4 ms·

Netflix only content isn't "rare" anymore, sorry if I don't purchase this particular red herring. DRM benefits Netflix just as much, if not even more than it d

by throwaway2048 8y ago

Netflix only content isn't "rare" anymore, sorry if I don't purchase this particular red herring. DRM benefits Netflix just as much, if not even more than it does traditional media companies.

jedberg 8y ago
It’s very rare. I’ll bet you can’t name a single show that Netflix produces. Remember all those big name shows are produced by other people and then sold exclusively to Netflix. DRM does not benefit Netflix. It’s complicated and takes a lot of resources to run. They’d much rather not have to deal with it at all. Having DRM does not gain them any customers — in fact it loses them some. But it’s the only way they can get content.
- 0815test 8y ago
  Come on, that can't possibly be right. If they can get shows sold "exclusively" to them, why can't they get shows sold to them without DRM requirements? (The closest I can get to an explanation is that the "exclusivity" deal might be limited to online streaming platforms only, and whoever is selling the content still worries about everything else. But streaming is a significant and growing portion of all media consumption (and could be even more so, were it not for that pesky DRM), so I'm extremely skeptical that this would be a real issue.)
  - jedberg 8y ago
    They probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline is very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any, especially given that this whole argument only applies to web streaming anyway.
    - 0815test 8y ago
      > ...and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any... This is where your narrative is strategically short-sighted. It would be a very significant leverage point for their own proprietary content over the traditional media companies' - the kind of thing that 'disruption' is built on!
- throwaway2048 8y ago
  If Netflix is paying for shows that are produced, and they have exclusive rights, they can attach any distribution terms they want to them. You can't tell me with a straight face that somehow they don't have this power. DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies.
  - jedberg 8y ago
    > DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies The fact that every pi8ece of Netflix content is on the pirate sites within hours of release would prove otherwise. Netflix is well aware of the uselessness of DRM. And you're right, they probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But you missed the other part of my post -- the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline was very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any. How many people would say "man I would totally sign up for Netflix if only their own content was DRM free, even though I'd need a DRM enabled player to play everything else, and oh yeah this only applies to web streaming anyway."
    - kalleboo 8y ago
      I would argue the increased customer satisfaction from being able to stream 1080p/4K quality in more browsers with less esoteric hardware would be worth the extra implementation complexity (currently higher resolutions are disabled on browsers with weaker DRM or hardware without a pure HDCP path)
      - jedberg 8y ago
        Most people don’t stream 4K on a computer. And most people don’t have the bandwidth to stream at 4K. Ie most customers would never notice.
        jrockway 8y ago
- morpheuskafka 8y ago
  Both Amazon and Netflix make the most money and are best known for their excellent original shows. Why did they bother to setup DRM for them? If they opposed it, they could have made it a selling point that you could watch them in 4K on any device without hassle.

Netflix only content isn't "rare" anymore, sorry if I don't purchase this particular red herring. DRM benefits Netflix just as much, if not even more than it does traditional media companies.

jedberg 8y ago

It’s very rare. I’ll bet you can’t name a single show that Netflix produces. Remember all those big name shows are produced by other people and then sold exclusively to Netflix. DRM does not benefit Netflix. It’s complicated and takes a lot of resources to run. They’d much rather not have to deal with it at all. Having DRM does not gain them any customers — in fact it loses them some. But it’s the only way they can get content.

0815test 8y ago
Come on, that can't possibly be right. If they can get shows sold "exclusively" to them, why can't they get shows sold to them without DRM requirements? (The closest I can get to an explanation is that the "exclusivity" deal might be limited to online streaming platforms only, and whoever is selling the content still worries about everything else. But streaming is a significant and growing portion of all media consumption (and could be even more so, were it not for that pesky DRM), so I'm extremely skeptical that this would be a real issue.)
- jedberg 8y ago
  They probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline is very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any, especially given that this whole argument only applies to web streaming anyway.
  - 0815test 8y ago
    > ...and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any... This is where your narrative is strategically short-sighted. It would be a very significant leverage point for their own proprietary content over the traditional media companies' - the kind of thing that 'disruption' is built on!
throwaway2048 8y ago
If Netflix is paying for shows that are produced, and they have exclusive rights, they can attach any distribution terms they want to them. You can't tell me with a straight face that somehow they don't have this power. DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies.
- jedberg 8y ago
  > DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies The fact that every pi8ece of Netflix content is on the pirate sites within hours of release would prove otherwise. Netflix is well aware of the uselessness of DRM. And you're right, they probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But you missed the other part of my post -- the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline was very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any. How many people would say "man I would totally sign up for Netflix if only their own content was DRM free, even though I'd need a DRM enabled player to play everything else, and oh yeah this only applies to web streaming anyway."
  - kalleboo 8y ago
    I would argue the increased customer satisfaction from being able to stream 1080p/4K quality in more browsers with less esoteric hardware would be worth the extra implementation complexity (currently higher resolutions are disabled on browsers with weaker DRM or hardware without a pure HDCP path)
    - jedberg 8y ago
      Most people don’t stream 4K on a computer. And most people don’t have the bandwidth to stream at 4K. Ie most customers would never notice.
      - jrockway 8y ago
morpheuskafka 8y ago
Both Amazon and Netflix make the most money and are best known for their excellent original shows. Why did they bother to setup DRM for them? If they opposed it, they could have made it a selling point that you could watch them in 4K on any device without hassle.