51–60 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're willing to pay that much, sounds like you just need to grab a $20/month server in the US and use it as a VPN endpoint, then use whatever services in the US that you like.
For Netflix, he'd also need a US credit card.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole system makes eminent sense. Content that has been permitted by the owner is released in your country, when the owner permits. If you are resort to piracy because of this, you are still stealing.
You are not stealing, you are making illegal copies.
Stealing something (or obtaining it illegally) just because someone doesn't want to sell it to you (or give it to you for free) is still stealing (or obtaining it illegally), regardless of the fact that you want it so bad.
As long as you own something, you have the right to choose if you want to sell it to some country, give it for free or do whatever else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why couldn't the BBC charge international viewers directly? $(License_fee/12) per month, say.
Technically they could, but it would mean creating and managing a new license fee system. Right now there's no enforcement of the license fee, just the knowledge that, to watch live broadcasts (either on TV or online) you must have a license, and if a TV license inspector catches you, you'll be in trouble.
I think the BBC must have some form of tie-in with the ISPs as I know a number of people that have had this happen to them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technically they could, but it would mean creating and managing a new license fee system. Right now there's no enforcement of the license fee, just the knowledge that, to watch live broadcasts (either on TV or online) you must have a license, and if a TV license inspector catches you, you'll be in trouble.
With the iPlayer service, if you watch any of the live-streaming channels and you don't have a TV License you will eventually get a letter informing you that you need to pay the license fee. Fail to obtain the TV License after that point and you are subject to the normal fines. I think the BBC must have some form of tie-in with the ISPs as I know a number of people that have had this happen to them.
And if I watched to avoid it, I could always use something like www.tvcatchup.com to watch the live content, and just go onto the iPlayer for VOD content (for which you don't need a license).
I wonder - traditionally a TV license is per household, not per person, meaning that if I want to watch on a TV in a friend's house, they need to have a license, not me. With internet access, how does that work. For example, say they were able to prove I had been watching iPlayer live streams in my house, what if it was a friend watching on their laptop, and they own a license? What if you're watching from a public WiFi or a 3G connection on a train? The "license for the house" doesn't quite translate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was really annoying to me even as an American as well (though I currently live in Denmark). When I embed Youtube videos in things like blog posts, I want to know that all my readers can view them, not just me , but Youtube won't tell me which videos are region-restricted. I ended up having to use a proxy in another country to test for myself, so I could avoid unknowingly embedding US-only videos.
I'm genuinely curious why they would refuse to make that information easily accessible. Thoughts?
Wait. This is YCombinator right? Why on earth does no-one create a startup to make buying digital copies easier wherever you live? Why is that so hard?
As an English speaker in Germany I was particularly interested in using things like iTunes (which is available here) to access TV. What do you know, it is exclusively German language content. And it is also only released when it airs in Germany rather than when it first airs in the US or the UK. Where is the logic there? If I wanted to get German language TV when it airs on TV, I would just watch TV. The whole system…
The whole system makes eminent sense. Content that has been permitted by the owner is released in your country, when the owner permits. If you are resort to piracy because of this, you are still stealing.
Laws should be the strictest manifestation of societies expectations. This is clearly not the case here, most people consider this kind of privacy to be about as bad as crossing the street at a red light.
As long as expectations don't change and they clearly won't, people will continue to resort to piracy as long as it is the most convenient way to fulfill their needs.
If people could easily buy music in a lossless format and videos without artificial geographical restrictions at a reasonable price, I seriously doubt that piracy would still be such a "serious" problem.
I'm not a total fanatic, I have no problem with DRM systems if they make sense for e.g. renting movies. I buy all my games via Steam which I consider an awesome platform. However piracy is still the most convenient way to get music/videos quickly in (most of) Europe and it seems very clear who is to blame for that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not stealing, you are making illegal copies.
Not in Germany. Here, we make "copies for personal use", which is not illegal. Publishing (seeding) is illegal, though.