[bilkow]

Does it work by checking the referrer? Maybe you can workaround by configuring a browser add-on (like RefControl) to just send facebook.com as a referrer while on WSJ.

[Jgrubb]

I believe this was discussed in one of the last threads as being potentially against some dumbass 25 year old law.

[the8472]

Not everyone is american

[melling]

I've paid for the WSJ for over 15 years. There's nothing wrong with actually paying for good content. That business model doesn't need to go away.

[hendersoon]

I completely agree. The real problem is pricing.

The difference between absolutely free like most content on the internet and the WSJ standard monthly rate of $33/month is truly enormous. The NYT, which I also feel is priced too high, is $15/month.

Remember Netflix costs $10/month-- that's the value proposition they need to compete against.

These content producers should charge $5/month, with no scummy "special introductory offers" where you just _know_ they're going to raise the price and screw you in a couple months. At that price I would subscribe to everything I read.

[cobookman]

If they lower the price they might not get more subscribers. So they are pricing it to maximize revenue.

[hendersoon]

I can't speak to that-- all I can say with certainty is I personally would subscribe at $5/month.

[hnbroseph]

do other countries have laws?