PaulT 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (29334)

• On the post: Adobe Really Wants To Help Netflix With Its Dumb Password Sharing Cash Grab

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 12:45pm

  "What bothers me most is the idea of IP being a key identity." Me too, but for different reasons. I tend to travel regularly, and while not as often as I used to can be in a different country to my "home" IP, where someone else may be watching at the same time as me. That's not even necessarily a flight, I can be in one country within 30 mins drive, 3 hours for another, and a multitude of different places. Can they know if I'm at work watching in the background on the service I paid for while someone else plays at home? Not by IP, especially if the router recently assigned a different IP, and god knows geoIP records can be faulty. I've been a happy Netflix subscriber for a long time, but I do worry that they'll start charging more/kicking me off because they think I'm sharing when all I'm doing is travelling. "I can think of two cities off the top of my head where this will be a disaster: Denver and Pittsburg. I’m sure there’s more." I've had experiences where I've been on a bus and been "welcomed" by my phone to Spain, Morocco and Gibraltar within a 30 min ride. Which, of course, have different Netflix libraries available. Good luck sorting that out if I'm silly enough to try streaming (fortunately, Netflix's download option tends to be pretty solid)

• On the post: Adobe Really Wants To Help Netflix With Its Dumb Password Sharing Cash Grab

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 12:38pm

  "Of course, those aren’t “losses”; they’re potential income that Netflix didn’t make" Not even potential. I don't mind admitting I share my Netflix with 2 people. One is a family member, who watches maybe one thing a month if I'm not visiting. The other is a friend, who initially couldn't afford to subscribe after having a new kid, and now pays for other services the kid wants to use. The potential income there is actually less than zero. Neither of the people I mentioned would pay for a full monthly sub, and if I don't have them on my account, I'd downgrade from 4 to 2 devices. So, by enforcing this, they're guaranteed to lose money. I have no doubt that there are some people abusing this, but ultimately they have the power to control what people access. If they react incorrectly, people have the ability to stop paying them as much money.

• On the post: Adobe Really Wants To Help Netflix With Its Dumb Password Sharing Cash Grab

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 12:31pm

  "Please show your math clearly on another page." I assume it's the same as the "every download is a lost sale" used previously. Which ignores people who don't have the money. People who only want one thing and it's not worth the sub (or encourages them to just use a free trial). People who "pirate" just to get around DRM on something they already paid for, since the DRM infected copy works better. I have no doubt that some people are abusing this, but it's likely the same situation where most people who share are doing so for reasons that don't directly translate into lost income, and cracking down in the wrong way just drives people to competitors or actual piracy. "If you want to learn a very important lesson from the music industry (which ZOMG is still making money despite music being free now)" Well... that's interesting. Music has gone from "buy an album if you want the 3 songs you want to listen to", to "OK, you can buy just those songs" to "OK, you can stream a rented copy when you want to listen". But, the music industry is full of angry complaints about how this means they can't make as many people as ridiculously rich as they used to and even - shock, horror! - they don't even have to depend on the old label structure to "make it". But, they still make a lot of money, it's just distributed differently and earned differently. The question is how you deal with new obstacles as they arise. The depressing thing here is that companies like Netflix exist because they identified the problems and offered the solutions. Now, they seem to be falling into the trap of thinking that "lost" revenue (read: money that's not on a spreadsheet because infinite growth is impossible) can be gained by forcing customers to do what they want instead of offering what the customers want. "How many Resident Evil movies are there? (Hey Mila, hey…)" Funny example in this context. There were 6 in the original series you're referring to, then 2 attempted reboots. While I largely dislike Paul W.S. Anderson's drooling over his wife nonsense, and wish that George Romero could have made the version he wanted since the games were based on his work, Netflix have apparently cancelled the TV series and the reboot movie wasn't great. But, the point stands - basing things only on short term thinking is doomed in the long term.

• On the post: Adobe Really Wants To Help Netflix With Its Dumb Password Sharing Cash Grab

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 12:16pm

  Sure. So, what's the problem? People who aren't going to pay either way aren't losing you money. I remember reading stories back in the day that there was a certain amount of tolerance for pirated copies of Dreamweaver, Photoshop, etc. because companies knew that they can't force a broke college student to pay for a legal copy, but they can have them get the company they eventually work for to pay for the product they prefer using. That might be a fable, but the fact is nobody's saying that they can't cut off access to people who aren't paying. They're saying that it might not be a smart move if the people who can't afford it move to competitors, and the person paying the bill no longer needs to pay as much for less users.

• On the post: Adobe Really Wants To Help Netflix With Its Dumb Password Sharing Cash Grab

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 12:11pm

  "“They get to run it as they wish” is exactly what Techdirt has promoted in numerous articles regarding content moderation on social media websites." OK. Now point to the part where it's said that people can't criticise them for the decisions they make. "You want to steal, but you just can’t own it" These are rental services, and by definition people have to pay for the service to share it. I'm guessing that if this were somehow a 1978 website, you'd be railing against video rental stores and saying they're stealing because not every customer is paying $100+ to buy every movie they watch.

• On the post: Adobe Really Wants To Help Netflix With Its Dumb Password Sharing Cash Grab

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 12:08pm

  "What is dishonest about using the number of streams that you have payed for?" Nothing. Netflix offer a service that says I can stream X devices simultaneously. They can stop me streaming if I go over that limit. They can cancel my paid contract if they think I'm violating some clause (I'm not, but they can). I can go elsewhere and use a different legal service. This is just the "X downloads means X lost sales nonsense" from the Napster days. They fantasised that every download was a lost sale, but failed to take into account reality, which stated that most people don't buy everything they listen to at full price, sometimes it's not on sale at all, and people might even "pirate" something they already own for various reasons. Here, they think that every person who shares someone else's service will become a subscriber, when in reality they're as likely to go elsewhere. Which, ironically, includes actual piracy.

• On the post: Adobe Really Wants To Help Netflix With Its Dumb Password Sharing Cash Grab

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 12:03pm

  "So now Techdirt promotes lawlessness and piracy?" I don't speak hallucinating idiot, unfortunately. Can you explain how allowing other people to use what you paid for equals criminal activity? At worst, it's a violation of a civil contract, which in the case of Netflix was actively encouraged until recently. "Whatever happened to “their company, they get to run it as they wish" Nothing. People can still criticise them or take their business elsewhere if they disagree. Which, I assume that you'll still blame on piracy when they take you up on that offer, even if people just start using Tubi instead of Netflix. "If you’re going to steal, at least be honest about what you’re doing." Again, explain how using a service that's been paid for is stealing. I pay for X devices. The irony with you people is that if you'd have got your way, libraries and video rental stores would never have existed, yet they made so much money for the corporations you worship once they stopped fighting. The problem with you people is that you not only accuse anyone with better ideas than you of piracy, you do it to the people paying you money.

• On the post: Biden Falsely Claims That Removing Section 230 And Forced Transparency Will Stop Hatred; He’s Dangerously Wrong

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 11:54am

  Yes, just look at the recent example of hatred inspired by a fairy tale character not being depicted with the same racial characteristics as a previous cartoon, despite literally not being human or real. The choices would be not to allow comments on a story about a new movie, or put up with the most vile racial hatred on a story that's likely to be read by children. It's bad enough when sites can show these people the door, but without that choice most would choose to not open the door in the first place. Then, if the business depends on people coming through that door to pay the bills, there's not going to be so many of them left. I can understand the desire to stop hatred fermenting online, but when even a fairytale can whip people up into a racist frenzy, I don't think that creating liability for people not directly participating in that speech can be anything but harmful in ways that are not understood by the people suggesting that.

• On the post: Legacy News Orgs’ Hatred Of Google Runs So Deep They’re Willing To Give Up Fair Use To Punish Google

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 03:11am

  Yeah, they don't want to get rid of Google. That means they'd have to replace all the useful services that Google provides and they depend on with much more expensive and less efficient in-house solutions. They want Google to continue in business, they just want free money while they do so.

• On the post: Legacy News Orgs’ Hatred Of Google Runs So Deep They’re Willing To Give Up Fair Use To Punish Google

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 03:09am

  While actual journalists are a rarer breed than they used to be, I'd like to separate them from the publishers actually making these demands. Sure, some toe the corporate line and are desperate to retain their former income, but there's likely a lot who are against this as much as anyone else - they're just not allowed to say so in a professional capacity.

• On the post: Legacy News Orgs’ Hatred Of Google Runs So Deep They’re Willing To Give Up Fair Use To Punish Google

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 03:08am

  As we've seen many times, some people think that they deserve to be paid money just by having a product. The idea that they should have to further work to earn it, especially if they were able to coast on regular income before their market changed, is distasteful. Google can't be earning more than them because they're providing desirable services that people actually use, while they fail to address the needs of their own customers. No, Google must be stealing their money that they deserve just by existing!

• On the post: Twitter Shareholders Approve Sale Of The Company To Some Dude Who Still Doesn’t Understand He Signed A Binding Contract To Buy It

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 03:05am

  For narcissists, they cannot do wrong. Any problem is caused by someone else, it can't be them because they're so perfect. Allowing a narcissist to amass a huge amount of wealth so that they get used to paying their way out of any problem just compounds the issue.

• On the post: Twitter Shareholders Approve Sale Of The Company To Some Dude Who Still Doesn’t Understand He Signed A Binding Contract To Buy It

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 03:03am

  As Arthur C. Clarke put it - "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." If you're so clueless about the tech that you think it's magic, then I can see why you'd think that magic can happen to fix the problems you perceive with it. The problem is that more educated people who understand the non-magical nature of the tech also understand that magic doesn't exist and can't be applied to fix what is a very human problem.

• On the post: Twitter Shareholders Approve Sale Of The Company To Some Dude Who Still Doesn’t Understand He Signed A Binding Contract To Buy It

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 02:57am

  It's unclear what will happen in that case ultimately, but the plaintiff lawyers have indicated that there's parameters at play which might mean that the limits don't apply to that judgement, and that they might use the case as a springboard to get the law that introduced limits overturned. Jones also has 2 further cases pending in Texas after the current CT trial has finished, so even with caps he's not out of the woods yet.

• On the post: Even The Copyright Office Doesn’t Want What The JCPA Is Selling

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 02:53am

  "the papers would get an income regardless of the quality of the journalism" Well, we're already there with the quality of journalism being dictated by clickbait. In fact, you could almost argue that the amount of disinformation could be reduced if they're getting paid the same for an honest article as they are for a distorted fiction that drives engagement. Not that a link that would be any good at all, of course, but I could see a scenario in which they stop rewriting articles to scaremonger and just use the raw feeds they're copying in the first place.

• On the post: Instagram’s Flopping TikTok Knockoff, Reels, Shows That Big Companies Can’t Just Copy Their Way To Success

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 02:46am

  Yes, although I rarely use Instagram, so if they didn't push marketing anywhere else I'd never have seen it.

• On the post: Instagram’s Flopping TikTok Knockoff, Reels, Shows That Big Companies Can’t Just Copy Their Way To Success

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 02:45am

  Not sure what MS have to do with this, but OK. I'd take a little issue with the mention of Mixer - while it "failed" as a Twitch competitor it was not a Microsoft project to begin with, and by all accounts it seems their primary focus in buying it was to use the tech to build their xCloud service rather than keeping it alive as an end-user video streaming service. They're probably have kept it around if their half-hearted attempts to popularise it had worked, but I think it was clear from the beginning that they bought it for other reasons.

• On the post: Instagram’s Flopping TikTok Knockoff, Reels, Shows That Big Companies Can’t Just Copy Their Way To Success

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 02:42am

  That is a good comparison, I think. On the Wii, the successful games were mostly games that were designed from the ground up to have motion support. There's no mystery in why Wii Sports was the game that sold the console even to people usually not interested in videogames - it was enjoyable in a way that could not be replicated with a standard controller. Whereas, a lot of the less successful Wii games were the ones that took a standard game and bolted on motion controls, and that extended to other consoles where they had to have the option to use a standard controller so as not to block 95% of their market. Without a compelling reason to use motion controls, most people prefer using a gamepad to jumping around like an idiot to do what can be done with a button. Kinect and Move lacked popular quality games that gave a compelling reason to use them, so they flopped. That seems to be similar to what we see here. TikTok is attractive for reasons outside of its surface functionality, and copying that without understanding why someone would use it means that you have a superficial failure.

• On the post: Gavin Newsom Fucks Over The Open Internet, Signs Disastrously Stupid Age Appropriate Design Code

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 02:22am

  But, then they'd have to be with their own children instead of using YouTube as a babysitter! The horror...

• On the post: UK Pressing Forward With Online Safety Bill

  

  PaulT ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 02:21am

  There's plenty of other places this side of the pond that are major tech centres, and these sites will already have adapted to deal with EU law for the most part. They're probably more likely to relocate to Dublin, Lisbon, Amsterdam, etc., especially if they're focussed on the European market.

Next >>