Sharing is Caring......or not.. at least according to Netflix, pay up.

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/distribution-rights

 

 

 

Just to explain this to anyone not interested in reading several pages of legal hoopla and examples,    Distribution rights nearly always the right to do whatever you want with content.  Netflix buys the rights to big bang, they can then stream it, not stream it, charge a lot for it, give it away free, sell it only to one person, sell it only in one state, not sell it in any state, etc.   What distribution rights never do is dictate who the license holder has to withhold it from or at what price they charge to ad it to their library.

[Spotty]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

How many times does it need to be said that the product has been paid for,  If I buy 4 screens then I have paid for access to netflix on 4 devices.

Small but important correction: If you buy 4 screens then you have paid for access to netflix on 4 devices to be used by people living in your household.

 

You keep trying to argue that you have the right to share your account with other people outside your household because you 'bought 4 screens' but you simply don't. It's one thing if you say "I know it's in violation of the agreement I made with Netflix but fuck netflix I'm going to do it anyway and it's because of people like me that Netflix has to put restrictions on everybody", but that's not what you're saying. You're continuously arguing that you have the right to do it which is simply wrong.

[mr moose]

23 minutes ago, Spotty said:

Small but important correction: If you buy 4 screens then you have paid for access to netflix on 4 devices to be used by people living in your household.

 

I know this.  That is according to their policy, that is not a stipulation of the copyright law or any other law forcing them to do this.

23 minutes ago, Spotty said:

You keep trying to argue that you have the right to share your account with other people outside your household because you 'bought 4 screens' but you simply don't.

I am not trying to argue that at all, I am saying the policy is shit and should not be a thing.  Please quote me where I said we have the right to do it.   I have said we should be allowed to do it, and I have said they have no real right to prevent us from doing it.  But I have never said we have the right to do it. EDIT: I know that might sound contradictory, but its the 2 wrongs don't make a right argument,  As far as I am concerned they don't have the right to force me to use their service in one house, but them doing it anyway doesn't give me the right to ignore the ToS.

 

23 minutes ago, Spotty said:

It's one thing if you say "I know it's in violation of the agreement I made with Netflix but fuck netflix I'm going to do it anyway and it's because of people like me that Netflix has to put restrictions on everybody", but that's not what you're saying.

I am not "doing it anyway", when I say "I buy 4 and give one to my neighbour" I am explaining a situation I believe netflix should not have any control over (although I don understand if you read it as me saying "I do this".  Sorry for the confusion. 

 

What I am expressing is my displeasure with yet another company dictating what I can and cannot do with product I have honestly paid for.   If I buy 4 screens and give one away, I am not violating any copyright law, I am not stealing content, I am not circumventing DRM I am not breaking any laws other than a consumer contract (which would likely fail in an Australian court) for an artificial limitation on a product that doesn't need one.  

 

23 minutes ago, Spotty said:

You're continuously arguing that you have the right to do it which is simply wrong.

Again please quote where I said I have the right to do it.  

 

I think in my last response to you I clearly said:

Quote

 

I'm not trying to justify anything except my displeasure with a ToS that essentially is too controlling and unnecessary to protect income.

 

...

I am not ignoring it, I am explaining why it concerns me and why I think it goes too far. 

...

 

So yes, I do FEEL the rules encroach upon my person freedoms, I do FEEL that telling me a service I have bought and that I am not using cannot be given to a friend is anti consumer.     I fail to see why my feelings and reasoning is wrong.  

 

I am not promoting reselling, I am not suggesting we should be allowed to share a single screen or account.  I am merely saying if I pay for 4 screens then I should be allowed to decide who the 4 users are,  where they live should not matter.

 

 

 

I am not saying their terms of service can or should be ignored, I am saying they are unjust and do nothing to protect their income.   Disney shows us that IP locking or screen locking isn't much a of a problem for them.  Maybe they'll change that in the future, maybe they'll introduce screen caps.  But it's very likely that 90% of Disney is for kids and because parents like to give their kids a movie to watch in the car, at grandmas or at a funeral and also often on a different device with a different IP every time that Disney won't want to piss off that many customers for very little gain.

 

 

 

[Master Disaster]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

If I buy 4 screens and give one away, I am not violating any copyright law, I am not stealing content,

Yes you are, your inability to accept that fact doesn't change anything. You are giving away copyrighted content to your neighbour, something you do not have the right to do. They are stealing, you are distributing, the clue is kind of in the name.

 

Like do you think that as soon as you pay for something that is copyrighted it automatically gives you full and complete ownership? Did you sign a distribution agreement with Netflix? How about a reseller agreement? Or did you sign a consumer contract?

 

Copyright is absolute, the rights holder remains the sole and exclusive owner, they get to dictate the terms that viewers have to abide by and the right to give it away is there's and there's alone.

 

You, as the consumer are bound by the terms laid out by the distributor who in turn is bound by the rules laid out by the owners.

[OddOod]

In the past this hasn't been a move they want to make, it's one they are forced to by rightsholders. They know they lose subs when they crack down on it

[Thaldor]

The big question is, what if I belong to two households and I pay for the Netflix? Not my case but something like kids being one of their parents every other week and one of their parents has Netflix, so do the kids get to watch Netflix only every other week? And god forbid if you let your kids use your Netflix account in their TV that you bought for them, the TV just happens to reside in the other parents house.

 

I know if Netflix brings this to Finland (which still has one of the worst Netflix libraries in the world) and my case is counted as sharing, I resort back to the old times and dust off my trusty seafearing hat. Actually even if they didn't stop me from sharing my Netflix with my family but bought this to Finland, I wouldn't see any reason to pay for it anymore. Bad library, you need to pay for the 4 screens to get 4K HDR available (the competition has that included in their normal price) and sometimes not all features I pay for are available (sometimes still Netflix refuses to show 4K video to "save bandwidth" like they didn't have money to build a good server in Finland to serve us with one of the most developed internet infrastructures in the world) and then they want us to pay even more.

[JogerJ]

Inb4

Netflix: "nooo u can't share passwords between households!!!"

*Netflix losing subs and piracy rate goes up*
Netflix:

[darknessblade]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

Yes you are, your inability to accept that fact doesn't change anything. You are giving away copyrighted content to your neighbour, something you do not have the right to do. They are stealing, you are distributing, the clue is kind of in the name.

 

Like do you think that as soon as you pay for something that is copyrighted it automatically gives you full and complete ownership? Did you sign a distribution agreement with Netflix? How about a reseller agreement? Or did you sign a consumer contract?

 

Copyright is absolute, the rights holder remains the sole and exclusive owner, they get to dictate the terms that viewers have to abide by and the right to give it away is there's and there's alone.

 

You, as the consumer are bound by the terms laid out by the distributor who in turn is bound by the rules laid out by the owners.

And yet Netflix is a Global company.

 

So "USA copyright rules" will not apply to the entire world, Meaning ALL copyright owners and Netflix have to look at a country by country basis, of where they can implement this "NEW" rule, since some Countries will have Anti-trust laws to prevent this kind of behavior, they cannot implement those rules in said countries.

 

not forgetting they will also loose massive amounts of subscribers if everyone has to pay ??? extra "based on their region"

 

Them loosing subs is also counter-intuitive, as it would mean less people pay for Netflix,

Meaning the rights holders get less money. causing Netflix their content to shrinks, due having less money to spend on the rights for new shows. Causing even more people to unsubscribe due the shrinking content/no new content being on the service.

Resulting in a downwards spiral, eventually ending up with Netflix revoking said new rule. in the hope they get more people to sign up after they give a massive discount. resetting their prices to about 50% of what it currently is. {so a 20$ subscription for 4 screens 4K resolution, would become a 10$} 

-----------

Not forgetting since a higher volume of subscribers that pay less is better than a lower number that pays more.

 

Smart companies rather want

100000000 Subs that pay 3$ a month

Than 10000000 Subs that pay 30$ a month. of which 50% shares their account. meaning the actual paying sub count is 5000000 subs {about 20% of the amount that pays 3$ a month}

 

Since more people are inclined to pay for a low price product/subscription themselves after trying it out using a friends account, than pay for a high price subscription.

[wanderingfool2]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

They have been paid, How many times does it need to be said that the product has been paid for,  If I buy 4 screens then I have paid for access to netflix on 4 devices.

You are paying for 4 simultaneous devices at one time for a household.  Like it or not, you are bound by the terms of use; which clarifies the user as a household.  It doesn't matter whether or not you disagree if it's hurting Netflix or that if you should be able to.  You are wrong, and acting like it's justified or trying to make excuses why it's allowable doesn't mean anything.  People just need to learn to own up to somethings (like I opening admit I still pirate, I have my reasoning but I don't try justifying it away).  It's an entitlement mentality.

 

To be clear, you aren't JUST paying for the privilege of 4 screen.  You are doing it for 4k as well, and higher bitrate...it's called a bundle.  Also, it's designed for people like my household.  We have 4 people and at certain times we consume 4 of the streams at once (each watching their own thing)

  

On 3/20/2022 at 2:46 AM, mr moose said:

Again, we are not talking about reselling anything.

It doesn't matter if you are reselling it.  Admittedly the part Spotty highlighted is from the current sign-up page (WBM doesn't work on that page sadly)...but you still argue as if you are justified because you aren't reselling.  The literal line "Only people who live with you" which was highlighted.

 

8 hours ago, mr moose said:

Distribution rights really only do two things,  1. grant netflix the right to offer said content on their service and 2. dictate which countries netflix can offer it in.  That is why foxtell in Australia and netflix in Australia has a different library to the US version.    E.G the rights to a lot of disney stuff slowly weren't re licensed to netflix when disney started their streaming service.  also some content (like paw patrol) will not be on netflix because it is already licensed to stan. where as in the US it might be licensed to netfllix or binge etc. 

 

This is why geo-blocking of streaming services occurs at a country level.  It does not occur inside a country because there is no licensing or copyright law that calls for it.

It's like you are intentionally trying to miss the point.  Distribution rights means nothing without the knowledge of the contract signed.  Read the TOS even, it's written to effectively cover when someone travels, but also written in a way that you are suppose to maintain streaming within the region that you purchased it from.

 

Also, it's you are accessing content you are not otherwise entitled to access; so yea it can fall under copyright laws.

 

Here's a novel concept as well, back in the heyday (even though Netflix didn't care as much about sharing) had they introduced this concept they likely would have gotten a decent amount more users.  Even now, it seems like a good 50% of people I know share Netflix amongst 3-4 people (estimating/hypothetical numbers).  Even if they lose 10% of people because of that, that means they only need to get 5% of people sharing to sign up to break even.

 

1 hour ago, Thaldor said:

The big question is, what if I belong to two households and I pay for the Netflix? Not my case but something like kids being one of their parents every other week and one of their parents has Netflix, so do the kids get to watch Netflix only every other week? And god forbid if you let your kids use your Netflix account in their TV that you bought for them, the TV just happens to reside in the other parents house.

I suspect, and I could be wrong (just the way I would implement it), I would track the user device and the IP address.  They have the analytics on you anyways, so they likely know which is the primary IP address.  From there, they could just check that the device has communicated from the primary IP address within say like x days.  If they notice a bunch of streaming from a separate address and no links back to the primary IP address then they probably raise the red flag.  Anyways, that is how I would implement it.  That way you can reliably catch people who might just load it onto their friend's TV to share.  It would catch I think a decent amount of people, while getting very few false positives (and even then, a bit better analytics and they likely could get the false positive rate to near 0%)

 

 

[Master Delta Chief]

1 hour ago, wanderingfool2 said:

-snip-

The main reason that most of us will come down to is the fact that Netflix is being unnecessarily greedy. In the past they thought the sharing of passwords wasn't really a bad thing, so I kinda see a bit of hypocrisy on their end. Are they within their right to enforce these new rules, yes I think so but that doesn't mean it's a good thing. It will get backlash as we are seeing already so eventually we will see if they're going to back down and come up with something better. 

 

Whether this is about someone's entitlement, it doesn't matter. Even if it was, so what? Are people not allowed to enjoy entertainment on said platform? 

[pas008]

47 minutes ago, Master Delta Chief said:

The main reason that most of us will come down to is the fact that Netflix is being unnecessarily greedy. In the past they thought the sharing of passwords wasn't really a bad thing, so I kinda see a bit of hypocrisy on their end. Are they within their right to enforce these new rules, yes I think so but that doesn't mean it's a good thing. It will get backlash as we are seeing already so eventually we will see if they're going to back down and come up with something better. 

 

Whether this is about someone's entitlement, it doesn't matter. Even if it was, so what? Are people not allowed to enjoy entertainment on said platform? 

do you share your bank account, ltt acount amazon account, steam account,

simple you shouldnt be sharing your netflix account you do have some fucking responsibility to your accounts

 

simple fix netflix could do is just verify accounts every 30days just like anything else now days

[tikker]

Also, all these people (in general, not necessarily just here) saying Netflix is going "back on their word" or similar:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/17/your-shared-netflix-password-is-safe-the-ceo-says.html

Quote

“In terms of [password sharing], no plans on making any changes there,” co-founder and CEO Reed Hastings said during the company’s third-quarter earnings webcast. “Password sharing is something you have to learn to live with, because there’s so much legitimate password sharing, like you sharing with your spouse, with your kids .... so there’s no bright line, and we’re doing fine as is.”

That doesn't sound like a company saying "yeah it's fine do whatever you want", just something that they can't be arsed to do anything about at that moment.

[Kazooduck]

1 hour ago, pas008 said:

do you share your bank account, ltt acount amazon account, steam account,

simple you shouldnt be sharing your netflix account you do have some fucking responsibility to your accounts

All of those can draw extra can buy things with them. Also some people do share Amazon and bank accounts(though the latter not between households).

[Blademaster91]

9 minutes ago, tikker said:

Also, all these people (in general, not necessarily just here) saying Netflix is going "back on their word" or similar:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/17/your-shared-netflix-password-is-safe-the-ceo-says.html

That doesn't sound like a company saying "yeah it's fine do whatever you want", just something that they can't be arsed to do anything about at that moment.

It sounds like a company that previously didn't care, as there are ways they could've blocked people from sharing accounts, and now Netflix suddenly cares because their shares went down.

[tikker]

42 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

It sounds like a company that previously didn't care, as there are ways they could've blocked people from sharing accounts, and now Netflix suddenly cares because their shares went down.

It sounds that way because that's what it is. I know I'll sound like a broken record, but it's just another one of the old tricks in the book. Get you hooked, then reel you in. Every time a company does something like this people will say the same things: they're only doing it for the money, they'll lose more customers than they'll gain and lose money anyway etc. etc.

 

It might feel backstabby to "suddenly" do this when they feel it's now hurting them, but people also need to realise the reality of the situation. This was always around the corner and you simply found a hole that they didn't bother plugging. Now terms have changed and even more explicitely tighten sharing and you are upset because of that. Are you allowed to be upset? Sure, it sucks. I agree with the people here saying we would benefit from having more options like single-person 4k streaming at different (lower) pricing, but the ambiguous non-answers of Netflix have been spun into something they are not.

 

For example, https://techcrunch.com/2016/01/11/netflix-ceo-says-account-sharing-is-ok/.

Quote

“We love people sharing Netflix whether they’re two people on a couch or 10 people on a couch,,” Hastings said. “That’s a positive thing, not a negative thing.”

To illustrate this example, he spoke of how a parent may share their login with their child. And when that child grows up, they will usually subscribe to Netflix, too.

“As kids move on in their life, they like to have control of their life, and as they have an income, we see them separately subscribe,” Hastings told reporters at CES. “It really hasn’t been a problem.”

While Hastings didn’t directly address how he feels about non-family members sharing their credentials – such as in the case where friends or roommates may split an account

To nobody's surprise, the headline is paraphrasing the response in a slightly creative way. The CEO's answers are carefully (or maybe not, I can only assume) worded to not say what some claim they imply. That is not someone saying it's ok to share an account with whoever you want. "a positive thing" is taken completely out of the in-home context it was said in and there was no comment on the situation people complain about now and only some elaboration on family situations. Yet the only thing people see is "positive thing" and "not a problem" and turn that into "hey we're allowed to share accounts". This isn't trademark land where if you don't defend it you lose it. Ironically in their HBO coverage they hit the nail on the head:

Quote

Now, he is saying that HBO doesn’t see account sharing as a problem for their business model.

I'm repeating myself, but saying "it's not a problem [for now]" does not equal "yeah people are allowed to do it".

 

Even their old 2016 terms could be interpreted as not allowing it:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160402102847/https://help.netflix.com/legal/termsofuse?locale=en&docType=termsofuse

Quote

Passwords & Account Access

• 5.1.   The member who created the Netflix account and whose Payment Method is charged (the "Account Owner") has access and control over the Netflix account. To maintain control over the account and to prevent anyone from accessing the account (which would include information on viewing history for the account), the Account Owner should not reveal the password nor the Payment Method details (e.g., last four digits of their credit or debit card, or their email address if they use PayPal) associated with the account to anyone. You are responsible for updating and maintaining the accuracy of the information you provide to us relating to your account.

The Account Owner has access and control over the account, should not reveal the password to anyone. You created the account, and you are billed therefore it's you that has access to the account per the terms and not someone you give the password to. I accept this may be ambigous, but in my opinion that is taken away by the earlier point:

Quote

4.5.   You agree to use the Netflix service, including all features and functionalities associated therewith, in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations, or other restrictions on use of the service or content therein. You agree not to archive, download, reproduce, distribute, modify, display, perform, publish, license, create derivative works from, offer for sale, or use (except as explicitly authorized in these Terms of Use) content and information contained on or obtained from or through the Netflix service.

Sharing your account is not an explicitely authorised action and thus not allowed. Whether the terms are enforceable is ultimately up to a court, but in general, to my knowledge gathered in the various "EULA's are not enforceable" conversations, if there's nothing ridiculous or unlawful in them it's fine and perfectly legal.

[Master Delta Chief]

3 hours ago, pas008 said:

do you share your bank account, ltt acount amazon account, steam account,

simple you shouldnt be sharing your netflix account you do have some fucking responsibility to your accounts

 

simple fix netflix could do is just verify accounts every 30days just like anything else now days

Comparing a Netflix account to a bank or anything else in this particular context is just laughable. Certain things you better don't share with others (unless you really trust them or are family members). If you really are concerned about your account's safety, you might as well make an account that is simply dedicated to sharing and minimize payment information. And yes, Netflix SHOULD add in multi-factor authentication to increase security of people's accounts. With that said, at the end of the day it's still the responsibility of the account's owner if they want to share it or not. 

[wanderingfool2]

5 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

In the past they thought the sharing of passwords wasn't really a bad thing, so I kinda see a bit of hypocrisy on their end.

No, they were thinking that it wasn't necessary to enforce it at the time.  Not hypocrisy, just people assuming they understand what is being said when they don't.

 

5 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

Netflix is being unnecessarily greedy

Yes, being unnecessarily greedy for wanting people to stop sharing passwords (which can be construed as theft).

 

5 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

Whether this is about someone's entitlement, it doesn't matter. Even if it was, so what? Are people not allowed to enjoy entertainment on said platform? 

If you aren't paying for it, then no strictly speaking you aren't...and given the way the question was said, that is very entitlist.  It's people who do password sharing that is also a reason for constantly increasing prices at a higher rate.  If people didn't password share, I am willing to bet that the pricing for Netflix would not have increased as much over the years.

 

It's the similar thing when people who try justifying stealing from big box stores like Walmart.  The "they have insurance", "they are ripping people off", "it's not hurting anyone" while failing to see that doing so does directly hurt the users/customers.

[Master Delta Chief]

22 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Yes, being unnecessarily greedy for wanting people to stop sharing passwords (which can be construed as theft). 

 

If you aren't paying for it, then no strictly speaking you aren't...and given the way the question was said, that is very entitlist.  It's people who do password sharing that is also a reason for constantly increasing prices at a higher rate.  If people didn't password share, I am willing to bet that the pricing for Netflix would not have increased as much over the years.

That's bullshit and you know it. How is that even considered theft? The consumer is paying, period. What if also the person that's being shared to is also paying for it to the owner of said account AKA splitting the bill? . I don't believe that their increasing of prices has any reasons to do with people sharing their password, it's simple greed. Their growth in the recent years (ESPECIALLY WITH COVID) has exploded enormously so once again it's unjustifiable.  

 

38 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

It's the similar thing when people who try justifying stealing from big box stores like Walmart.  The "they have insurance", "they are ripping people off", "it's not hurting anyone" while failing to see that doing so does directly hurt the users/customers.

 This sort of comparison has no relevance to this particular situation at all and to be quite frankly insulting. People aren't stealing, they're sharing.

[Spotty]

2 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

That's bullshit and you know it. How is that even considered theft? The consumer is paying, period. What if also the person that's being shared to is also paying for it to the owner of said account AKA splitting the bill? . I don't believe that their increasing of prices has any reasons to do with people sharing their password, it's simple greed. Their growth in the recent years (ESPECIALLY WITH COVID) has exploded enormously so once again it's unjustifiable.  

 

 This sort of comparison has no relevance to this particular situation at all and to be quite frankly insulting. People aren't stealing, they're sharing.

Sharing your Netflix account is no different than buying a DVD of a movie and then burning 5 copies to give to your friends. I would hesitate to call it stealing but you are depriving them of potential income. Seems some people are arguing "I bought the DVD so I should be able to distribute as many copies as I want! It's not stealing because I paid for it"

 

2 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

What if also the person that's being shared to is also paying for it to the owner of said account AKA splitting the bill?

Then that means the person whose name is on the account is reselling the service, which is still against the agreement with Netflix. It would be like having your friend pay you $5 for that pirated DVD. 

[divito]

On 3/17/2022 at 11:02 AM, paddy-stone said:

What about if your household includes a child that lives between 2 residences. What about if you yourself watch netflix on your phone wherever you happen to be, etc. There are multiple legit reasons for people to be using accounts outside of the physical address where that account if paid for.

 

Doesn't bother me, never have been a subscriber to netfux, and never will. Same goes for most subscription based accounts, only exception for me is youtube premium as I technically live in Turkey, where it's very cheap 

This has been my situation for a few years now; I have the "Premium" option in Canada, and I have all my devices at my house and in my daughter's room, and then my account is also logged into my former PS4 at my ex's house where my daughter primarily lives as well. 

Curious to see how the test goes, and if they start trying to roll it out to other countries. If the price becomes egregious or they implement more hassle than is necessary, I have Plex, which I use way more than any other service anyways.

[mr moose]

17 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Yes you are, your inability to accept that fact doesn't change anything. You are giving away copyrighted content to your neighbour, something you do not have the right to do. They are stealing, you are distributing, the clue is kind of in the name.

 

That's not how copyright law works.  Seriously.  in the situation I posted I would not be giving away something that wasn't paid for.  No one is stealing anything because the screen they are watching was purchased.  It was paid for.   There is a huge difference between netflix's screen policy and copyright.  

 

17 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Like do you think that as soon as you pay for something that is copyrighted it automatically gives you full and complete ownership? Did you sign a distribution agreement with Netflix? How about a reseller agreement? Or did you sign a consumer contract?

 

17 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Copyright is absolute, the rights holder remains the sole and exclusive owner, they get to dictate the terms that viewers have to abide by and the right to give it away is there's and there's alone.

 

You, as the consumer are bound by the terms laid out by the distributor who in turn is bound by the rules laid out by the owners.

 

 

I'm sorry but you really are not understanding how copyright law and licensing works.  Netflix has purchased a license agreement to distribute content as they see fit.  That distribution agreement means that they can charge for it, limit its distribution, give it away free, literally whatever they want to do too make the most money from it.   It's all in the link I posted explain distribution rights.   It is NOT copyright law that is imposing the "single household" rule. 

 

Now as it is you who is making the claim the burden of proof is on you to prove it is.  So please provide evidence that netflix is legally obliged to limit content o a single household.

 

 

 

 

[Master Disaster]

41 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

That's not how copyright law works.  Seriously.  in the situation I posted I would not be giving away something that wasn't paid for.  No one is stealing anything because the screen they are watching was purchased.  It was paid for.   There is a huge difference between netflix's screen policy and copyright.  

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry but you really are not understanding how copyright law and licensing works.  Netflix has purchased a license agreement to distribute content as they see fit.  That distribution agreement means that they can charge for it, limit its distribution, give it away free, literally whatever they want to do too make the most money from it.   It's all in the link I posted explain distribution rights.   It is NOT copyright law that is imposing the "single household" rule. 

 

Now as it is you who is making the claim the burden of proof is on you to prove it is.  So please provide evidence that netflix is legally obliged to limit content o a single household.

 

I think this circular discussion has gone on long enough, its clear we're never gonna agree and I really don't wanna cause any tension or arguments. (plus truth be told, I'm kinda sick of it now and I imagine you are too)

 

Agree to disagree?

[mr moose]

43 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

I think this circular discussion has gone on long enough, its clear we're never gonna agree and I really don't wanna cause any tension or arguments. (plus truth be told, I'm kinda sick of it now and I imagine you are too)

 

Agree to disagree?

Yep,  If I ever encounter an article on the topic (that goes in either direction) from an easier to read source I'll PM you.

[Master Disaster]

24 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Yep,  If I ever encounter an article on the topic (that goes in either direction) from an easier to read source I'll PM you.

Cool, also nice to have an adult discussion without it resorting to ad hom on the internet