3 ms·

I doubt that Netflix really wants to be doing DRM. But the simple fact is that the rights-holders demand it. If Netflix didn't do DRM, then it wouldn't have any

I doubt that Netflix really wants to be doing DRM. But the simple fact is that the rights-holders demand it. If Netflix didn't do DRM, then it wouldn't have any good content on it. As soon as rights-holders can be convinced that DRM is unnecessary, then we'll see the internet streamers like Netflix drop it. I'd bet that by the time we see A-List movies on GOG, we'll be seeing them on Netflix too.

smacktoward 12y ago
This argument is increasingly less compelling as Netflix's focus moves away from streaming other people's content towards streaming its own original content.
- shmerl 12y ago
  It was always a fake excuse for Netflix. They bear the guilt of pushing this DRM garbage into HTML standard.
shmerl 12y ago
> I doubt that Netflix really wants to be doing DRM. But the simple fact is that the rights-holders demand it. Where is their own content DRM-free? > As soon as rights-holders can be convinced that DRM is unnecessary, then we'll see the internet streamers like Netflix drop it. Without someone pushing for it, it will never happen. Netflix clearly don't care to push for it in the least. So kudos to GOG for actually trying.
- nemothekid 12y ago
  > Where is their own content DRM-free? What does Netflix gain at this point for instrumenting DRM free streaming for a small subset of their content rather than just piggybacking off their current infrastructure? Why add even more to the cost of in-house content for DRM? > Without someone pushing for it, it will never happen. That someone is consumers, not Netflix. And given that the overwhelming majority of consumers don't care about DRM, Netflix has little incentive to care about it also - they have enough to worry about with their content well drying up, and I doubt they are keen on exacerbating that problem by telling their partners to license their content DRM free. Short of either the government stepping in and mandating the end of DRM, I don't think will ever see DRM go away (not to say it won't be hopelessly broken). All that still doesn't change the fact if Netflix could, they would most likely drop DRM, if not for all the technical reasons - it would allow them to distribute on Linux and most likely simplify parts of the content delivery chain. For Netflix they have no reason to be against DRM free content, but a ton of reasons to not be actively against DRM.
  - shmerl 12y ago
    > What does Netflix gain at this point for instrumenting DRM free streaming for a small subset of their content rather than just piggybacking off their current infrastructure? They gain more trust by showing that it's not their intention to use DRM. Since they don't, they are viewed as liars when they claim that they don't want to use it. And they very well can be liars. Let them prove their intentions with actions rather than with empty words. > That someone is consumers, not Netflix. No, that's false logic. Users of course should push for it too. But you can't compare the scale. Individuals voting with their wallets are less visible to publishers than distributors voting with theirs. GOG already demonstrated it. And that actually feeds the cycle. Once some distributor breaks the wall of stupidity by making some DRM-free deals with publishers, then more users start supporting them from those who care about buying it DRM-free. The bottom line, Neflix are not interesting in fighting that fight. They oblige insane publishers willingly and their claims that they "have no choice" don't sound sincere. > Netflix has little incentive to care about it also That's exactly the point. So they can't claim that they don't like it. In the best case they don't care, and in the worst they prefer using it even for their own content and push for that garbage into HTML standard. Incentive for caring about it should not come from estimating how many users care about it. > ll that still doesn't change the fact if Netflix could, they would most likely drop DRM, if not for all the technical reasons That's what they say, but no one is inclined to believe them when they don't do it for their own content as above. There is no technical reason for them to use DRM where publishers don't demand it. And when they are the publishers themselves it means they demand it themselves too.

smacktoward 12y ago

This argument is increasingly less compelling as Netflix's focus moves away from streaming other people's content towards streaming its own original content.

shmerl 12y ago
It was always a fake excuse for Netflix. They bear the guilt of pushing this DRM garbage into HTML standard.

shmerl 12y ago

> I doubt that Netflix really wants to be doing DRM. But the simple fact is that the rights-holders demand it. Where is their own content DRM-free? > As soon as rights-holders can be convinced that DRM is unnecessary, then we'll see the internet streamers like Netflix drop it. Without someone pushing for it, it will never happen. Netflix clearly don't care to push for it in the least. So kudos to GOG for actually trying.

nemothekid 12y ago
> Where is their own content DRM-free? What does Netflix gain at this point for instrumenting DRM free streaming for a small subset of their content rather than just piggybacking off their current infrastructure? Why add even more to the cost of in-house content for DRM? > Without someone pushing for it, it will never happen. That someone is consumers, not Netflix. And given that the overwhelming majority of consumers don't care about DRM, Netflix has little incentive to care about it also - they have enough to worry about with their content well drying up, and I doubt they are keen on exacerbating that problem by telling their partners to license their content DRM free. Short of either the government stepping in and mandating the end of DRM, I don't think will ever see DRM go away (not to say it won't be hopelessly broken). All that still doesn't change the fact if Netflix could, they would most likely drop DRM, if not for all the technical reasons - it would allow them to distribute on Linux and most likely simplify parts of the content delivery chain. For Netflix they have no reason to be against DRM free content, but a ton of reasons to not be actively against DRM.
- shmerl 12y ago
  > What does Netflix gain at this point for instrumenting DRM free streaming for a small subset of their content rather than just piggybacking off their current infrastructure? They gain more trust by showing that it's not their intention to use DRM. Since they don't, they are viewed as liars when they claim that they don't want to use it. And they very well can be liars. Let them prove their intentions with actions rather than with empty words. > That someone is consumers, not Netflix. No, that's false logic. Users of course should push for it too. But you can't compare the scale. Individuals voting with their wallets are less visible to publishers than distributors voting with theirs. GOG already demonstrated it. And that actually feeds the cycle. Once some distributor breaks the wall of stupidity by making some DRM-free deals with publishers, then more users start supporting them from those who care about buying it DRM-free. The bottom line, Neflix are not interesting in fighting that fight. They oblige insane publishers willingly and their claims that they "have no choice" don't sound sincere. > Netflix has little incentive to care about it also That's exactly the point. So they can't claim that they don't like it. In the best case they don't care, and in the worst they prefer using it even for their own content and push for that garbage into HTML standard. Incentive for caring about it should not come from estimating how many users care about it. > ll that still doesn't change the fact if Netflix could, they would most likely drop DRM, if not for all the technical reasons That's what they say, but no one is inclined to believe them when they don't do it for their own content as above. There is no technical reason for them to use DRM where publishers don't demand it. And when they are the publishers themselves it means they demand it themselves too.