91–100 of 267 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except for how they actively encouraged it for years.
That does not follow. Now, that is separate from the argument that because they didn't strictly enforce their ToS, that people now feel entitled to something and may drive some people away from the service.
They definitely did the latter.
Remember when their marketing gimmick was "Love is sharing your password"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, same. Their plans included a number of active screens/supported devices a at a time. It seems pretty ridiculous to charge for the number of screens but then put restrictions on where those screens are.
Yep, paying $20/mo specifically to be able to play on 3 devices. If they stop allowing sharing, there is little to no value in that plan for me anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably will impact folks that travel and want to watch while away from home. Specifically, those where their family did not travel with them. That said, probably easy enough to deal with that, as I'm guessing most of them take a common device with them? Not sure. But, yeah, your example is pretty much how I view this. Was nice for a few cases where it was working. But hardly earth shattering.
I don't know anything about Netflix's system, but similar-seeming anti-fraud systems just fingerprint devices. Chances are, if you normally watch from your laptop or iPad and travel a lot, you're not going to notice any changes.
That said, with how many folks leave their contacts in rental cars, I wouldn't be too shocked to know folks try to login at other locations. I imagine that would be a popular integration with hotel booking systems. Basically, make it so your netflix is attached to the hotel tv when you get there.
My gut is that hotels also don't want that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That does not follow. Now, that is separate from the argument that because they didn't strictly enforce their ToS, that people now feel entitled to something and may drive some people away from the service.
There's a real difference between "didn't strictly enforce their terms of service" and "actively encouraged a behavior". They definitely did the latter.
What if you own, for example, a lake house? No Netflix for the same family using a different house on occasion?
My Mom lives on the West Coast while we live on the East. She's almost 70 and on a fixed income, so I pay for Netflix access for all of us and I'm happy to do so. However, if they block her access I can't see any reason to keep my 4k plan. I can get anything we want on a Plex server and give her whatever she wants to watch that way. I was already on the fence with the lack of content on Netflix, but this may just be…
So your thesis is that piracy is cheaper. Ok thanks.
Once upon a time, Netflix itself was considered the case in point! Then video streaming splintered into a dozen services and now Netflix has decided to make things even more complicated. People don't learn, I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That does not follow. Now, that is separate from the argument that because they didn't strictly enforce their ToS, that people now feel entitled to something and may drive some people away from the service.
There's a real difference between "didn't strictly enforce their terms of service" and "actively encouraged a behavior". They definitely did the latter.
What if you own, for example, a lake house? No Netflix for the same family using a different house on occasion?
> If you are traveling or live between different places, you can continue to enjoy Netflix.
> If you are away from your primary location for an extended period of time, your device may be blocked from watching Netflix. You can request a temporary access code to continue watching.
Vague answer. It's ok until it's not ok. How long is an "for an extended period of time"? A month? a couple of months?