Speech. Please read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. > Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, > Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Personally, I do enjoy films from all over the world. You may not lawfully compel these companies to control their speech. You may levy a tax to fund the arts. Forcing local investment in that way is not a good way to build healthy relationships. "They're only finding this project because they have to" You may invest in building competing platforms. You do not own these companies. These are not state-owned or state-operated businesses. They were built and financed by non-state actors. Would you go to a scholarly journal and tell them that they must publish 40% local articles? You would not, because you would then be infringing their right to freedom of speech. You would not, because later on, the authors would question whether their success was unfairly subsidized; whether they succeeded due to merit or nationality. "You must carry" Get the heck out of here. "This is our country, So you must put my kid's painting on your wall." Go treat yourself. What's next? Are you going to strongarm Ikea -- which sells great products -- into carrying a product mix with 30-40% goods from other local manufacturers? Actual competition results in superior goods that consumers prefer.
Jyaif 8y ago
This quota sort of work for movie theater (and radio/TV) because offering crappy content makes them miss out on some money. This is not the case with Netflix. Netflix will be completely OK with serving locally produced content that nobody watch because it will only cost them a couple of hard drive that won't ever be used. So Netflix will just end up licensing the cheapest locally content to meet their quota. This content will also be the poorest, which will turn people away from locally produced content. Another job well done by the EU. PS: If any Netflix exec sees this, I'm available for creating french films at the rate of 200 EUR / hour.
sonnyblarney 8y ago
One of the dichotomies they're maybe missing is that Americans love their TV. There are a billion channels in the US. In Europe, it's more like 5. So just the sheer lack of content relative to the US makes 30% quite a high and problematic number. 15% locally, 30% from the entirety of Europe. Maybe.
microcolonel 8y ago
You know, Canada had (has?) this, and most of what we got were dime-a-dozen, unwatchable knockoffs and drug-addled accidental psychological thriller children's shows.
chvid 8y ago
Imagine that Netflix in order to be accessible in Ohio had to have 30% content (of its Ohio edition) produced in Ohio.
CM30 8y ago
Doesn't something like this already happen with TV shows in Canada? I recall quite a few unpopular TV shows (like Johnny Test) basically kept running purely because of some Canadian TV show quota the country had going, despite people's reactions to them being generally meh at best. Either way, it's not a great idea, because... well, some countries simply make more/better shows than others. It's like in any other area of business, where some countries more representation in each industry, like how America's done well with films and tech because of Hollywood and Silicon Valley. All this sort of setup does is encourage streaming services to run poor quality, disliked shows to fill a quota at the expense of what's actually best or most appreciated by its audience.
Semaphor 8y ago
Could they also require English subs then? Because for pretty much everything that is not originally English, my subtitle choices are between German and whatever the original language is.
itry2develop 8y ago
No quotas on immigration, but on tv? Their cultures won't survive because of an extra few subsidized shows made in Finland...
GhostVII 8y ago
Sounds like the kind of pointless law that streaming services can easily get around by just buying the rights to super cheap movies from the country. Although apparently "streaming services will also have to ensure visibility and prominence for local content," not sure how that will be enforced.
TangoTrotFox 8y ago
I wish there was more regulation that was positive instead of negative. Here for instance imagine that if instead of punishing Netflix for not providing an arbitrarily determined sufficient amount of local content, why not provide positive incentives for other companies (or Netflix as well) to do just that. For instance for each 10% of your catalog that is made up of region local content, you get an 8% tax deduction. As companies adjusted to the new incentives, these values could be gradually lowered over time. This would help spur on new competitors as well as give established players a great motivation to not only provide a sufficient amount of local content, but also heavily promote it, in efforts to try to drive demand make it commercially viable to make even larger chunks of their catalog local. Instead we get this, which is going to do little except encourage the bare minimum under threat of penalty. Just doesn't seem very logical.
funshed 8y ago
So every EU country can demand 30% (to 40%) of content is local to them. There is 27 countries in EU, so how the hell will that work. Not only will Netflix have to produce local content but will have to hide. French stuff from Germans to keep 60% of the prime Holywood stuff. Unless I'm missing something - the maths seem off. Another plus for Brexit. We have BBC for local stuff, give me back Futurama. (that being said, there is a great none English football team owning drama.. Plus that French secret service drama/comedy.. Good netflix original stuff I watch with subtitles)
reaperducer 8y ago
This sort of thing is the reason there are so many Canadian channels on satellite radio in North America, and also why there are so many Canadian-produced shows on pay TV channels like HGTV and Food Network. It's also why the version of Dire Straits' Money For Nothing that plays on most SiriusXM stations is the sanitized, politically correct Canadian version, not the real version that was played on American radio in the 1980's. Though that version does play occasionally on channels like Deep Tracks.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  There are numerous Canadian-produced shows on cable TV because Canada costs about 50% of shooting in the US. This makes the financials pen out for lower-budget shows that would otherwise die if made in the U.S. Generally, the higher-budget shows are shot in the US. Largely, because the cast members on higher budget shows are less willing to move to Canada for half of the year. Compare, e.g., Suits and other USA shows (ironically, now all filmed in Canada) with Better Caul Saul/AMC shows or Mayans MC/FX shows (generally, filmed on location).
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    While I don’t disagree that many shows are made in Canada because it’s cheaper, the fact remains that the CRTC requires something like 30% “CanCon” in order to permit carriage (TV) or coverage (sat radio) in Canada. Canadian-focused channels were a specific requirement for Sirius to sell radios in Canada. Before that, there were no Canadian channels, and people would import Sirius radios from border towns.
cliffordthedog 8y ago
> And, frankly, if you’ve seen one superhero movie you’ve seen them all I for one am immediately convinced that this author is much more sophisticated, cultured, and frankly better than the swine who sees superhero movies.
Tomte 8y ago
I am regularly defending the EU here on HN, but this is a stupid idea. I wouldn't argue with a much smaller quota, like half a percent or so, but this is not helpful. I'd be surprised if this didn't originate in France, they have always been concerned about English influence, and I think they already have such a quota for their radio programmes.
xky 8y ago
Can this be easily gamed by just uploading a boat load of local, public domain content and burying it in the depths of the catalogue?
- jdavis703 8y ago
  Sure, but then the regulators will be back with more stringent regulations, for example requiring a certain amount of spending or streaming time be spent on local content. I would expect the big players (Netflix, Hulu) will want to avoid angering the regulators. Smaller players may play games, but regulators probably aren't as concerned (for example how would a niche service like Crunchyroll that focuses on anime comply?).
wpasc 8y ago
> And, frankly, if you’ve seen one superhero movie you’ve seen them all. So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. That argument is so silly and reductionist that, to me, it invalidates the rest of the opinions expressed in this article.
gamesbrainiac 8y ago
I generally applaud the European Union's efforts to make things better for their citizens. However, this is just so easy to circumvent by using a VPN. Furthermore, this does not solve the problem of having strong EU contenders to Netflix, Hulu and whatever else is out there. It is better for the EU to fund something that can fight on its own two feet rather than using these punitive measures that prevent people from watching things that they _paid_ for and _want_ to watch.
Aeolun 8y ago
What is it with Europe and hare-brained stupid internet ideas lately. They pushed through GDRP and are now on a regulation high or something...
MistahKoala 8y ago
This proposal has a very French flavour to it. Hopefully it won't affect us in the UK, but my fear would be that it leads to more walls being put up around content and services for EU Internet users, as has happened with GDPR.
j45 8y ago
This seems similar to CRTC programming rules in Canada which apply to cable. Also it may shed some light on Netflix developing relationships with the government in Canada.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
em3rgent0rdr 8y ago
This type of trade protectionism I'd expect from Trump, and as we've seen the past year and a half, ultimately hurts consumers.
wemdyjreichert 8y ago
This seems like another excuse to go after US tech companies. Why does the EU hate US tech so much?

161 points by Kemet 8y ago

gonvaled 8y ago

Extremely good news: left unchecked, the "market" would let minority communities behind.

beaconstudios 8y ago
the market just matches providers with consumers. Netflix and other providers respond to demand - if they aren't showing the content you want, it's likely that (given any reasonable level of demand) someone else will be. Forcing providers to produce content with less demand is purely ideological because if the demand were high, they would already be producing content to match it. Which they do. What the EU is trying to do is coercively transfer wealth from Netflix to their member states, which I consider to be unethical.
- gonvaled 8y ago
  Not even close to the truth. What you are describing is a perfect functioning market, with producers just interested in serving the needs of the customers. In reality, things are way more complex: - producers try to reduce costs - producers ignore customer demands as long as they are able to do it. In particular when the customer has no option because competitors are following the same cost-saving approach. - customers give up and start watching second-best options, and get used to them (tragedy of the commons) - there are synergy effects which allow producers to get away with sub optimal options: I will use my Amazon Prime account to watch videos, even if I am not entirely happy with the offer, because I am already paying for Prime for delivery. - the world is complicated, and consumers have little time and power, while producers can spend time writing 30 pages contracts. The only way to balance power here is to associate, but citizens are quite bad at it. The EU is an association, and I am happy that they are taking into account the consumer's interests. I wonder when will this fallacy of "the market works to fulfill the interests of the customers" die out ...
  - beaconstudios 8y ago
    All of these things are true, but that still doesn't make what the EU is doing, good. They're just forcing the providers to spend money in Europe. What makes you think European productions won't fall prey to exactly the same problems? This is purely an exercise in the EU seeing that it can control foreign companies using GDPR and thinking "hey, why don't we use this to force companies to give us money". Also: > I wonder when will this fallacy of "the market works to fulfill the interests of the customers" die out ... Just because it's flawed, doesn't mean it isn't mostly true. The market is far from perfect but that doesn't mean it doesn't still fulfil customer needs. It just doesn't fulfil all of them, fulfils them in an inoptimal way, and so on.
- FearNotDaniel 8y ago
  > if the demand were high Culture is not just about satisfying demands, it's also about giving people the opportunity to stumble across things they weren't even looking for, and so enrich themselves in unexpected ways. As a teenager I had no particular desire to go looking for ancient harpsichord music, difficult jazz, sombre poetry, magnificent choral worship or even five-minute recordings of nothing but church bells ringing. But I found them just by twisting the radio dial late at night and discovering things that would never get airtime in a purely commercial setting. The fact that these things are paid for by a "tax" that many are still strongly opposed to, is something I would strongly support in a more modern media context.
  - bluGill 8y ago
    You have just made the opposite point you wanted to: by requiring 30% local culture you have prevented someone from stumbling across a different non-local culture, simply because the math cannot work out without censoring something else.
    - gonvaled 8y ago
      Nice utopia you are describing. The reality is that without rules, neither the 30% local culture nor the non-local culture gets offered.
  - beaconstudios 8y ago
    why would you expect Netflix to provide culture? Culture and commercialisation don't mix. Go find an independent organisation that is geared towards lifting up cultural works - trying to force commercial entities to publish obscure art by law is going to harm both the quality of the commerce and the quality of the art. Most people don't want to tune into Netflix to experience five minutes of church bells.
- tenfold 8y ago
  Free markets are effective but need regulation at some point to prevent them becoming abusive monopolies. The EU collectively represents the interests of its citizens and is telling large media that if they wish to make money off EU customers then they should at least buy some local produce.
FearNotDaniel 8y ago
Not just minorities, but also anything that might enrich or challenge the mind in any significant way. BBC Radio 3 [0] would not exist in a free market, only dumbed-down 'pop classics' stations. The world would be significantly more stupid as a result. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Radio_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Radio_3
Swinx43 8y ago
Yes that is all well and good, until that "content" and its message also starts being dictated by whomever is in charge of the government. All of these things always sound like a great idea when you have good people in government. However almost everyone seem to forget that bad people do get into government too. Having governments dictate or force quotas and determining content always ends up biting the people in the long run.

comboy 8y ago

> So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. I'm in EU. A Good Thing is letting me watch whatever the fuck I want. It's a real dystopia if the state decides which movies you should or shouldn't watch.

ethbro 8y ago
It's hard to watch a movie that never gets produced. Let's not pretend there aren't strong tendencies towards centralization and homogenization in media. (That we could, most charitably, ascribe to efficiency and risk management) On the other side, yes, protectionism leads to a lot of otherwise unmarketable things being produced (looking at you, France). But balance doesn't seem like too much to ask. Because Hollywood is doing fuck all for diversity.
- davedx 8y ago
  > But balance doesn't seem like too much to ask. Because Hollywood is doing fuck all for diversity. Six million Wakandans might disagree with you...
  - ethbro 8y ago
    I'm as much of a Black Panther fan as anyone... but how many Hispanic Marvel superheroes are there?
    - beobab 8y ago
      Loads? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latino_superheroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latino_superheroes
      - ethbro 8y ago
        Let's be serious, Miles Morales (as post-Parker Spiderman) is probably the only Marvel superhero on that list people know. Maybe Robbie Reyes (as Ghost Rider) or Kyle Rayner (as Green Lantern).

dantheman 8y ago

Protectionism is bad in all its forms. Content providers want to capture the local market and should include local productions -- if that's what the subscribers want. Mandating a quota is backwards. If a state wants to sponsor work and make it available at low costs I'm sure content services would jump to provide it. All this does is either increase cost or reduce available selection in the affected markets. If the subscribers don't want the content they shouldn't be forced to pay for it. I live in Austria and do not want to have my selection reduced or more Austrian content. Countries should try to compete on the global market place -- entertainment is one area where good content easily jumps borders.

v_lisivka 8y ago
Protectionsm is bad in all its forms. USA wants to protect it markets, and English language is one of tools to do that. Same for Russian language. Google forces me to Russian and English sites even if local versions are exist and I explicitly say that I want local version via "lang:Ukrainian". Google just ignores me and my needs and drives traffic to Russian and English sites. Youtube tries to convince me with Russian clips for years. The only tool I have is to ban every Russian clip I saw, but it helps only partially. I cannot do that for English clips, so my Recommended page is 99% of English clips and few ones sometimes in Ukrainian. I have my own site: Linux.org.ua. At beginning, it was very popular site because it was the top national site about Linux. Then Google turned switch (in 2007?) and redirected all our national traffic to linux.org.ru, because 150M Russians is way more than 50M Ukrainians. Same for other sites, so almost all our niche national sites died.
pbhjpbhj 8y ago
>If a state wants to sponsor work and make it available at low costs I'm sure content services would jump to provide it. // Who should they sponsor? By getting the people who are already efficiently producing programmes they at least seem to be targeting for efficient content production? In general I appreciate the sentiment - both financial and cultural - but the proposed implementation does seem barmy. A sensible quota would be something like 1%.
michaelt 8y ago
Protectionism is bad in all its forms. I read a book once that made an interesting point: 1. English-language films make more money than French-language films because there are more English speakers than French speakers. 2. Because of this, an English-language film can profitably have a bigger budget, allowing better production values. 3. Once a film has been produced, the rights will get sold in every foreign market - with the price set by auction, not by the film's production costs. If French broadcasters only bid $15 million for a $150 million film, they get it for that price. 4. The upshot of _this_ is English-language films look 10 times more expensive than French-language films that cost the same. 5. This makes it extremely hard for French language films to compete. The reason the French are so protective is because they believe, in the absence of such protection, the French film industry would get its ass kicked by the English-language film industry. Oh, and for 'English-language' and 'French-language' above, you can insert a bunch of stuff about national culture. How do the police and courts act in your film? What food do we see people eating? What attitudes to sex, violence and alcohol do the good guys show? What political systems are shown, and how do characters view and interact with them? What values motivate the lead characters? What sort of things does the military get sent to do? How do employees interact with their bosses? What do roads and cars look like? Is there literally a character named Captain America?

phyller 8y ago

> The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided (individual EU Member States could choose to set the content bar even higher, at 40%) 30% for each country seems really high to me. As usual for regulation, there will likely be high unintended consequences. While in the US and elsewhere there will be thousands of movies available, if Netflix can only get the rights to 90 Belgian films, they aren't going to pay through the nose to create or purchase many more movies. They will just trim down the available movies in Belgium to 300. After all, no competition will be able to do any better. Worst case scenario, someone may corner the market on digital rights to some country's movies, then they will be the only ones that can provide any sort of streaming service. That country will only have access to an expensive service with a limited selection. In those cases, the locals will just continue to pirate movies as the only way to reasonable access them online, and the local film industry will be no better off than before as their consumers will be accustomed to getting their movies for free. Imagine if every state in the US did this, what Netflix would look like. 30% of movies in Indiana need to be created in Indiana. Netflix would suck, ha.

iDemonix 8y ago
I'm amazed something this poorly thought out is about to be 'signed off'. I foresee shrinking catalogues and a massive increase in piracy. Go EU!
- frockington 8y ago
  Probably going to need a license to pirate soon. That way they can ensure that all illegally downloaded content is culturally appropriate. I am only half joking with this comment, I could see it happening
ethbro 8y ago
I mean, Uwe Boll is European (German, specifically).
- grimskin 8y ago

julesie 8y ago

How can this work in practice? Can the 30% be from any EU country? I'm Irish, we don't produce that much stuff. If it has to represent 30% of the catalogue, that catalogue is going to have to shrink massively.

r3bl 8y ago
Yeah, I'm failing to see the practice behind this as well. It was big news in Croatia that Netflix got a local TV show available in its catalogue a few months ago (The Paper, AKA Novine in Croatian). As far as I can tell, it remains the only one. In practice, does that mean that Netflix would have to reduce their Croatian catalogue to like three shows until they purchase the rights to reproduce additional domestic ones?
bluGill 8y ago
It can't work mathematically unless it is from any EU country. There are more than 3 EU countries, which means that eventually you will get some great content from some other country that you are not allowed to access. That is 30% Irish, 30% French, 30% German, and 30% Italian content already doesn't add up, meaning some things that you personally might want from a different country are on the list of things you are not allowed to access even though the streaming provider you are on has all rights. If it can be from any EU country, then the country will be France. France already has laws like this and has historically invested in their content industry, so it should be (should) fairly easy to license that content and fills the requirements.
- iguy 8y ago
  Once you have an amazon.com account, you magically also have an amazon.de account, and an amazon.it account... and it's a few clicks to switch in the app. Maybe that's how it'll go?
  - bluGill 8y ago
    maybe. However in most countries the courts tend to see through such things. I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon doesn't risk this loophole. If they do (even accidentally) I expect some lawyer will sue - there are a bunch of EU countries to choose which to sue in, the results might be different in each.

akuji1993 8y ago

The 30% quota is ridiculous. What this will lead to is either providers shutting down the service for that country or just buy the cheapest, most available content they can get from some indie movie publishers and pushing it in one carousel on their site. This will not lead to bigger local productions or a bigger support for local film makers...

pbhjpbhj 8y ago
Well I for one am looking forward to hearing of the production of the 200 episodes of "Norwegian log pile drying" and such (eg https://www.netflix.com/title/80119345 https://www.netflix.com/title/80119345 ?). Presumably that's what will happen -- unless they mandate hours viewed and then we in the UK will have to watch an hour of "puddle drying in Stratham" before we can watch a foreign movie. Of course the metric could be "catalogue hours", in which case one 500 hour showing of "Silence, a tribute to John Cage" might satisfy the requirement. TL;DR how will they define the quota, what constitutes a TV programme.

stringcode 8y ago

Don't worry comrades, it's for the greater good

Ygg2 8y ago
THE GREATER GOOD!

iDemonix 8y ago

The EU make a lot of stupid decisions, this is definitely one of them. All that happen is streaming providers will just shrink the catalogues massively for non-US customers. 30% is easy to achieve when the subscribers only get about 50 items to choose from in total.

AllegedAlec 8y ago

I've said this before, but the EU overstepped their intended mandate the very moment they decided that they were more than the ECSC. It is beyond me how those numbnuts in Brussels keep thinking up more stupid and useless plans each time. Not only is it completely up to streaming services what they do and do not offer in terms of content, now you force those services to split up what they show per country, decentralising their services, since it's not possible to adhere to the 30% rule otherwise.

rocqua 8y ago
I like the GDPR, I like many other EU rules. In short, I am quite in favor of a big EU. But this is simply stupid. This is straight-up protectionism / weird national pride.
rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
>It is beyond me how those numbnuts in Antwerp keep thinking up more stupid and useless plans each time You may question your sources of information.
- AllegedAlec 8y ago
  Yeah, stupid mistake. I meant Brussels.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Antwerp would be very fitting though (a "twerp" is an ignorant fool).
mrkstu 8y ago
Its also going to completely kill narrowcast specialized channels- trying to sell an Anime channel? Sorry, no can do. I assume BBC is going to be unable to sell their channel in European countries as a streaming service if the local to country restriction is real. No Canadian specific channel. You HAVE to have a wide based supply and therefore you have to be a large international company, likely American, since they will be the only ones who can source the most desirable content. This is going to be a disaster that will have consequences directly in opposition to the publicly intended ones.

Zenst 8y ago

So the prospect of shoestring country news channels or 24/7 streaming of a local clocktower as way to `statisticaly` claim compliance, cannot be ruled out. So this regional 30% could be just as riveting as a watching a chimney stack. Though may work in parts of Italy.

r_smart 8y ago
I, for one, welcome a future of 24/7 streaming of yule logs.

Frqy3 8y ago

I'm not an expert in media laws, but my understanding from the broadcast days was that TV broadcasters got access to radio spectrum for effectively zero or peppercorn rates and in return were required to broadcast a certain level of local content. Broadcast licences were also limited in number by the available spectrum. An on-demand catalog is also quite different from broadcast, being measured by content availability rather than transmission time, and a 30% (or higher) local content bar seems to me to be a rather high level for an on-demand service, however, I read elsewhere [0] that Netflix is already close to meeting this, so the restriction is not likely to be too onerous for them at least. [0] https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/04/eu-will-force-netflix-and-streaming-rivals-to-offer-30-local-content/ https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/04/eu-will-force-netflix-and...

pferde 8y ago

Meanwhile, nobody will force this 30% limit on pirates, who will, yet again, provide what consumers actually want.

martin-adams 8y ago

What's to prevent streaming services just underfunding projects to tick the boxes of getting the catalogue to 30%? Producers can secure rights to a movie that in order to retain the rights, the must produce a film - of any quality. That's how 1994 version of Fantastic Four was made. A low budget B-movie to prevent the rights being transferred back to Stan Lee. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrbFLJHeX8w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrbFLJHeX8w

cafard 8y ago

Will we see an equivalent of Second City TV's "Great White North"?

rocqua 8y ago

This does not read as neutral reporting. Consider phrases like: > cultural difference risks being steamrollered before it until nothing but tedious superhero tropes remain. > And, frankly, if you’ve seen one superhero movie you’ve seen them all. So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. > rather than just doing the easy thing of fencing yet more Marvel superhero movies. In fact, it seems so amateurish that I wondered if this was even real. Sadly, I see it reported by multiple sites.

antidesitter 8y ago
> So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. Wow. I’m suprised TechCrunch actually published this. Has their quality dropped that dramatically?

madshiva 8y ago

The main problem is copyright. I want do a film, and all the limitation that come with stop me for doing so. We can't film any part of the world without need to pay someone else. You have a car in your movie? ok go ahead and pay for "using it" This is non-sense. I watch too many low documentary that need to apply black stickers and this make me feel sad.

no1youknowz 8y ago

Does this affect other "streaming services" like Bitchute, Steemit and D-Tube? For them to evade this proposed regulation, is to ensure that they don't produce "THEIR" own content to sell? I suppose YouTube Premium falls under this?

rocqua 8y ago

> Netflix attempted to challenge the Commission’s support of Germany’s move to support its local film industry in the courts, arguing it countered EU law on state aid. But in May the European General Court dismissed its appeal against the EC decision — saying its action was inadmissible as Netflix has no legal standing to challenge the decision. It seems patently ridiculous that Netflix does not have standing here. The law directly affects Netflix, in a negative way. How could they not have standing?

jstanley 8y ago

How exactly is it going to be possible to make sure that 30% of the catalogue comes from the country the customer lives in? If they provide service in more than 3 countries (and, they do) then it is a mathematical impossibility to meet that limit in every single country. I don't get it.

mrep 8y ago
From the article "The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided". Presumably, that means they would only have to have 30% of content be from one's own country, the rest can be from anywhere.
- jstanley 8y ago
  If I am a customer, and a person from France is a customer, and a person from Germany is a customer, and a person from Spain is a customer, how can they possibly satisfy that requirement? 30% from the UK, plus 30% from France, plus 30% from Germany, only leaves 10% left for Spain. EDIT: Are they saying they only want French content to be available in France, and they only want German content available in Germany, etc.? That seems nonsensical.
  - seszett 8y ago
    > Are they saying they only want French content to be available in France, and they only want German content available in Germany, etc.? That seems nonsensical. That's what techcrunch says but I think they misinterpreted the Vanity article they used as their source.

nicktelford 8y ago

An unintended consequence of this will be that streaming services will need to ring-fence European produced content from other European countries, as it would count towards the non-native quota. This has the potential to significantly reduce the viewership for European-produced content that might otherwise be watched elsewhere. For example: a German film might be kept out of the Austrian catalogue to prevent increasing the quota of Austrian content above what's available.

kevincox 8y ago

One interesting way to look at it is if some service wanted to provide access to all content they could only do this in countries which produce 30% or more of all content globally. I would assume that this means that no country in the EU would be able to access all US content.

towb 8y ago

> The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided Not possible and for sure nothing people even want. We have two or three channels in Sweden that makes original content that could go up on Netflix. And they don't really have more than one or two series (10 episodes max) running at a time per season. Two of the channels have their own streaming service (C-More, Viaplay), the third is public service who also puts it up there (SVT Play) for a good long time. There is plenty of really bad content that the tv channels can sell to Netflix though. A good way for a traditional tv company to stay alive a bit longer. But then there's HBO and others that needs exclusive rights to the content so probably still not possible.

mrmekon 8y ago
Well, TechCrunch says "made in each EU country where a service is provided"... but every single other report about this, including the Variety article that TechCrunch linked to and is simply repeating, says differently. https://advanced-television.com/2018/04/27/svods-set-for-eu-quotas/ https://advanced-television.com/2018/04/27/svods-set-for-eu-... > at least 30 per cent share of European content. https://www.neweurope.eu/article/eu-council-raises-eu-content-netflix-quota-30/ https://www.neweurope.eu/article/eu-council-raises-eu-conten... > to buy European content for the European market https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2018/04/27/eu-bodies-agree-30-european-quota-on-netflix-type-services/ https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2018/04/27/eu-bodies-agree-3... > a quota of 30% for European works on their platforms https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/26/eu-third-party-trader-amazon-google-ebay https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/26/eu-third-... > will have to dedicate 30% of their output to TV shows and films made in Europe etc, etc. Unless TechCrunch has some new inside information, this article is wrong. And given that it's TechCrunch... it's probably wrong.

yAnonymous 8y ago

I wish this was only protectionism and stupidity, but you can bet that big producers have been lobbying for this to get more visibility on their shitty content. If there's one thing where the German TV industry equals the American one, it's being corrupt pieces of shit. Source: German who pays about 20€ of media taxes and fees for services I don't need or want, every month.

vmsp 8y ago

I also feel like this isn't a good idea but who knows. In 2009 the Portuguese government introduced a mandatory quota of 25% Portuguese music in all radio stations. It was absolutely terrible at the time as all Portuguese music was invariably shitty. Flash forward 9 years and, in my opinion, things are much better. We still have a bunch of bad music but meanwhile a lot new quality artists appeared and became popular. Maybe it has nothing to do with the quota's but take it as you will.

xugo 8y ago

I'd rather EU forces stream providers to have one account valid for the whole of Europe. I'm French, lived 10 years in England and now in Spain, I want one iTunes account to give me access to the full EU library and not needing 3 seperate accounts. Same thing with Netflix and Digital TV. That would also help Europeans understand their neighbours better. These region-restricted distribution contracts should not exist anymore in Europe. It's from the video tape era, it belongs in a landfill.

bhelkey 8y ago
It seems to me that this will make that problem significantly worse. If at least 30% of content in an EU country is local to that country then this local content cannot be available in every EU country. The percentages simply wouldn't add up. I would bet that the majority of this local programming will only be available in the country where it is produced.
swebs 8y ago
I haven't used Netflix in a few years so I don't know if it works the same now, but the region restrictions were based on your IP address, not credit card info or anything. That meant you could easily turn on a VPN and easily access the worldwide Netflix library. They would blacklist IPs from public VPNs like Private Internet Access, but you could easily just set up OpenVPN on a Linode to get around that.
iknowstuff 8y ago
That was the plan as a part of the Digital Single Market (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/digital-single-market_en https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/digital-single-ma...) but they settled on, essentially, roaming for digital services for now: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4681_en.htm http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4681_en.htm

evertheylen 8y ago

I live in Belgium and was surprised to find out how regulated our media is. However, it is mostly for linear media (i.e. a single continous stream like traditional TV channels). The law is somewhat vague, requiring that "the largest portion of broadcast time be dedicated to European productions". Rules for nonlinear media like Netflix basically state that they have to promote insofar possible European productions, but without hard numbers. I can imagine that these vague rules are blatantly ignored by modern streaming providers, so at least in Belgium you could see this as simply a more specific wording of already existing rules. (I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this btw, I'm just providing some context for those interested.)

jdlyga 8y ago

Realizing too late in the game that the US is going for a cultural victory

frockington 8y ago
Everyone is going to be wearing those pesky American blue jeans soon

binmanthrowaway 8y ago

No thanks. I wish bureaucrats have limited their ideas to their own lives. Fascism is creeping in from all sides in the EU, but people seem to live in denial.

phobosdeimos 8y ago

Everyone here actively despises the local film industry. We do not need to inflict Dutch television on the world. Thats torture. Good shows should earn their ratings, not be force fed- if your culture is so great France and Germany you wouldn't need these subsidies. Netflix is not a public broadcaster.

harperlee 8y ago
When good shows are made, everyone wants to see them, and streaming services jump to offer them. There are a lot of examples of this working, such as Netflix buying Spain's "Money heist / la casa de papel", or german "Babylon Berlin", or belgian "Tabula Rasa". Also Netflix is actually opening a European production hub thus investing in local culture the good way.
maxsilver 8y ago
> Everyone here actively despises the local film industry. We do not need to inflict Dutch television on the world. Thats torture. I don't understand. Do the Dutch hate their own programmes? Why would they bother making shows they don't want to watch? > if your culture is so great France and Germany you wouldn't need these subsidies. I'm not sure they need them, just that it helps promote it. These shows might not necessarily be record-smashing-popular, but local film/TV from other countries routinely makes it's way to the US with sizable audiences (despite the US drowning in it's own media). Even childrens shows often have broad appeal. (as just a few examples, see 'Degrassi' from Canada, 'PJ Masks' and 'Miraculous' from France, 'Sarah and Duck' from Britain, 'Octonauts' from Ireland). Some of those are funded in part from "cultural quotas" (various implementations of similar ideas) such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content . But it doesn't mean they aren't popular or good on their own.
- kodablah 8y ago
  > I don't understand. Do the Dutch hate their own programmes? Why would they bother making shows they don't want to watch? Same reason any culture creates art, by choice. Not all art has to be accepted (or forced) and many times the value to its creator and/or a small subset of patrons is enough to justify it. >> if your culture is so great France and Germany you wouldn't need these subsidies. Netflix is not a public broadcaster. > I'm not sure they need them, just that it helps promote it I added more context to the original quote. I assume the original poster didn't mean "subsidies" as financial assistance, but instead misused the word to mean restrictions on foreign content. I think most agree grants for the arts have value due to some forms of art being unsustainable on their own.

pluma 8y ago

I'd be fine with "30% from any country in the EU", but "30% from my country" is torture. I mean, have you even seen what movies Germany produces? If I could stand any of that rubbish, I'd be watching cable TV, not Netflix.

probably_wrong 8y ago
You mean "The lives of others"? "Run Lola Run"? "Goodbye Lenin"? "Wir Kinder Vom Bahnhof Zoo"? "Fack ju Göhte"? I know there are bad German movies. But with the biggest film studio in Europe being right next to Berlin, I think saying "there are no good German movies" it's a bit too much. The fact alone that there are decent German movies for children seems to me like a plus - I probably won't go see "Das schönste Mädchen der Welt", but I'm not opposed to it. Disclaimer: I liked Danni Lowinski, and would like to watch Deutschland 83.
- tomjen3 8y ago
  That is less than 10 movies and Wir kinder.. is old enough that my mother saw it in the cinema as a youngster. You might find a few more, but "Der Untergang" is on Netflix, not because they were required to, but because it is good. I fear for the same as a Dane, Danish movies are crap.
  - Apocryphon 8y ago
    Danes made The Killing, though.
    - tomjen3 8y ago
      Yeah, I mean it is supposed to be really good, but I never got around to see it, partly because it is Danish.
- EpicEng 8y ago
  >Wir Kinder Vom Bahnhof Zoo You had to reach back 37 years to fill out your list of... five movies. That's a bit telling, no?

sannee 8y ago

This is the side of the EU that foreigners usually don't see. This is the reason there are movements for quitting in every member state (with varying levels of success). The isolationism EU is beginning to display is starting to worry even me and the alternative is a bunch of UKIP-like nationalist which I am not really a big fan of.

Ygg2 8y ago
Interesting. What are you thoughts on DIEM 25?
philwelch 8y ago
This isn't all that different from the "Canadian Content" regulations in Canadian broadcasting, which is probably a contributing factor to the disproportionate number of Canadian popular music artists.
- bepotts 8y ago
  It probably has more to do with the fact that Canada is close to the US, so Canadians have plenty of opportunities to mingle with the American cultural players.
  - philwelch 8y ago
    There are parts of the US that are in the US and don't produce quite as many actors and music artists. Though there are some other factors (e.g. Vancouver's generous film subsidies and variety of cool-looking architecture to use as outdoor film sets), there seems to be way more Canadians in entertainment than you'd expect, and I wouldn't dismiss the influence of Can-Con regulations. Of course, it probably helps that Canada has plenty of cultural and linguistic similarities to the United States. Preserving the native culture of, say, Denmark through Danish Content regulations on popular entertainment means producing content that isn't easily consumed outside of Denmark, whereas a ton of Canadian Content can be easily marketed in the United States.
harperlee 8y ago

tinus_hn 8y ago

Also the EU wants Netflix to offer the same content anywhere, so 30% of it will have to be from Germany, 30% from France, 30% from Belgium, 30% from Spain etc. EU, ‘this one goes to 360%’

chimeracoder 8y ago
> Also the EU wants Netflix to offer the same content anywhere Literally the only way to do that would be for Netflix to take down movies for which they haven't secured the rights in every EU country. That'd mean they have to drop a massive chunk of their catalog, because media rights are sold piecemeal, so there are very few things for which they have distribution rights in every EU country[0]. [0] Ironically, this includes Netflix originals.
- tinus_hn 8y ago
  Not if the EU invalidates provisions in contracts that state it is valid in one member state and not in another.
  - chimeracoder 8y ago
    > Not if the EU invalidates provisions in contracts that state it is valid in one member state and not in another. I look forward to the EU suddenly telling the current rightsholders that their distribution rights have been seized by the state.
- gbear605 8y ago
  Couldn’t the EU just require distribution rights be sold for all EU countries collectively?

lostmyoldone 8y ago

Great, now Netflix in Sweden will have about 5 movies, unless they count painfully bad Swedish series as movies, then it will be a billion or so.

ruiseal 8y ago
Äkta människor was fun(ny).

jackconnor 8y ago

Question - how would this even work in small countries with limited local content? Is Netflix Latvia going to be just a small handful of movies/TV since they can only add 60% international content (aka a tiny part of their catalogue) to whatever few movies/TV get made locally?

jackconnor 8y ago
Follow up question: Doesn't this just screw over Latvians by limiting their content over other European countries?

Proven 8y ago

Damn socialists

adifferentname 8y ago

Your superior cultures results in terrorist cells and content. Your superior culture should pay it's own flipping bill (to handle it's miscreant externalities). Here's a flipping mirror. You're welcome What is the word for "To look down one's nose And expect others to solve one's own country's problems at others' expense." Here are some topics That you're preferred, local, must-carry content MUST address in order to be considered for publication in this journal: - Ethnocentrism - Nationalist bigotry - Editorial discretion "You know, we're going to make these successful Americans do our bidding; so that we're not forced to voluntarily pay for their inferior American content" You can start your own flipping platform. You can add a tax in order to subsidize a privately or state-owned competitor for these services. But you will not flipping tell these companies what content to carry. And while you're at it, add a tax to pay for filtering content uploaded by the outcast miscreants your region of the world produces. Freedom of Speech. Please read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. > Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, > Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Personally, I do enjoy films from all over the world. You may not lawfully compel these companies to control their speech. You may levy a tax to fund the arts. Forcing local investment in that way is not a good way to build healthy relationships. "They're only finding this project because they have to" You may invest in building competing platforms. You do not own these companies. These are not state-owned or state-operated businesses. They were built and financed by non-state actors. Would you go to a scholarly journal and tell them that they must publish 40% local articles? You would not, because you would then be infringing their right to freedom of speech. You would not, because later on, the authors would question whether their success was unfairly subsidized; whether they succeeded due to merit or nationality. "You must carry" Get the heck out of here. "This is our country, So you must put my kid's painting on your wall." Go treat yourself. What's next? Are you going to strongarm Ikea -- which sells great products -- into carrying a product mix with 30-40% goods from other local manufacturers? Actual competition results in superior goods that consumers prefer.

Jyaif 8y ago

This quota sort of work for movie theater (and radio/TV) because offering crappy content makes them miss out on some money. This is not the case with Netflix. Netflix will be completely OK with serving locally produced content that nobody watch because it will only cost them a couple of hard drive that won't ever be used. So Netflix will just end up licensing the cheapest locally content to meet their quota. This content will also be the poorest, which will turn people away from locally produced content. Another job well done by the EU. PS: If any Netflix exec sees this, I'm available for creating french films at the rate of 200 EUR / hour.

sonnyblarney 8y ago

One of the dichotomies they're maybe missing is that Americans love their TV. There are a billion channels in the US. In Europe, it's more like 5. So just the sheer lack of content relative to the US makes 30% quite a high and problematic number. 15% locally, 30% from the entirety of Europe. Maybe.

microcolonel 8y ago

You know, Canada had (has?) this, and most of what we got were dime-a-dozen, unwatchable knockoffs and drug-addled accidental psychological thriller children's shows.

chvid 8y ago

Imagine that Netflix in order to be accessible in Ohio had to have 30% content (of its Ohio edition) produced in Ohio.

CM30 8y ago

Doesn't something like this already happen with TV shows in Canada? I recall quite a few unpopular TV shows (like Johnny Test) basically kept running purely because of some Canadian TV show quota the country had going, despite people's reactions to them being generally meh at best. Either way, it's not a great idea, because... well, some countries simply make more/better shows than others. It's like in any other area of business, where some countries more representation in each industry, like how America's done well with films and tech because of Hollywood and Silicon Valley. All this sort of setup does is encourage streaming services to run poor quality, disliked shows to fill a quota at the expense of what's actually best or most appreciated by its audience.

Semaphor 8y ago

Could they also require English subs then? Because for pretty much everything that is not originally English, my subtitle choices are between German and whatever the original language is.

itry2develop 8y ago

No quotas on immigration, but on tv? Their cultures won't survive because of an extra few subsidized shows made in Finland...

GhostVII 8y ago

Sounds like the kind of pointless law that streaming services can easily get around by just buying the rights to super cheap movies from the country. Although apparently "streaming services will also have to ensure visibility and prominence for local content," not sure how that will be enforced.

TangoTrotFox 8y ago

I wish there was more regulation that was positive instead of negative. Here for instance imagine that if instead of punishing Netflix for not providing an arbitrarily determined sufficient amount of local content, why not provide positive incentives for other companies (or Netflix as well) to do just that. For instance for each 10% of your catalog that is made up of region local content, you get an 8% tax deduction. As companies adjusted to the new incentives, these values could be gradually lowered over time. This would help spur on new competitors as well as give established players a great motivation to not only provide a sufficient amount of local content, but also heavily promote it, in efforts to try to drive demand make it commercially viable to make even larger chunks of their catalog local. Instead we get this, which is going to do little except encourage the bare minimum under threat of penalty. Just doesn't seem very logical.

funshed 8y ago

So every EU country can demand 30% (to 40%) of content is local to them. There is 27 countries in EU, so how the hell will that work. Not only will Netflix have to produce local content but will have to hide. French stuff from Germans to keep 60% of the prime Holywood stuff. Unless I'm missing something - the maths seem off. Another plus for Brexit. We have BBC for local stuff, give me back Futurama. (that being said, there is a great none English football team owning drama.. Plus that French secret service drama/comedy.. Good netflix original stuff I watch with subtitles)

reaperducer 8y ago

This sort of thing is the reason there are so many Canadian channels on satellite radio in North America, and also why there are so many Canadian-produced shows on pay TV channels like HGTV and Food Network. It's also why the version of Dire Straits' Money For Nothing that plays on most SiriusXM stations is the sanitized, politically correct Canadian version, not the real version that was played on American radio in the 1980's. Though that version does play occasionally on channels like Deep Tracks.

gamblor956 8y ago
There are numerous Canadian-produced shows on cable TV because Canada costs about 50% of shooting in the US. This makes the financials pen out for lower-budget shows that would otherwise die if made in the U.S. Generally, the higher-budget shows are shot in the US. Largely, because the cast members on higher budget shows are less willing to move to Canada for half of the year. Compare, e.g., Suits and other USA shows (ironically, now all filmed in Canada) with Better Caul Saul/AMC shows or Mayans MC/FX shows (generally, filmed on location).
- reaperducer 8y ago
  While I don’t disagree that many shows are made in Canada because it’s cheaper, the fact remains that the CRTC requires something like 30% “CanCon” in order to permit carriage (TV) or coverage (sat radio) in Canada. Canadian-focused channels were a specific requirement for Sirius to sell radios in Canada. Before that, there were no Canadian channels, and people would import Sirius radios from border towns.

cliffordthedog 8y ago

> And, frankly, if you’ve seen one superhero movie you’ve seen them all I for one am immediately convinced that this author is much more sophisticated, cultured, and frankly better than the swine who sees superhero movies.

Tomte 8y ago

I am regularly defending the EU here on HN, but this is a stupid idea. I wouldn't argue with a much smaller quota, like half a percent or so, but this is not helpful. I'd be surprised if this didn't originate in France, they have always been concerned about English influence, and I think they already have such a quota for their radio programmes.

xky 8y ago

Can this be easily gamed by just uploading a boat load of local, public domain content and burying it in the depths of the catalogue?

jdavis703 8y ago
Sure, but then the regulators will be back with more stringent regulations, for example requiring a certain amount of spending or streaming time be spent on local content. I would expect the big players (Netflix, Hulu) will want to avoid angering the regulators. Smaller players may play games, but regulators probably aren't as concerned (for example how would a niche service like Crunchyroll that focuses on anime comply?).

wpasc 8y ago

> And, frankly, if you’ve seen one superhero movie you’ve seen them all. So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. That argument is so silly and reductionist that, to me, it invalidates the rest of the opinions expressed in this article.

gamesbrainiac 8y ago

I generally applaud the European Union's efforts to make things better for their citizens. However, this is just so easy to circumvent by using a VPN. Furthermore, this does not solve the problem of having strong EU contenders to Netflix, Hulu and whatever else is out there. It is better for the EU to fund something that can fight on its own two feet rather than using these punitive measures that prevent people from watching things that they _paid_ for and _want_ to watch.

Aeolun 8y ago

What is it with Europe and hare-brained stupid internet ideas lately. They pushed through GDRP and are now on a regulation high or something...

MistahKoala 8y ago

This proposal has a very French flavour to it. Hopefully it won't affect us in the UK, but my fear would be that it leads to more walls being put up around content and services for EU Internet users, as has happened with GDPR.

j45 8y ago

This seems similar to CRTC programming rules in Canada which apply to cable. Also it may shed some light on Netflix developing relationships with the government in Canada.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

em3rgent0rdr 8y ago

This type of trade protectionism I'd expect from Trump, and as we've seen the past year and a half, ultimately hurts consumers.

wemdyjreichert 8y ago

This seems like another excuse to go after US tech companies. Why does the EU hate US tech so much?