5 ms·

The point is, the extra "protection" is worthless.

by depressedpanda 4y ago

AnthonyMouse 4y ago
Not worthless, actively harmful to the user experience, and therefore actively harmful to the bottom line.
- hunter2_ 4y ago
  But I doubt the harmed people will feel materially less harmed if some tiny fraction of content isn't in harm's way while the rest still is.
  - AnthonyMouse 4y ago
    It's in their interest to get rid of all the DRM, so it's a matter of setting an example. If they try to get Hollywood to stop demanding it while they're still doing it themselves, they look like hypocrites and fools. If they stop they can demonstrate the worthlessness of it and the success of their content without it and try to get others to follow.
    - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
      > It's in their interest to get rid of all the DRM, so it's a matter of setting an example. Is it? I doubt it's a significant cost center. Plus, right management is viewed favourably by the rest of the entertainment industry. Actively going against the grain would impair their image with their commercial partners. I honestly think they don't care at this point.
ben174 4y ago
It's not worthless though, because if it didn't exist - some browser extension would appear the next day which adds a nice little download right next to the play button.
- musicale 4y ago
  > a nice little download right next to the play button This is obviously what we would actually want.
  - heleninboodler 4y ago
    But we are talking about Netflix's motivations, not ours. And Netflix does not want this download button.
    - musicale 4y ago
      I'm not. Buffering delays can be greatly reduced, if not eliminated entirely, by simply sending the whole file but in the past many upstream content providers insisted on limits for the amount of buffering/storage in the client. Fortunately you can now download entire videos in the app, though they're undoubtedly encumbered by DRM of some sort.
MBCook 4y ago
It’s not. It’s enough to deter casual piracy. There is some value in that. If you could just right click and choose “download” for any Netflix original don’t you think that would be a problem for them?
- Zuiii 4y ago
  > It’s not. It’s enough to deter casual piracy. There is some value in that. Casual pirates wouldn't bother right-clicking in the first place unless it's to store a local copy that they won't even know how to share effectively (since they're casual). The only thing DRM achieves for netflix is deterring new customers and hurting existing ones.
  - MBCook 4y ago
    I’ve known enough casual pirates like that in my life. People who would sign up for Netflix for one month every three years and immediately download everything and then cancel again. The fact they can’t do that is a benefit.
  - alwayslikethis 4y ago
    Most pirates are not subscribed in the first place. They just download something someone else had removed DRM from, which also makes it a superior experience. It only takes one pirate with a decent computer to encode a good DRM-free copy for it to be shared via BitTorrent. It is pointless to deter casual piracy when one "professional" pirate is enough to free the content.
    - MBCook 4y ago
      > It is pointless to deter casual piracy when one "professional" pirate is enough to free the content. For the piracy scene, sure. It’s irrelevant. But for normal people the difference is huge. They may not know how to pirate content, where to go to find it, or be willing risk downloading it and getting in trouble (scary FBI warnings and ISP letters). But once it’s trivial due to the lack of protection it will be all over TikTok and FB and WAY more people will pirate. Those are the people DRM, even light DRM, stop.

The point is, the extra "protection" is worthless.

AnthonyMouse 4y ago

Not worthless, actively harmful to the user experience, and therefore actively harmful to the bottom line.

hunter2_ 4y ago
But I doubt the harmed people will feel materially less harmed if some tiny fraction of content isn't in harm's way while the rest still is.
- AnthonyMouse 4y ago
  It's in their interest to get rid of all the DRM, so it's a matter of setting an example. If they try to get Hollywood to stop demanding it while they're still doing it themselves, they look like hypocrites and fools. If they stop they can demonstrate the worthlessness of it and the success of their content without it and try to get others to follow.
  - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
    > It's in their interest to get rid of all the DRM, so it's a matter of setting an example. Is it? I doubt it's a significant cost center. Plus, right management is viewed favourably by the rest of the entertainment industry. Actively going against the grain would impair their image with their commercial partners. I honestly think they don't care at this point.

ben174 4y ago

It's not worthless though, because if it didn't exist - some browser extension would appear the next day which adds a nice little download right next to the play button.

musicale 4y ago
> a nice little download right next to the play button This is obviously what we would actually want.
- heleninboodler 4y ago
  But we are talking about Netflix's motivations, not ours. And Netflix does not want this download button.
  - musicale 4y ago
    I'm not. Buffering delays can be greatly reduced, if not eliminated entirely, by simply sending the whole file but in the past many upstream content providers insisted on limits for the amount of buffering/storage in the client. Fortunately you can now download entire videos in the app, though they're undoubtedly encumbered by DRM of some sort.

MBCook 4y ago

It’s not. It’s enough to deter casual piracy. There is some value in that. If you could just right click and choose “download” for any Netflix original don’t you think that would be a problem for them?

Zuiii 4y ago
> It’s not. It’s enough to deter casual piracy. There is some value in that. Casual pirates wouldn't bother right-clicking in the first place unless it's to store a local copy that they won't even know how to share effectively (since they're casual). The only thing DRM achieves for netflix is deterring new customers and hurting existing ones.
- MBCook 4y ago
  I’ve known enough casual pirates like that in my life. People who would sign up for Netflix for one month every three years and immediately download everything and then cancel again. The fact they can’t do that is a benefit.
- alwayslikethis 4y ago
  Most pirates are not subscribed in the first place. They just download something someone else had removed DRM from, which also makes it a superior experience. It only takes one pirate with a decent computer to encode a good DRM-free copy for it to be shared via BitTorrent. It is pointless to deter casual piracy when one "professional" pirate is enough to free the content.
  - MBCook 4y ago
    > It is pointless to deter casual piracy when one "professional" pirate is enough to free the content. For the piracy scene, sure. It’s irrelevant. But for normal people the difference is huge. They may not know how to pirate content, where to go to find it, or be willing risk downloading it and getting in trouble (scary FBI warnings and ISP letters). But once it’s trivial due to the lack of protection it will be all over TikTok and FB and WAY more people will pirate. Those are the people DRM, even light DRM, stop.