A story on Stuff (“Netflix wants to make content the same worldwide”) says:
“CEO Reed Hastings told Gizmodo Australia the online media streaming service wants to stop subscribers pirating content because it is unavailable in their country” and later on the same article “However, he said VPN piracy played only a small part in piracy worldwide.”
Following a common trend in New Zealand press, using a VPN to circumvent geo-blocking is called “piracy”.
Note however these are not straight quotes, but second hand “reporting”, because the source article on Gizmodo actually quotes from Mr Reed Hastings:
“The VPN thing is a small little asterisk compared to piracy… Piracy is really the problem around the world. The VPN scenario is someone who wants to pay and can’t quite pay. The basic solution is for Netflix to get global and have its content be the same all around the world so there’s no incentive to [use a VPN]. Then we can work on the more important part which is piracy."
You see, the original article makes a distinction between a problem (content piracy) and someone who doesn’t want to be a part of the problem but has to use technology to unlock and PAY for the content to legal distributors (the VPN users). The alternative is true piracy – downloading content for free from illegal distribution on torrents. Obviously whoever wrote the article for Stuff (there is no byline) didn’t bother making the distinction.
I’d like to know how these writers on Stuff see buying books or DVDs on Amazon and having these items shipped to New Zealand? Perhaps they don’t quite see that as “piracy” even though these actions are actually just the real world equivalent of buying digital content in different markets from legal distributors?
What do you think?
Other related posts:
If the headlines indicate the quality of news in New Zealand…
Geekzone is a ESET NetGuide Web Awards 2014 winner
comments powered by Disqus