« Netflix Updates iPad App to Version 1.0.1 | Main | Time Warner Disrupting Internet Service to Warn Torrent Users? »

Comments

Tester

Good for her. I'm sick and tired of the studios forcing DRM down our throats.

Sony and Disney are the worst of the bunch but the rest are close behind.

Even though I use a number of different methods to remove the copy protection from the media I purchase it still ticks me off that the studios want to treat me as if I were a pirate instead of a customer. Especially since the DRM doesn't stop their products from being pirated.

When will the execs. get their collective heads out of their ass and see what's going on around them.

Sock Puppet

Tester wrote:

Even though I use a number of different methods to remove the copy protection from the media I purchase

Unfortunately its that very mentality that made the studios begin using DRM... Not saying I agree, because when you "Purchase" the media (actually pay for a copy) then its yours to do with what you choose.

But streaming media is different (at least from Netflix) you are not "Purchasing" a copy of what you stream. You are subscribing to an all you can eat buffet.

When you choose to dine at one of those places it sort of goes without saying that you do not get to take food home with you too ;-)

While I applaud Ms. Paley, it still must be nice to turn down the $$, especially when she could still have offered it free from her site... That was a true cake moment...

Jesus from Venus

Its not really the greed of the studios, but the greed of the people that feel they don't need to pay for some else's hard work.

The studios are out to make money, they are a business, they sell entertainment. I guess I am greedy for going to work every day, for a paycheck, rather then doing it for free.

Get out of your moms basement and get a job.

Racket

If it is easier and faster to pirate something than to get a legitimate copy then the studios DESERVE to be pirated. It will always cost more to buy a movie than to pirate it, but if someone living in their moms basement is capable of delivering movies faster and easier than actual companies that produce them, more power to the mommas boy.

For all the bs talk of piracy, the pirates have forced the music/movie industry onto the internet, they keep prices down, and I believe without them we would still be stuck with buying CD and DVDs at the local store.

DRM doesn't work and never will work because there are just too many clever people out there who will figure out how to defeat it.

Mr Nethead

Hmmm, according to Wikipedia, the music license for the film allowed for one pressing of 4,999 DVDs. The free downloads on the Internet are considered "promotional copies."

I don't suppose streams on Netflix would be considered "promotional copies." So maybe the real reason she didn't sign up for the Netflix deal is because she couldn't.

shetaan819

Did they force the director to also take down the copy that was being distributed on the Internet ?

If not, I dont see any harm in allowing it to be available on the Internet AND allowing for Netflix streaming. Why not allow for better viewership via Netflix distribution and also give users whom dont want to support DRM an option to download it on the Internet ?

Karva

I wanted to watch this and I didn't know I could download it for free. Thanks for the heads up.

mndtrp

She sounds condescending with her "discover the rest of the internet" comment. It's too bad its not on Netflix, because I doubt I will hunt it down somewhere else to watch on my computer.

mumsp

@Shetann819, that's exactly what I'm wondering. I think Mr. Nethead may have nailed it. That would be the only explanation why she would decline. Or maybe Netflix wanted her to stop distributing for free in exchange for purchasing the rights. If not, why would she decline? I'm not a fan of DRM on purchased media, digital or otherwise. If I'm willing to purchase it, I should be able to what I wish with the media.

Netflix streaming is different. As mentioned earlier, Netflix is streaming is effectively a rental. I have no problems with strict copyright protections on 'rentals' and I can't see why this woman is making a stand over it as it's meant as a protection for her intellectual property. I understand that she's distributing it for free. Does she really expect Netflix to change their business model for her and a fringe group of independents that are distributing for free?

John

I admire what Nina Paley is doing, giving away her movie for free. It's a very generous thing to do, and it might even help her gain more recognition as an artist, because I'll bet there are a fair number of folks like me who might not have otherwise noticed her movie, who went over to her site and downloaded it. I don't pirate and I don't have much income, so I was excited at the opportunity to snare a legal free movie without any DRM that is mine to keep.

Having said all that, I don't have any issues with Netflix over putting DRM in their rentals. I am uncomfortable with DRM in general, but it doesn't really bother me when it's used in media that is sold as and priced as a rental. I fully realize when I stream via Netflix, I am renting the movies, not buying them, and the cost is consistent with that.

That actually might be the only type of circumstance where I am comfortable with DRM -- to maintain a rental model. If I buy something, I expect to be able to make backup copies and play it on anything I want to play it on in perpetuity, but if I rent something, it's reasonable that it have certain restrictions. In fact, DRM in rentals might be a necessity if we want to have low-cost rentals at all -- otherwise they'd just have to sell us everything, and those of us who can't afford to buy a lot would be out of luck.

It's DRM imbedded into things that the customer is supposed to *own* that is the problem, because it restricts our ownership rights and turns something we paid to own into a rental. DRM in a rental makes it, well, a rental, and that's pretty reasonable to my way of thinking.

byteme

"While some call for a boycott of Netflix, it's really the studios that are forcing Netflix to use DRM. It would be a lot easier for Netflix to stream movies without DRM --"

This is essentially the same argument that Apple made when some indie artists wanted to make their songs available on iTunes sans DRM..."Sorry. The labels are making us use DRM. We can't make exceptions." But, we all know they could have. And in short order they went from all DRM, to offering selected songs without to essentially having their entire catalog available DRM-free.

Hopefully Netflix will take a moment to ponder the fact that it probably wouldn't be too hard to make a software adjustment to allow selected media to play without DRM and adding some low cost and/or free selection to their streaming catalog would benefit everyone.

Tester

@Jesus from Venus:

"Its not really the greed of the studios, but the greed of the people that feel they don't need to pay for some else's hard work."

What are you talking about? DRM has not stopped piracy!

I guess you don't think it was greed that made Sony decide to put a root-kit on people's computers. I guess you don't think it's greed to want Homeland Security to handle piracy. But you obviously feel it's alright for those same companies to run roughshod over everything and everyone. I honestly believe you're a stooge from either Sony or one of the other companies.

"The studios are out to make money, they are a business, they sell entertainment. I guess I am greedy for going to work every day, for a paycheck, rather then doing it for free."

Who said anything about free?

"Get out of your moms basement and get a job."

Since there are only two people who posted before you, you must be speaking to one, or both, of us. I suggest you get your head out of the sand and then take your blinders off.

Neither of us said a damned thing about wanting not wanting to pay for something nor did we say we condone piracy.

You're either delusional, on drugs, or both.

Btw Jesus from Venus, I have one more thing to say to you...

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT I'M MAKING COPIES OF THE MEDIA I PURCHASE, FUCKING DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

Tester

@Sock Puppet:

Let me start by saying I'm sorry to you if you feel I overstepped my bounds by including you in my post to Jesus from Venus.

With that out of the way;

"Unfortunately its that very mentality that made the studios begin using DRM"

I don't believe that is the reason because it has not stopped piracy and while it may have stopped the general public from "making a copy for a friend" it did not stop the friend from downloading his or her own copy.

The real reason, as far as I am concerned, DRM is being used by the studios is they believe since the average person cannot make a copy of what they purchased they will need to buy another copy if the first one is damaged. That would generate additional revenue. That hasn't gone as planned for the studios.

"...because when you "Purchase" the media (actually pay for a copy) then its yours to do with what you choose."

I completely concur with how you feel but explain that to the studios.

They had laws written for them that say if you do anything to circumvent the DRM, even on a copy you actually pay for, you've broken the law. WHAT BULLSHIT!

"But streaming media is different (at least from Netflix) you are not "Purchasing" a copy of what you stream."

My only problem with the DRM Netflix is using is that it's the supposedly same company and same DRM that has caused many problems with Silverlight.

things

@ tester

settle down man...goodness! For years we've managed some good discussions here without freaking out.

Tester

@mumsp:

"Does she really expect Netflix to change their business model for her and a fringe group of independents that are distributing for free?"

No she doesn't. That's why she turned down the offer.

Tester

@things:

"settle down man"

Why do I need to "settle down"? Other than the one thing I "yelled" at Jesus of Venus I don't see where I need to settle down.

Do you think it's ok for him to insinuate that I, or Sock Puppet, want something for nothing? Do you also condone the "moms basement" comment?

If Jesus of Venus has the right to make his comments I have the same right to respond to them.

"For years we've managed some good discussions here without freaking out."

I don't know how many years you've been here but I've been here for many years, initially under a different name. I've seen several changes with this site and I've seen people come and go and also be banned.

Do you consider it "freaking out" because I tell someone that if he doesn't like what I'm doing to do something about it? If that's not it please tell me where, in this thread, I've freaked out.

things

@ tester

Have a good day! : )

CJ

Without getting into the DRM argument, what I find interesting is the terms of the offer - 12 months license fee for XX bucks. The "term" is my big problem with IW. It's a "here today, gone tomorrow" type service, usually with little notice to the customer. This is unlike the DVD rental service, where Netflix will keep copies available until all copies are worn out, been broken, or have been stolen, which can take many years.

As for Nina Paley, she must know that IW doesn't have a non-DRM option, unlike DVDs, where frequently the DVD doesn't have any DRM at all. So her position is laudable, but kind of pointless. Unlike copying DVDs, which is pretty mainstream, stealing IW streams is way underground (but I'd bet a market will develop).

RowdyReptile

CJ,
Just a quick note that http://feedfliks.com tells you when IW movies will expire, though I don't know why Netflix itself doesn't.

mumsp

Netflix will tell you if a title is expiring in the next month. It's not hard to imagine why they wouldn't advertise expiration dates beyond that timeframe.

Tester

@things:

"Have a good day!"

You as well.

While you don't owe me any explanation I would appreciate why you said I was freaking out.

S

@CJ:

Netflix lets you know when IW movies are expiring. You can either click on the picture of the movie, or you can add the item to your queue. If the item is about to be removed, it'll be listed under the "notes" column.

Or you can certainly use Feedflix!

Satorical

I interviewed Ms. Paley at her home about 18 months ago regarding Sita's marketing and her eventual distribution plans. I can tell you that she's not a rich woman, so the fact that she turned down Netflix Instant Watching was not out of largesse or just because she could. It was a matter of principle.

As for the fellow who said he probably wouldn't watch her movie because it's not available on Instant Watching, I'll do the work for you. Unless you're philosophically opposed to clicking links, you can watch it for free here:

http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/watch.html

tiffany1837co

The studios are out to make money, they are a business, they sell entertainment. I guess I am greedy for going to work every day, for a paycheck, rather then doing it for free.

Get out of your moms basement and get a job.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Sponsors

Third-Party Netflix Sites