  Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 |
Gbcue
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 2:49 pm
Need More $We need more deep-pockets fighting other deep-pockets. It's the only way the lowly consumer can win!
When all internet is capped in your area, how competitive is that? | |
|
 | | |
Re: Need More $All of the deep-pockets are aligned against Netflix's shallow ones. Netflix should be grateful that it is allowed to rent DVDs. | |
|
| | | |
talz13
Member
2011-Jul-8 3:38 pm
Re: Need More $said by Wilsdom:All of the deep-pockets are aligned against Netflix's shallow ones. Netflix should be grateful that it is allowed to rent DVDs.
That's another BS thing... Why should the **AA be able to tell them what to do with their DVDs? They bought them. They're not making public performances out of them. They own them. Why can they tell netflix that they have to wait 90 days for new releases, when netflix could just send some people down to the nearest costco and pick up a bunch of copies to add to their rotation? | |
|
| | |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD |
pnh102
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 4:32 pm
Re: Need More $said by talz13:That's another BS thing... Why should the **AA be able to tell them what to do with their DVDs? They bought them. They're not making public performances out of them. They own them. Why can they tell netflix that they have to wait 90 days for new releases, when netflix could just send some people down to the nearest costco and pick up a bunch of copies to add to their rotation? The DVDs you buy at the retail level are most likely not licensed for any commercial use, including rentals. My guess is that NetFlix has to enter into special legal arrangements with the movie studios to get the rights needed to rent out DVDs. | |
|
| | | | | |
gettagrip
Anon
2011-Jul-9 10:19 am
Re: Need More $said by pnh102:The DVDs you buy at the retail level are most likely not licensed for any commercial use, including rentals. My guess is that NetFlix has to enter into special legal arrangements with the movie studios to get the rights needed to rent out DVDs.
There is no "license" required for renting DVDs and BDs. The First Sale Doctrine allows that you can do anything with the items that you purchased, including renting them out to others. The only reason Netflix agrees to follow the movie studios' rules is so that they will be allowed to purchase discs directly from them at a substantially discounted rate from what you and I would pay for a single disc at a store. | |
|
| | | | | | |
Re: Need More $said by gettagrip :There is no "license" required for renting DVDs and BDs. The First Sale Doctrine allows that you can do anything with the items that you purchased, including renting them out to others.
The only reason Netflix agrees to follow the movie studios' rules is so that they will be allowed to purchase discs directly from them at a substantially discounted rate from what you and I would pay for a single disc at a store.
You are wrong on both points. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
Re: Need More $You realize you can't just say 'You are wrong' without providing proof, right? If you do, it makes you look like an ignorant, opinionated douchebag. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
Re: Need More $said by TheRogueX:You realize you can't just say 'You are wrong' without providing proof, right? If you do, it makes you look like an ignorant, opinionated douchebag.
Pop in a DVD, read the FBI warning. Netflix has agreements with the studios so they can stream, not just to get the discs at a discount. But thank you for the comment. Next time I'll actually post something like this so as to not look like an ignorant, opinionated douchebag. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Re: Need More $That's great, but the FBI warning doesn't, in fact, prevent the rental of DVDs or BDs, which is what was being referenced... not streaming. Streaming is indeed another matter.
Also, please remember that in a debate or argument, it is the onus of the accuser to provide proof.. it's not our job to go look up proof. So if you say 'you are wrong' you are required to back up your statement or look like a fool. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Re: Need More $said by TheRogueX:Also, please remember that in a debate or argument, it is the onus of the accuser to provide proof.. it's not our job to go look up proof. So if you say 'you are wrong' you are required to back up your statement or look like a fool.
Actually I barely cared enough about the subject to google it for you. I'm certainly not putting any further effort into this. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
to TheRogueX
the FBI may not have any power to control this but the MPAA does and Netflix is required to pay for those movies that they rent. Blockbuster is/was required to do the same. And your local mom and pop rental house is required to do the same.
And there is no such thing as proof on here unless it comes from Google and Wiki (or a previous blog entry from a "writer". And if you want it; maybe you should learn that the Studio's pay the MPAA to represent them in court and battle their legal battles so they don't have to. the same with the RIAA and the other likes of those companies. Maybe you also should visit your state's website on starting a business and you'll find the same documents telling you on who you need to contact to protect yourself. After all those are all free legal documents the gov't provides. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
to Camelot One
said by Camelot One:Pop in a DVD, read the FBI warning.
Netflix has agreements with the studios so they can stream, not just to get the discs at a discount.
But thank you for the comment. Next time I'll actually post something like this so as to not look like an ignorant, opinionated douchebag.
It's true that there is a license required to stream movies, but that is because the law considers streaming to be a public performance. Also, if you read the FBI warning, it is fairly disingenuous as it highlights the worst-case scenario penalties for CRIMINAL copyright infringement. In order to qualify for that, you would need to make large numbers of copies of DVDs and sell them. Though it does mention distribution, renting a DVD is not considered to be distribution according to the law (see the EFF link in my other reply.) The law does not consider rentals to be a public performance or copyright infringement, thus they are allowed under the First Sale Doctrine. Please see the links in my other reply. It is unfortunate that there is so much FUD and misinformation floating around out there. It just confuses people. I suggest you ask the nice folks at the EFF and they will provide the facts. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | |
to Wilsdom
said by Wilsdom:All of the deep-pockets are aligned against Netflix's shallow ones. Netflix should be grateful that it is allowed to rent DVDs.
Warning - KoolAid drinker detected! | |
|
| | | | |
Re: Need More $and that's why Netflix has to wait 28days before actually being able to rent a title. Maybe the Studios need to extend that time frame to about 45 days out? I'm sure Netflix will do anything else but listen or not rent that title. | |
|
| | |
to Gbcue
said by Gbcue:We need more deep-pockets fighting other deep-pockets. It's the only way the lowly consumer can win!
said by Netflix :The marginal cost of providing an extra gigabyte of data—enough to deliver one episode of "30 Rock" from Netflix It takes a gigabyte to stream 1 episode of a 30 minute show? If so, it's not more money fighting money that we need. Its compression thats worth a damn! | |
|
| |  r81984Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX ·AT&T U-Verse
|
r81984
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 7:54 pm
Re: Need More $Bandwidth is dirt cheap, it make sense to only charge for fix costs and not usage by the byte. Compression is irrelvant, also FYI they are already heavily compressed.
Remember netflix pays for their bandwidth and the customer pays for their bandwidth.
Bandwidth is so cheap neflix can be very profitable selling you unlimited downloads for $7.99 a month which includes paying the licenses fees for the downloads, servers, a work staff, and then paying for the bandwidth.
It seems like netflix is getting a much better price on bandwidth then us consumers that are stuck with monopolies and have no internet choices. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: Need More $said by r81984:Bandwidth is dirt cheap, it make sense to only charge for fix costs and not usage by the byte. Compression is irrelvant, also FYI they are already heavily compressed.
You misunderstood my point. The ISP's like to roll out talking heads that have no idea what they are talking about, using numbers pulled out of the sky. So Hyman stating a streamed 30 minute TV show (which is what, 21 minutes without commercials) would eat up a Gigabyte - just seems sloppy. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: Need More $If you have no idea how video bitrates, compression, and bandwidth work you should refrain from commenting on news stories involving them. TIA | |
|
| | | | | | |
Re: Need More $said by 45612019:If you have no idea how video bitrates, compression, and bandwidth work you should refrain from commenting on news stories involving them. TIA
Was your comment actually directed at me, or did you click the wrong reply button? | |
|
| | | | | | | |
Re: Need More $Yes it was. You appear to be under the impression that a 22 minute show would not work out to being a gigabyte in size. That is incorrect.
If a high definition episode of a 22 minute show DOESN'T work out to be at least 1 GB in size; even using the H.264 codec, that means it's been over-compressed and won't even be close to looking as good as the source material. And that's only 720p... 1080p requires a bitrate of at least 12 Mbps utilizing the H.264 codec before it starts approaching "good quality" territory. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
Re: Need More $An episode of 30 Rock, at 720p, should use no more than 560Mb. I guess if you are adding up the bandwidth both ways, you could call it a Gb. But the article and comment were directed just at the end user's ISP restrictions.
Netflix doesn't offer it in 1080p. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
Mrsmartarse to 45612019
Anon
2011-Jul-12 4:01 am
to 45612019
Not sure what your working with but I get excellent "recording" at 9.6 Mbps using H264 with little to zero macro-blocking in low-light, fast action scenes.You probably know, avchd and h264 codec struggle in low light, especially with lower bitrates, but it is the most efficient we have today when done right. I have encoded for years , on the old pc that's how long it took for one. Thank the the lord for transmuxing and mkv's. Quick and easy work now. | |
|
| | | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
to Camelot One
said by Camelot One:So Hyman stating a streamed 30 minute TV show (which is what, 21 minutes without commercials) would eat up a Gigabyte - just seems sloppy.
I guess, depends on if it's HD or not, there are episodes of some shows like Game of Thrones that are 1.5GB's just for 720p content, and I think without commercials is about 45 minutes long, so taking half of that out you could get around 750MB for 1 show, which is pretty close to 1GB, and I think it was more of an exaggeration so it wasn't so confusing for consumers. But then again maybe so it's not confusing for ISP's too, since they can't seem to realize 1GB is 1024MB's and not 1000MB's..... Edit: I think his point was that watching one show could make you hit your cap and make you pay extra, just saying... Matt | |
|
| | | | |
to r81984
bandwidth may be "dirt cheap" but the hardware and all of the staff that takes to fix that network you use; is NOT dirt cheap. Also there is NO proof on what anyone is paying and that it's going down!
Maybe NF should start teaming up with the last mile owners and put their Servers farther into the network And NF is only using L3- when L3 files for bankruptcy protection NF won't be getting that cheap bandwidth- we already seen that they took a HUGE hit when Comcast noticed all that extra bandwidth being sent to their network and taking up their resources did. L3 got to pay a larger bill and NF was affected by it.
And you have a choice for Internet. There is NO such thing as a monopoly any longer. You have Cable, Telco, 3G and 4g, Wireless from a local provider, 3rd party DSL (if available still), HughesNet and WildBlue and many others. Options are there. It's when you have NO option is that company called a monopoly and then its up to the Feds to decide how much of one they are. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: Need More $Your American ISP fellating is pitiful. Thread after thread, I see you spreading propaganda and attempts at justifying their delivery of subpar service for high prices.
Which one are you working for? Comcap? Time Warner? AT&T? If I had to guess, I'd go with Comcap. | |
|
| | | | | | |
Re: Need More $i actually work for the LEGO Group. and own my own business. And if you want change- maybe you should be the one that steps up and changes it. Instead you bitch about it and hope it will change for what you want; maybe you should wake up and see that it won't change for what you want until YOU change it. Otherwise live with what you're dealt.
And Comcrap? you show you true age eh? And also if they were really crap they wouldn't be making the money they do. Talk about someone being a little jealous eh? | |
|
| | | | | | r81984Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX ·AT&T U-Verse
|
r81984
Premium Member
2011-Jul-10 10:59 pm
Re: Need More $said by hottboiinnc4:i actually work for the LEGO Group. and own my own business. And if you want change- maybe you should be the one that steps up and changes it. Instead you bitch about it and hope it will change for what you want; maybe you should wake up and see that it won't change for what you want until YOU change it. Otherwise live with what you're dealt.
And Comcrap? you show you true age eh? And also if they were really crap they wouldn't be making the money they do. Talk about someone being a little jealous eh?
So even though Lego already pays for their website's internet connection should comcast, ATT, etc be able to charge Lego Group extra when comcast, att, etc. customers go to lego.com to play the free games or watch the videos??? | |
|
| | | | | | | |
to hottboiinnc4
Comcap is not good for anyone except its shareholders. You're damn right I'm jealous of their ability to make money off of idiots. Making a lot of money rarely translates to producing a quality product.
The universal theme here is that the people love crap. It is why Apple products continue to sell like hotcakes, DVDs continue to outsell Blu-rays, lossy compressed music is overtaking CDs, console gaming continues to grow and PC gaming continues to shrink, conservatives continue to get elected... quality doesn't stand a chance in this world. | |
|
| | | | r81984Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX ·AT&T U-Verse
|
to hottboiinnc4
said by hottboiinnc4:bandwidth may be "dirt cheap" but the hardware and all of the staff that takes to fix that network you use; is NOT dirt cheap. Also there is NO proof on what anyone is paying and that it's going down!
Exactly, ISPs need to charge by the fixed costs not by the byte. If they actually divided the fixed costs by all the available bandwidth and charged you by the byte they would all go under. They can't really charge you by the byte and risk that you curb your usage because they would not get enough money to pay for the network. What they are trying to do is divided the fixed costs and be profitable and then use charging by the byte to rip off customers beyond just being profitable. said by hottboiinnc4:Maybe NF should start teaming up with the last mile owners and put their Servers farther into the network And NF is only using L3- when L3 files for bankruptcy protection NF won't be getting that cheap bandwidth- we already seen that they took a HUGE hit when Comcast noticed all that extra bandwidth being sent to their network and taking up their resources did. L3 got to pay a larger bill and NF was affected by it. Why? Neflix already pays for their internet connection which covers all the costs. Customers pay for theirs which covers all the costs. No one needs to pay more for any reason including usage as all the costs are covered by each party. Also netflix does not use anyone else's network. All the customers use their ISP and netflix's ISP to download from netflix. But if an ISP offers to host netflix servers for free because it would actually save them money, then I doubt netflix would turn them down. The only reason Level 3 would become unprofitable is because companies like comcast are trying to rip them off by blocking the internet that comcast customers are paying to use. said by hottboiinnc4:And you have a choice for Internet. There is NO such thing as a monopoly any longer. You have Cable, Telco, 3G and 4g, Wireless from a local provider, 3rd party DSL (if available still), HughesNet and WildBlue and many others. Options are there. It's when you have NO option is that company called a monopoly and then its up to the Feds to decide how much of one they are.
I have no choices for internet, sorry. My current choices are ATT "capped/restricted" internet or some no name apartment complex cable "capped/restricted" internet which requires cable tv through them. I can't even get just plain "internet" without restrictions anymore, there is no option for this. If there was an unresticted internet that I could get, I would in a second. ATT used to be this provider until a few months ago. "Capped/restricted internet" is a monopoly and cannot be called "internet" | |
|
| | | | | |
to hottboiinnc4
Network equipment is dirt cheap when compared to consumer costs.
Keeping a network up and running is not rocket science, and the vast majority of the "problems" on an ISP's network are self inflicted. | |
|
| |
mail competitionsuddenly the post office option looks better and better, doesn't it?
sending 50gb over capped broadband, or $1.50 (each way) through the mail vs $10 overage? | |
|
|
••••••••••••• |
 DaarkenRara Avises
Premium Member
join:2005-01-12
Southwest LA
kudos:3 |
Daarken
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 3:17 pm
Greed ruins innovation.Every time an article of this nature comes out it makes me smile, then I stop smiling because of all the major media outlets ignore them.
Greed keeps North America low on all of the rankings for fastest and affordable internet access.
Greed allows corporations insist on keeping the profits instead of spending on network improvements and infrastructure upgrades.
Greed keeps the government from forcing an even and level playing field. | |
|
| |
Dear NetflixDear Netflix,
I eagerly await the time you become your own ISP because you will have my money immediately and then some TRUE competition will exist in this market.
(I know this is "pie in the sky" but I can dream.) | |
|
|
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• |
| |
Finally this is getting some light.I am glad netflix is bringing this whole data cap business into the light finally. There are a few of us who care and know about it here, but were simply labeled as the "data hogs" by the media and ISP's so no one will listen typically. Maybe people will notice this is real finally.
The fact that AT&T uverse TV is not included in its own cap is 100% bogus, its an IP packet, it must be counted as one. | |
|
|
••• |
cptmiles
Premium Member
join:2004-04-22
Swayzee, IN |
cptmiles
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 4:50 pm
Edge (cache) ServersI don't know where Netflix has its servers or even pretend to know how their network works, but why don't they work with the service providers to build edge routers (servers) in key areas and then keep those servers updated during off-peak hours.
Then the majority of the downloading will be done on the local network and off the backbone, which, I assume, is the issue.
I operate a small ISP and would love to be able to put a Google, Netflix, Hulu, and anything else type of server in my CO to cut down on my backbone costs. | |
|
| | |
Re: Edge (cache) Serverssaid by cptmiles:I operate a small ISP and would love to be able to put a Google, Netflix, Hulu, and anything else type of server in my CO to cut down on my backbone costs. I'm not sure how big you have to be before CDNs will want to host gear at your site it couldn't hurt to ask. Typically someone like Akami provides you with the gear. You provide rack space, power and pipe. Their gear caches content and significantly reduces your overall bandwidth utilization and performance of cached content. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Edge (cache) Serversthis is what needs to be done- if NF wants access to those customers - they should be co-locating direct within the lastmile network for that provider and into their private network. provide their own transit and BOOM! be done. customers get faster access and in turn NF will get those customers. | |
|
| |
They want to protect..their TV side - they don't want people renting from Netflix (where the cable cos get nothing) rather than paying to watch it on cable TV. Verizon will be doing the same - instead of Netflix, they want you to subscribe to their TV packages, even on FIOS. | |
|
 linicxCaveat Emptor
Premium Member
join:2002-12-03
United State ·CenturyLink
 ·DIRECTV
 ·TracFone Wireless
|
linicx
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 5:18 pm
Nothing newMy engineer friend has been saying the same thing for a long time. He dumped AT&T and U-Verse because of their silly policies that rape the public. He gets 20/20 at home in Dallas for around $30. I"m in rural Illinois. If I want 10/2 I pay $100. I don't understand why in the hell these companies think 256 up is too much bandwidth - especially since they have the ability to provide FTTH. . | |
|
 88615298
Premium Member
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness |
88615298
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 5:46 pm
Should have started complaining YEARS ago.Instead of waiting until AFTER Cocmast, Charter and at&T started capping they should have been more vocal BEFOREHAND. | |
|
ctggzg
Premium Member
join:2005-02-11
USA
kudos:2 |
ctggzg
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 8:26 pm
Hyphen"per-byte overages" | |
|
 HB61Maru Maru Mori Mori
Premium Member
join:2011-06-21
00000 |
HB61
Premium Member
2011-Jul-8 9:47 pm
Well how else is CATV going to defend their overpriced stuffCome on people. You actually expect MSOs to put out their own compelling products at a compelling price? Be reasonable here. It is much easier and certainly better for endless MSO profit to simply traffic shape or overage fee your competitors out of existence rather than actually compete against them.
Why work if you don't have to? | |
|
| |
NoLuckChuck
Anon
2011-Jul-8 9:59 pm
We beg for bytes up in CanadaLike a tamed dog or a frog with its tongue out for flys we beg for bytes from the byte eyedropper up in Canada. | |
|
 gatorkramNeed for Speed
Premium Member
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:3 |
The perfect teamGoogle, Netflix, Roku and revision3.net should all work together to smash the standard TV delivery system in this country, and around the world.
There, I said it. And... Kevin Rose you better invest...
Maybe toss in CNET too. | |
|
| | |
Re: The perfect teamyou do realize that CNet is owned by CBS right? will NEVER happen. CBS will KILL them so fast they won't know what hit them.
As for the rest of them- LMAO! They'll all end up being run out of business. Google will lose their Safe Harbor for YouTube real fast and you'll have every label, RIAA, MPAA and anyone else suing them for copy righted material posted on YouTube. | |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 |
dvd536
Premium Member
2011-Jul-9 12:54 am
Business modelYup!
specially when your biz model relies on your sub having flatrate service from their internet provider. | |
|
| |
More like Portecting the Net from Netflix.I see caps as more like protecting the physical network from Netflix.
To me The message I see form Netflix is you going to have to take my traffic; if it clogs the net then tough. | |
|
| | |
Re: More like Portecting the Net from Netflix.said by Scatcatpdx:I see caps as more like protecting the physical network from Netflix.
To me The message I see form Netflix is you going to have to take my traffic; if it clogs the net then tough.
You might want to clean your glasses because you are not "seeing" the message correctly. | |
|
| 88615298
Premium Member
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness |
to Scatcatpdx
said by Scatcatpdx:I see caps as more like protecting the physical network from Netflix.
To me The message I see form Netflix is you going to have to take my traffic; if it clogs the net then tough.
Well if it wasn't for things like Netflix I wouldn't need he 18 meg connection I pay charter $55 a month for. If all the ISPs want me to do is chek e-mail, sports scores, weather and online banking I can do that with Charter's 1 Mbps tier which is $20 a month so I guess if Charter wants $420 less per year from me then fine. In fact I don't even need that since I have a smart phone and the required data package and can do all thsoe things from that so I really don't need Charter's internet at all. So that's $660 a year less from me. Let's see how long they stay in business if even a small %( like 5% ) feel the same way. I doubt a company like Charter can afford to lose $100 mil a year in business. | |
|
| |
Bandwidth isn't an issueLike one of the previous posters said, bandwidth obviously isn't a cost issue if Netflix is able to offer their product at such a low cost. Netflix has to output just as much bandwidth as ISPs have to receive it and look at how cheap it is! Especially given that Netflix has it's fair share of fixed cost overhead as well, and yet it's still able to offer it at a very reasonable price. Now I'm well aware that ISP's need more bandwidth because of other network traffic besides Netflix, but obviously it isn't breaking the bank. If anything, an ISP's biggest expense and greatest congestion point is bandwidth at the last mile (node to premises). But that's why we pay them a monthly fee, and believe me, there is a profit margin included in that fee. The fee includes service and maintenance costs, and of course, profit. That's why this whole idea of caps doesn't make any sense other than to protect their TV revenues, or possibly a predatory move to make customers pay additional fees of pure profit, in addition to the profit already included in the monthly fee. | |
|
| |
OldCoot
Anon
2011-Jul-9 5:14 pm
Netflix caNetflix Canada sucks compared to Netflix U.S.
The "Recently Added" movies were released on DVD minimal 9 months ago! They're usually even older than that. | |
|
| | |
jasonkradiog
Anon
2011-Jul-10 3:33 pm
Re: Netflix caNetflix USA is basically the same way.
It's a fun diversion every once in a while, but no way could you replace any satellite/cable source with Netflix and get the same quality of programming. The Netflix stuff is all old/B-rate. You get what you pay for. | |
|
| | 88615298
Premium Member
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness |
88615298
Premium Member
2011-Jul-10 7:14 pm
Re: Netflix casaid by jasonkradiog :Netflix USA is basically the same way.
It's a fun diversion every once in a while, but no way could you replace any satellite/cable source with Netflix and get the same quality of programming. The Netflix stuff is all old/B-rate. You get what you pay for.
Because the studios won't allow Netflix to get newer stuff. That's why they have to do back door deals with companies like Epix and Starz. | |
|
| |
And it will go and blind and deaf earsas many (including here) continue repeating the same line given to them by ISPs....that those using more data than them (even if a GB or 2 more) are "slowing the network down" are "hogging it all" and "need to pay MORE" | |
|
|
|
·
·
·
·
