Live data from Hacker News

Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

techdirt.com

551–556 of 556 posts

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#551
I didn't know [we] PC and VPS users went anywhere, if anything the already established and really skilled release groups were solidified while others were extricated, or in some cases and very unfortunate, immured. I would make a partially substantiated and educated guess that a driving force in any potential, acute, theoretical or otherwise increase in freedom of information; The renaissance of the information era, our time, is suddenly presented with a market filled with VPN providers, most of them blatantly crude in their pitch. With promises of hosting end-points in nations unburdened by draconian laws, well outside any jurisdiction legally obligated to abide by federational - european, american or otherwise - demands or requests of private information. They also always make it a big deal to point out that they don't even generate logs of user activities. The latter sounding unlikely since it's crucial for any service providers survival and growth as well as preserving the capability to offer an equally distributed quality of service.

Piracy is not a fitting name. There's no rape, murder, malintent or even direct physical, psykological or directly provable damages made by sharing information. The argument that one album downloaded automatically equals the loss of one sell. That is similar to comparing bank-robbers to successful hedge fund managers because they aspire to collect currency or assets in large numbers. Wait.. That actually is comparable.. Well, I digress.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#552

Germans/Europeans might feel with me: I had the pleasure of using Sky to watch Game of Thrones and a few movies and it was the most abysmal experience I have ever had. Your account is an email combined with a 4-digit NUMERIC-ONLY (!) "password" and once you are hyper-securely logged in the amount of usability pain a single piece of software can cause will immediately become apparent. How can anything paid by a big co…

Sky used to have a web client. Now you have to use their apps, even on the desktop, which come with a suite of monitoring services (Cisco Videoguard) to prevent people from streaming their content. On my Mac Mini the video player takes up easily 80-100% of the 6-core/12-threads i7. It's almost unwatchable. Unfortuantely it's a requirement if you're into german soccer.

Not really in the spin, but what about DAZN?

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sky used to have a web client. Now you have to use their apps, even on the desktop, which come with a suite of monitoring services (Cisco Videoguard) to prevent people from streaming their content. On my Mac Mini the video player takes up easily 80-100% of the 6-core/12-threads i7. It's almost unwatchable. Unfortuantely it's a requirement if you're into german soccer.

Not really in the spin, but what about DAZN?

Love it. Great content, good streaming quality, fair price. Unfortuantely they lost the Premier League rights to Sky this season which is fine whenever I turn on my projector for the big picture - after all Sky's satellite video quality obviously is superior to a stream, but casual watching at the desk is rendered almost unbearable due to Sky's abysmal apps and streaming technology. In that regard DAZN is far superior.

Anyway, when it comes to content spanish La Liga as well as other top european soccer leagues make up for the loss of the Premier League. However as someone who enjoys watching soccer I still need both, DAZN and Sky, since there's hardly any overlap in their content and rights.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#554
post #44
post #14

No surprise. Even we (HN) predicted this the moment the first content company withdrew their content from Netflix. Two reasons: 1. People only have so much money. 2. When people compare it to what they used to payit seems unfair. People complain when gas prices increases by a few percent, no wonder they complain when they suddenly have to pay twice or even three times for the same content they used to pay one low mon…

Pay per view has the drawback of requiring too many decisions, leading to decision fatigue. Subscribing to a service for $20/mo is a one time decision, whereas figuring out if the show you're about to watch is worth $0.30 gets tiring really quickly. Monthly credits works a bit better, but the all you can eat model completely avoids this.

>Subscribing to a service for $20/mo is a one time decision, whereas figuring out if the show you're about to watch is worth $0.30 gets tiring really quickly.

"figuring out if the show you're about to watch is worth $0.30 gets tiring really quickly." This is the biggest problem in the industry that no one wants to talk about. Valuing content aka how much is x show worth. The monthly premiums actually kill or put as strong fixed upper bound on what the content is actually worth.

It also brings up another argument on whether or not valuing content ( how much is x show worth) is even worth talking about and talking about how you got your show on x platform because that means 100x more people will see your stuff vs if you are not on x platform.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#555
post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, rent seeking by creating original content. A nefarious twist on the concept of rent seeking.

I'm not sure if you're trying to be sarcastic, but yes, rent seeking is different from selling a product. In this case, the copyright holders would rather you pay for _temporary access_ to their libraries, rather than actual ownership -- a tradeoff that is (somewhat sadly) acceptable to many when it's a single, cheap subscription, no fuzz, and critically, no ads.

The definition of rent seeking is creating nothing of value. They are producing original content. You can pay more to buy the DVD or Blu-ray if you want to own the content outright.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#556
post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? Not everyone in the US is starved for upstream. Not everyone is going to lose their mind if their friend's Plex doesn't have Five 9s availability -- and let's be real, with all the things that can and do go wrong between a user and a service on the Internet, Three 9s is optimistic for anything. And whose subscription service has Fresh Prince of Bel-Air? Saved by the Bell? Countless other shows and movies that are…

I have gigabit up and down via AT&T, most Americans get their internet via their cable company - cable companies always have crappy upload bandwidth around 30Mbps. People want a reliable service and will pay for it. I have no idea why this concept is forum. Hulu and Netflix publish their numbers every quarter and about 60% of households have Amazon Prime Video ( https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amazon-prime-members-59-…

> values convenience over price

That's the thing. Needing more subscriptions to access the content everyone in a household wants to view is going to lower convenience and raise the (collective) price. Disney+, next is Peacock, and who knows what's next after that.

Nobody's suggesting a mass piracy uprising. But more people will look in that direction and decide that piracy can substitute for another subscription or replace all of them.

Running my own Plex server costs substantially more than subscribing to the major streaming services. I'm paying for the convenience -- it pretty much runs itself, new content appears "by magic" (Radarr/Sonarr/Trakt lists), content never goes away, I have content that no streaming subscription offers, and there's only one place to look for content.

Post reply on HN