dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Netflix: Offer Quality and People Pirate Less, Duh
BitTorrent Traffic Shrinks Wherever We Launch Netflix Streaming
by Karl Bode 08:37AM Friday May 03 2013
For years as the entertainment industry sued grandmothers and engaged in all manner of aggressive behavior one common refrain was: "you know, people would probably pirate less if you offered a less expensive, quality video services." Fast forward a few years, and the success of Netflix streaming is a clear testament to that idea, even if there will be some people who'll always pirate. Netflix Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos this week noted they see a drop in BitTorrent traffic whenever they launch Netflix streaming in a new territory:
quote:
One of the things is we get ISPs to publicise their connection speeds – and when we launch in a territory the Bittorrent traffic drops as the Netflix traffic grows. So I think people do want a great experience and they want access – people are mostly honest. The best way to combat piracy isn’t legislatively or criminally but by giving good options. One of the side effects of growth of content is an expectation to have access to it. You can’t use the internet as a marketing vehicle and then not as a delivery vehicle.
It's fascinating that it only took us a decade and a half for many to realize it -- and many in Hollywood haven't realized it still. The interview also touches on their plans for 4K and some potential upcoming new exclusive series, including the film adaptation of Stephen King's The Dark Tower series that keeps bouncing around Hollywood but never gets made.

view:
topics flat nest 

fatpipe

join:2011-10-02
Austin, TX

Hmm, maybe, perhaps, oh IDK

"you know, people would probably pirate less if you offered a less expensive, quality video services."

I wonder if this "idea" could possibly be used to decrease the amount of Bittorrent traffic with regards to gaming software and application software.

It seems like it should work, but my faith is wanting...
egilbe

join:2011-03-07

Re: Hmm, maybe, perhaps, oh IDK

Steam for Linux seems to be fairly successful and for some games its "pay what you want or think its worth" model. $60 for a crappy game is pretty bad.

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

Re: Hmm, maybe, perhaps, oh IDK

said by egilbe:

Steam for Linux seems to be fairly successful and for some games its "pay what you want or think its worth" model. $60 for a crappy game is pretty bad.

Tell me about it... this is why I stopped paying full price for games. I'd feel alot better buying a game during a Steam sale months down the line for $20 and it being bad than paying $60 and being downright angered.

aronymous

@simmons.edu
I think it has in regards to gaming. I feel steam change alot when it launched, but i don't have real data just personal observance.

cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
said by fatpipe:

..
I wonder if this "idea" could possibly be used to decrease the amount of Bittorrent traffic with regards to gaming software and application software...

Well, I stopped paying full price for console* titles. But I refuse to buy used. I just wait. The reward is savings... but I won't torrent. One has to TOR and find more anon routes. And time, plus bandwidth... not worth it to me.

*Why the disparity between PC titles prices and same title for console? (licensing, distribution, ...? ) I think PC game titles offer more bang for dollar for tweaks, mods, maps, servers, cheats etc than consoles...yet they are typically 10-25% cheaper on release. Sorry for digression...
--
Splat
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Hmm, maybe, perhaps, oh IDK

with pc you dont get a physical copy, like you do on consoles. Why shouldn't pc cost less then?

But yeah I agree, steam and their sales, and gog and their sales, have take a good bite out of piracy.

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

Re: Hmm, maybe, perhaps, oh IDK

said by me1212:

with pc you dont get a physical copy, like you do on consoles.

Not in all cases. As an example, there is not a single Blizzard Entertainment game I own that is not a physical product.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Hmm, maybe, perhaps, oh IDK

I was more referring to steam, since thats where most games get released. Plus pcs dont have to deal with sony or ms taking some off the top. Or maybe pc gamers just refuse to pay the higher prices or the companies are price gouging console gamers, or something.

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

Re: Hmm, maybe, perhaps, oh IDK

said by me1212:

Or maybe pc gamers just refuse to pay the higher prices or the companies are price gouging console gamers, or something.

Bit of both, I would suspect.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
However, the product is usually just a copy of the install file. The license is very steamlike indeed---- one shot, linked to your Battle.net account. Of no value once used, and can't be transferred. Much like Steam. In other words the disc is just swag.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
psiu

join:2004-01-20
Farmington, MI
Reviews:
·Comcast
·AT&T U-Verse

the news yesterday about titles being removed...

goes to show many of these companies just don't get it. How about you let Netflix, whose entire existence revolves around delivering video to customers through a variety of options and devices, do that? And then you can get easy money through licensing...win win all around.

Also, up through Wizard & Glass I think a movie/miniseries would have been pretty cool...the end of the series (especially the "write myself into the novel" portion) was just awful, imo.

spewak
R.I.P Dadkins
Premium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
kudos:1

Separation anxiety

With all the individual Studios separating their content from Netflix, what will become of Netflix?

Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
Reviews:
·Hargray Cable

Re: Separation anxiety

said by spewak:

With all the individual Studios separating their content from Netflix, what will become of Netflix?

Like Disney they will fail one by one and give up opting for the easy way to make money. People want one stop shop and most likely aren't going to pay $10 here $10 there, what's the point if you're paying $80 a month???? That's why Netflix works.

Kilroy
Premium,MVM
join:2002-11-21
Saint Paul, MN
Netflix will thrive, provided they survive. Short term they are losing these services. The problem the individual studios doesn't seem to realize is that consumers don't want to pay for five to ten streaming services. They want to pay for one with most of the things they want to watch. Netflix should survive as their independent content will keep them afloat until the studio offerings are killed off due to lack of interest. Eventually, maybe even before they die, the studios will eventually strike deals with the independent streaming companies that survive.
--
“Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something.” ¯ Robert A. Heinlein
jrodson69

join:2012-10-02
Independence, IA
said by spewak:

With all the individual Studios separating their content from Netflix, what will become of Netflix?

Seen it coming long ago and I'm sure Netflix did too. Hence the "Original Content" they are now doing and even expanding. I think Netflix will continue to thrive especially as this economy remains mired in the dump (despite what Obama tells you) and yes, no one wants to maintain and pay for 5 different streaming subscriptions. Big Business would love that, of course.

IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1

I always pay for my content

DirecTV for video and iTunes for music.

I have never received a copyright warning from Comcast.

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

Re: I always pay for my content

I've seen it happen to people who don't even download things. I remember several years ago (2006) when my neighbor asked me for help as she'd gotten an abuse notice from Comcast for torrenting some movie called "John Tucker Must Die". The notification was absolutely ludicrous (and, as it turned out, sent incorrectly anyway). I doubt she knows what BitTorrent is to this day...
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
I refuse to support the iTunes monopoly. Rhapsody/Amazon are usually cheaper anyway.

Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
Reviews:
·Hargray Cable

Re: I always pay for my content

said by silbaco:

I refuse to support the iTunes monopoly. Rhapsody/Amazon are usually cheaper anyway.

I have to give credit to ITunes because before that everyone was downloading music illegally. Even Bill Gates commented before ITunes on why someone wouldn't just rip a track off a CD and pass it around to friends etc.

Have to realize Gates and Jobs are from an era where you would use cassettes and copied music off the radio. People use to make tapes from their albums and pass the tapes on to friends.

However you want to pay for it is fine, my point is pre ITunes there really was no legal options and illegal file sharing was huge much more than today.
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
How is iTunes a monopoly if Rhapsody/Amazon are cheaper?
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: I always pay for my content

Because their market-share is massive and they literally control the music industry? They managed to block Spotify from entering the US for years. They have set the industry standard on what labels/artists get paid, which promoted EU investigations. Rhapsody/Amazon have been forced to merely sacrifice their own profit margin to stay competitive. They abused DRM to win a monopoly on the portable music players market by restricting themselves to be the only music store supported and having exclusive content in the iTunes music store. They ran countless music stores out of business with the practice because they couldn't pay enough for exclusives and couldn't sell music on the largest pmp on the market. DRM might be gone, but Apple continues to receive exclusives (Taylor Swift's Red for example) and continues to abuse its dominate position to hold onto the majority of music download sales. And it continues to strangle the music industry, forcing them to do things they don't want to do. Such as 90-second song samples, which effectively violates DMCA.

The list goes on.
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: I always pay for my content

said by silbaco:

Rhapsody/Amazon have been forced to merely sacrifice their own profit margin to stay competitive.

That's competition. That's why competition is bad for business, but good for consumers.
said by silbaco:

They abused DRM to win a monopoly on the portable music players market by restricting themselves to be the only music store supported and having exclusive content in the iTunes music store.

That's not a monopoly. DRM is gone for music and has been for several years now. The iPod became the de facto music player because of Apple's marketing strategy, not a monopoly. There were/are plenty of alternative music players that are better than the iPod, but the rest of the industry failed to market their products effectively. Exclusive content? Nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, we have seemingly daily/weekly discussions about exclusivity.

Tomek
Premium
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY

Legal are not, options are options

People are getting annoyed with arbitrary restrictions placed by studios.
I honestly prefer to watch on netflix because it simply there.
Even I go for watching episodes on studios websites, but once I am told to go to ITUNES to buy episode that was aired previous day, well then hello pirate bay.

People want content and they are willing to "pay" for it, either with money or sacrificing time to "watch" ads.

The other day I went on to watch battle of LA and wasted 10min of watching "previews", reminds me of good old days of ripping VOBs from DVDs so I just have a movie
--
Semper Fi

Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC

Re: Legal are not, options are options

Temek,

That always pissed me off so much, I buy a movie and then I'm stuck with watch previews of other movies??? I can see doing that on a rental but not one I bought.

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

HBO Could Take a Hint...

Quite some time ago, this comic was released from The Oatmeal.

Almost one year ago to date, Forbes wrote this.

Mere days ago, HBO said this.

Today, I ran into this:



Presently, I have an HBO subscription which gives me the ability to access it on HBO GO, but not everyone can do so (see: Overseas Customers).

When you make it difficult for your customers, they're going to go where it's just easy to do so.

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1

IMO Hulu could have been King.

When Hulu first launched, I thought it was great. A place to watch recent TV shows, and movies, all under one roof.

Then they went with a paid service, that still had ads in the shows and movies. I didn't mind the ads in the free version, but if I'm paying for something, leave the ads out.
Then the networks started playing games and delaying episode releases to Hulu by 3 to 9 days [Fox].

Then Netflix hits, and it's nice. A flat fee, no ads, all you can eat.
Then Hollywood and networks start jerking Netflix around.
So stuff that was available, is now no longer available, or available on another paid service.

with the number of paid streaming services now available, and each service starting to establish "exclusive" content, piracy is now starting to look more attractive. Because by the time you add up all the paid streaming services, you are paying what you'd pay for cable anyhow.
I don't count Itunes or Vudu because it's pay for a season or per episode, not an all you can eat like Netflix, Huluplus, Amazon prime.

Maybe Crackle will have a spot in there. Crackle is free, has exclusive content, and ads. Like the original Hulu.

But I get the point netflix is getting at. Offer a low cost alternative to pirating sites, and most, not all, will switch to it. Lets face it, there are those that will pirate because that is all they want to do. They want things for "free" because they feel entitled to them.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?.

Packeteers
Premium
join:2005-06-18
Forest Hills, NY
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

1 recommendation

Re: IMO Hulu could have been King.

i pirate due to convenience, not any entitlement. i find all new content within 3 hours after it's broadcast, it takes me 6 minute to download a one hour show at 460p, and i can view any episode from any network including hbo and bbc going all the way back to the series premiere - all while commercial free. my only additional expense over my ISP is $3/mo for a VPN to protect me from 6-Strikes and copyright legal trolls. I would gladly pay $30/mo if Netflix could do all that legitimately at 1080p.

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1

Re: IMO Hulu could have been King.

You and I know full well that:
quote:
all new content within 3 hours after it's broadcast

Will never happen on sites like Netflix, Hulu or Crackle. The Networks what to get what they feel they are owed for the shows. Hence why Itunes, Vudu, Amazon get first crack at it for $1.99 or more per episode. Then a week later, you see that episode popping up on the networks website. For free viewing with ads.

The networks are still refusing to accept that the old way of TV broadcasting is dead.
IMO, they'd be smart to establish Youtube channels and broadcast the shows there, with ads built into the show. ]By doing that:
1]They would know exactly the number of viewers that watch the show.
2]They would generate Google adsense money as well.

Though I don't know if people would be happy with watching ads.

And the Networks, Producers, and actors would like to get paid for the show. So if they didn't inject ads into the show, or charge per episode, how else would they get their money?
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: IMO Hulu could have been King.

The old ways still bring in more money than new ways. That doesn't sound dead to me.

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1

Re: IMO Hulu could have been King.

It's because they have tried and so far have succeeded in locking it down.
Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
said by silbaco:

The old ways still bring in more money than new ways. That doesn't sound dead to me.

That is because the new way isn't for sale; this is what the whole topic is about in case you missed it.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

1 recommendation

You seem to think you are entitled to convenience.
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

Re: IMO Hulu could have been King.

Ya, so? Your point is?

Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1

offer quality...

at a REASONABLE price and people won't pirate...

JMHO42

@verizon.net

Well, unfortunately,

you'll never convince the studios, labels, and other "content owners" that the general public isn't as greedy and larcenous as they themselves are. These people see everyone else as a threat and as a bunch of thieves because that's the kind of people these content owners are. They are the real pirates.

trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

Hey idiots...

Hey idiots... wake up! The faster you realize that NetFlix can be your best friend the faster it's going to be better for you, the studios!

One video platform, one content delivery system, one payment, one login, one web site, one place to get everything! That's what people want!!!!

This crap about... "Oh, online video is great. Let's make our own service." doesn't work. People don't want to have to think about what online service currently hosts their favorite show, they want a single web site (ie. NetFlix) with a single login to view every TV show and movie that has ever been created. CONVENIENCE!

The faster you realize that NetFlix can be your best friend the faster it's going to be better for you, the studios!
--
Tom
Boycott AT&T uVerse! | Tom's Android Blog

•••
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Quality? Netflix?

Cheap, sure.

But until they offer mainstream content, not yesteryears' leftovers, their advice is irrelevant.

••••
63099088

join:2013-04-26

Free versus Right

I think people will always prefer something that is free as long as it works the same as what you would buy. But pirating survives because of easy access, not really because it costs less. If you think about it, there's some work that goes into searching for pirated games, movies, etc, so free is not everything. The other issue is access. I travel a lot and I can't get access to all the stuff I want to most of the time, so those sites are sometimes the only way. But now with a VPN (»expressvpn.biz) I can get the services properly. I'm still paying, but it's easy and works out great so I'm happy.
dagg

join:2001-03-25
Galt, CA

of course they realize it

what do you mean studios haven't realized this yet? of course they have realized it. they know very well that piracy isn't the boogeyman they make it out to be publicly and they know very well how to stop it.
they simply do not want to. its their golden ticket to help shape laws that benefit them and increase their stranglehold.
zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw

Hopefully they don't fracture the system.

I would agree.

Hopefully the content owners realize this and resist the urge to move their content to their own service. The best part of Netflix is that it has content from everywhere for one small fee a month.

I get the feeling content owners might get greedy and pull their content to offer it themselves. It would completely undermind the success of Netflix. People don't want to pay 5 separate $10 subscriptions per month. They want one place where they can get everything.

Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2

It all depends

It all depends on the pirating level. There are average pirates, and there are Pro pirates who known were to go, how to crack a software, how to remove DRM.
bnceo

join:2007-10-11
Bel Air, MD

I Buy This

I can believe it. For years, people loved Napster and all it's alternatives. Steve Jobs gave people a fast and easy way to buy music and hit the magical price point of 99 cents. And boom, people bought music, even though they probably could have gotten the same song (or entire album) for free.

Sadly, the old men in suits (and the short term profit shareholders) only care about being stagnant and not giving a crap. Instead, they fight tooth and nail to keep things the way they are and rather out lawyer the youngsters.
swe3tdave

join:2008-02-01
Sainte-Catherine-De-Hatley, QC

Bittorrent is the last option.

i always look for all my options first before considering bittorrent. For example, i love "Doctor Who", so i buy the entire set of every season on itunes as soon as the first episode comes out. The price is more than reasonable and i'm happy to help the studio as long as they make more.

As for netflix you end up seeing the end of it pretty quickly. A lot of TV Series are not up to date and lately the choices seems to keep going down.

I watch a lot of anime and documentaries so i often had to take Funimation and GaiamTV subscriptions. it sure beats the hell out of Cable TV.
--
David Giard