Netflix Downloads(media.netflix.com) |
Netflix Downloads(media.netflix.com) |
Anyone with ounce of motivation can easily bypass and extract the media content, so the only thing DRM does is piss of paying users which can't watch content on flaky connections, flights, travel and alternative operating systems.
Meanwhile on torrent sites you find Netflix digital dumps in matter of minutes after release.
If they do, they should be able to get this to the web version of Netflix.
(Laptop screens are great for watching video content on e.g. a flight or train ride. Bringing an extra piece of hardware like a tablet just for this purpose seems silly. Phone screens offer poor ergonomy. They are only really a decent compromise on a bus or a subway, or similar.)
I'm sure the Netflix files on your iPad are still DRMed. They just give you some kind of key that's only good for a limited amount of time.
But then they have to rely on the OS instead. Not sure what is better.
edit: Actually, I just checked an apparently you can download the free apps from the store without logging in now. I tried to do this a very long time ago and skipped because it wanted a Microsoft account login, so I left. I'm glad they've changed this.
.....which was unfortunately only a limited subset, especially since I'm not US based (Scandinavia here).
Besides the problem of everything being spread out over Netflix, HBO, Amazon Prime and what have you not, some content is just not available, such as Supernatural outside of US/UK/Germany.
I almost feel like the TV networks wants people to pirate things...
The differences are pretty nuts:
http://exstreamist.com/is-your-countrys-netflix-library-grow...
They would if they could, but they'd have to go back and renegotiate all those old settled contracts.
EDIT: On Android 7.1 VLC for Android, was able to "open" (duration etc) a large file I found in Netflix directory (.hidden), though not decode sound or video. There were two smaller files besides I suspect are audio tracks. And several other very small files, subtitles maybe.
“I think it's something that lots of people ask for. We'll see if it's something lots of people will use. Undoubtedly it adds considerable complexity to your life with Amazon Prime – you have to remember that you want to download this thing. It's not going to be instant, you have to have the right storage on your device, you have to manage it, and I'm just not sure people are actually that compelled to do that, and that it's worth providing that level of complexity.”
Part of me wonders how much this was marketing spin to cover a gap they had relative to Amazon Prime and they were in actuality evaluating how to catch up.
This happens far to often. Notorious example is Ballmer saying iPhone will be a flop when teams internally know that Windows Mobile just blew up.
But we all know that it's a very desirable feature and most people are willing to pay for that complexity to be able to watch offline.
So it was mostly spin, like Steve Jobs saying they'd never make a tablet at a point where it had to be in final development internally.
Browse/download any streaming service (that you have access to) easily - I love it.
Morally I don't think what they're doing is wrong. But the US government is in bed with media goliaths, and the two work together to shut down re-hosted content (even in areas where re-hosting MIGHT be fair usage).
The whole thing is a little flaky, but I'm really pleased with what it cost me ($60 if I remember).
From the article: "For example, Orange is The New Black, Narcos and The Crown are available for download today."
Polygon said there are some non-Netflix movies that are available for download.
I too am very curious what the download policy is. I think you only get a few days on Amazon or stuff you copy off your TiVo so I wonder how much time Netflix gives you.
For instance, in the case of Luke Cage, maybe Marvel needs to sign off on delivery changes like this? Hard to determine without looking at Netflix's actual contracts.
HK in particular I would assume Netflix (content producer) are interested in partnering with a Chinese company as that region tends to favour those quite heavily.
It looks like it won't be possible to stream the contents of the netflix app in my phone to the projector.
https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-MHL-HDMI-Adapter-Packaging/dp...
The real fix is to have reasonably priced unlimited 4G/5G data. But it doesn't seem to be coming.
Now fix subtitles and expand the catalog...
And yeah, it would be swell if Netflix could snap their fingers and expand their catalog, but they can't.
Also sometimes the last character is trimmed.
Most likely what they've done is stored the video chunks locally and then the Netflix app is "streaming" these chunks from the local storage rather than the netflix servers. If you looked through the folder that holds these chunks, you'd probably just see a bunch of randomly named 100mb files. That's all the DRM they need, you have no ability to consume these files without the Netflix app.
――――――
This is like saying that .doc files are as good as DRM'd, since who's going to open one in anything but Word?
I get what you're saying but it's a security through obscurity argument - if this takes off, of course someone can figure out the encoding and transcode straight from those files.
But I still see some risk for Netflix there... Split files are made to be whole again.
If you had only one movie stored locally, you would very quickly be able to solve the puzzle.
Plus, the owner of the Android/iOS device is paying for that content anyway, why would it be in any way a problem if he can open that downloaded file in another software?!?!
I agree that DRM is a waste of time and the pirates are going to get the content whatever happens, but a $10/m streaming service is only licensing you to watch video in a few specific scenarios. If you had spent $3 an episode (or whatever it is on iTunes/Google Play these days) to own it, then I'd expect a DRM free file to be available (Though I doubt you actually get one in reality).
If your browser is in charge of running the storage of the ciphertext and the decryption, it is much easier to debug it and apply a patch that will store the plaintext than if you have to do this all in an Android emulator as well.
But either way: DRM doesn't work for long.
In the meantime, Netflix is providing enough value for me that I happily pay their monthly fee and don't bother looking for ways to break their DRM.
Maybe they were just doing a Steve, though.
You can write a stream to file with maybe 2 commands, and try to decode it later.
If the DRM on the stream is broken, you can save the stream to file and decode it later. If the DRM on the stream is safe, then it should be equally safe between the stream and saving the file to disk.
I fail to see how letting you save encrypted stuff to local disc has anything to do with breaking the DRM.
Also, the first thought people have when given a new service for free is "how can I use this to pirate movies". This is why we can't have nice stuff.....
How? I don't have Netflix, but, for Amazon Video, you get a download button—that seems to be the only bit of the interface that reflects the ability to download at all. After that, you don't have to worry about whether you're watching a local or streamed copy; the movie plays just the same.
Now it's "click on anything and it plays. Unless your offline. Where search also doesn't work. And when you're offline you probably go somewhere else to see what you're looking for. When online we need to show that too. And buttons to let you download or see the download status. And....
I'm not saying it's insurmountable, but it's quite a bit more than the old "everything you see you can watch now and that's all there is to it" model.
> Now it's "click on anything and it plays. Unless your offline. Where search also doesn't work. And when you're offline you probably go somewhere else to see what you're looking for. When online we need to show that too. And buttons to let you download or see the download status. And....
But it seems that your 'before' is not quite right: if you can't download videos, then it's "click on anything and it plays, unless you're offline", full stop! That is, by allowing download of videos, a total-failure mode has been replaced by a mode with different functionality. Although it's technically true that "you can do some things" is more complicated than "you can't do anything", I'm not sure that it's really worse.
This is obviously untrue. For at least 95% of Netflix users this is inconceivably difficult. Peek out your bubble and you may also notice that torrent use is massively declining in popularity because they're a horrible user experience.
The people that use Popcorn Time/etc would disagree. That has been a fantastic experience, so it's natural that the MPAA would go after it tooth & nail.
An important use for DRM in regards to streaming services is to prevent people on shared networks from getting access to the data. For instance, if I was in a college dorm with dorm-wide wifi, and I was watching my de-DRM'd Netflix, anyone on the dorm intranet could snoop my packets and get the data being transmitted to me by Netflix, for free.
That is nigh on impossible to do when the content is encrypted with DRM.
It was always passing the legal buck ("It wasn't us that let those evil evil pirates steal your series, we did all we could, look at that DRM software certificate!").
Snooping packets in dorm rooms? No.
And the second problem has a simple solution. Give the customer a tiny discount for uploading. Anyone with an unmetered connection sees it as free money even if it's only pennies/month, and it works fine even if some customers turn it off because the discount-accepting customers can upload more than they download.
(let's say they have to be at least sort of like Netflix, with minimal advertising and comedy/drama shows)
I used to be able to use Netflix alone fairly well, but the fracturing of online services is making me lean more and more on automated piracy tools like Sonarr. If I were going to pay $10/mo to a dozen services I'd go back to cable.
If you don't think that makes quite a real difference in enabling or incentivizing actual piracy then I think I'll just disagree - that rate limit is a huge difference in my book and makes it far more likely for someone to take the trouble to rip and transcode.
(Which you can confirm by fast availability of streamed content on torrent sites or if you actually test the streams.)
Your second statement (about torrent sites) implies that everyone was already "downloading" content and NetFlix's servers were happy to serve the streams as a single very fast download without regard to how long it should takes clients to consume that (i.e. no throttling) - is this correct?