Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 256 posts

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#171

Post by scarface74 »

shmerl wrote: post #154
scarface74 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have 700 songs in my various Spotify playlists and growing. Back in the day I would have had to pay $700 for my songs. Now so pay $10 a month. I pay $10.99 for Netflix. That doesn’t pay for one movie, let alone a dvd box set.

I don't mind paying to creators for the music I'm listening to. Didn't you yourself say that it costs money to make?

They are getting paid. I've never suggested pirating media. The streaming media companyed pay the creators. Netflix alone pays billions per year for Netflix.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#172

Post by scarface74 »

mmt wrote: post #159
jasonjayr wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and children + discs often ends poorly.

I can't imagine buying a disc and not immediately ripping and trans-coding it, though I was assuming buying some cheaper, downloadable content in the first place.

And then when you rip it, you have to go through the trouble of either setting up a Plex Server to stream the content (which I've done) or putting it on each device.

Just another FYI: If you buy DRMd movies by Disney or three of the other four major movie studios, from either iTunes, Vudu, Google Play or Amazon and link your accounts with Movies Anywhere, they will show up as purchased movies in your other libraries as if you purchased them from the other services.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#173

Post by scarface74 »

axaxs wrote: post #76
MisterTea wrote: post #3

These companies are obsessed with fragmenting the market for the sake of owning content from production to delivery. I have bad news for them: you're going to lose. People don't want to go back to paying $100/month for a dozen streaming "channels" with one or two good shows and a the same crap the rest of the other "channels" have. We want an on-demand nexus. A single hub. Just the other day I had the urge to watch g…

Agreed. TV for me is a nicety, I enjoy it from time to time. I'm already a bit putoff from having both Netflix and Hulu, forgetting which show is on which, two apps, etc. I have a feeling we're heading towards each player making their own ecosystem, apps, monthly charges. If/when that happens, I'll either not watch TV at all, or use the 'free' options widely available. I want to give them money, but not if it makes m…

Apple has been selling TV shows by the episode since 2005.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#174

Post by cam_l »

rayiner wrote: post #49
sosborn wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Off to a torrent site or asking around to see if someone has rips or a box set. The other option is to just not watch it.

The down voting you’re getting is emblematic of the entitlement mentality among tech folks when it comes to content. There is no right to consume entertainment someone else produced for free. If you don’t like the terms on which they’re selling the fruits of their labor, don’t buy it.

Sure, if i don't like the terms of distribution I don't get the privilege to have it. If society doesn't like the terms, the company doesn't retain the privilege to sell it.

Plenty of people do work which is not properly compensated. I don't get to set the terms of the sale of my intellectual property, as I work in an industry where this has little worth.. and I am an employee.

This is all about power. The power to set prices, the power to use propaganda to change peoples morals, the power to change the law to criminalise minor contract infringements. And as such I get to say, whenever and wherever i can get away with it, fuck their power.

For the very, very minimal amount that's about the sale of the fruits of labour of the creatives and workers producing this entertainment.. Well I wish there was an easier way to compensate them that didn't involve also paying off the distributors.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#175

Post by shmerl »

scarface74 wrote: post #171
shmerl wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind paying to creators for the music I'm listening to. Didn't you yourself say that it costs money to make?

They are getting paid. I've never suggested pirating media. The streaming media companyed pay the creators. Netflix alone pays billions per year for Netflix.

So do DRM-free stores like Bandcamp.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#176

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

geodel wrote: post #166
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think about a situation in which a consumer would be happy to pay full price to watch content, but they are prevented entirely by a service provider? For example, suppose where you live there is a monopoly ISP-cable conglomerate, you cannot afford to move away, and you are literally unable to consume from any other ISP / cable level provider. For some content, like watching European soccer in the US, this…

> Telling the consumer to just not watch seems morally hollow in that specific case Seems like big word for something which is not food, water, life saving drug or some such. Now people are free to consider entertainment as basic human right. But similarly other powerful people/institution feel free to take away more fundamental things from helpless people. From where I am, government is more than happy to offer free…

So because information content is not the same as food, it’s ok for corporations to be artificially advantaged and consumers to be artificially disadvantaged? And consumers aren’t allowed to consider the moral implications of the arrangement? Or what it incentivizes companies to do? Or whether their ability to consume content is limited by regulatory capture?

I am not convinced by your reply because it tries to flip it around and blame the consumer (the victim of regulatory capture and ISP monopolies or oligopolies) just because the thing they are being deprived of “is not food.”

No part of this is related to whether something is a human right — that’s completely unrelated.

The problem is why should I, as a consumer, agree to accept a worse life in any way, even a minor way based on what is convenient for a corporation acting to ensure regulatory capture and ensure monopolistic or oligopolistic conditions within which it can unilaterally control what a consumer is allowed to consume.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#177

Post by tomjen3 »

bertjk wrote: post #57
drngdds wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There could be many such hubs. They don't have to control the content, just buy the (non-exclusive) right to distribute it.

And how would you suggest that these many hubs differentiate themselves to compete for your business? If your answer is "they can compete on price," then I think you've just answered the question of why they don't want to do it that way.

Useability. Netflix is so much better at their apps and website than anybody else I have seen.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#178

Post by adjkant »

bookbinder wrote: post #150
MisterTea wrote: post #3

These companies are obsessed with fragmenting the market for the sake of owning content from production to delivery. I have bad news for them: you're going to lose. People don't want to go back to paying $100/month for a dozen streaming "channels" with one or two good shows and a the same crap the rest of the other "channels" have. We want an on-demand nexus. A single hub. Just the other day I had the urge to watch g…

People don't want to pay $100 a month for cable TV either, but they did it anyway (for decades) and continue to do so. Now we're being asked to buy a bunch of streaming services and we'll bitch and moan, but ultimately we'll pay because every major platform will have at least one show that justifies their existence. I associate CBS with bland procedural crime dramas and awful three-camera sitcoms. CBS All Access woul…

> continue to do so

What are the numbers on that? My impression was that cable is declining fast.

Re: Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox

#179

Post by rileyphone »

MisterTea wrote: post #3

These companies are obsessed with fragmenting the market for the sake of owning content from production to delivery. I have bad news for them: you're going to lose. People don't want to go back to paying $100/month for a dozen streaming "channels" with one or two good shows and a the same crap the rest of the other "channels" have. We want an on-demand nexus. A single hub. Just the other day I had the urge to watch g…

The fact is the reason anyone pays for content online is because the cost to access it is less than the cost to download and manage it as well as the possible cost of acquiring it is less than the cost of accessing it, which goes down the more content can be accessed. Every monthly subscription has an additional cost of maintaining beyond it's numenary value which quickly bring them above just torrenting the content. Ultimately the content is just constant information, which is pretty cheap on the internet.
Post reply on HN