[jedberg]

It’s very rare. I’ll bet you can’t name a single show that Netflix produces. Remember all those big name shows are produced by other people and then sold exclusively to Netflix.

DRM does not benefit Netflix. It’s complicated and takes a lot of resources to run. They’d much rather not have to deal with it at all. Having DRM does not gain them any customers — in fact it loses them some. But it’s the only way they can get content.

[0815test]

Come on, that can't possibly be right. If they can get shows sold "exclusively" to them, why can't they get shows sold to them without DRM requirements?

(The closest I can get to an explanation is that the "exclusivity" deal might be limited to online streaming platforms only, and whoever is selling the content still worries about everything else. But streaming is a significant and growing portion of all media consumption (and could be even more so, were it not for that pesky DRM), so I'm extremely skeptical that this would be a real issue.)

[jedberg]

They probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline is very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any, especially given that this whole argument only applies to web streaming anyway.

[0815test]

> ...and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any...

This is where your narrative is strategically short-sighted. It would be a very significant leverage point for their own proprietary content over the traditional media companies' - the kind of thing that 'disruption' is built on!

[throwaway2048]

If Netflix is paying for shows that are produced, and they have exclusive rights, they can attach any distribution terms they want to them.

You can't tell me with a straight face that somehow they don't have this power.

DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies.

[jedberg]

> DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies

The fact that every pi8ece of Netflix content is on the pirate sites within hours of release would prove otherwise. Netflix is well aware of the uselessness of DRM.

And you're right, they probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But you missed the other part of my post -- the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline was very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any. How many people would say "man I would totally sign up for Netflix if only their own content was DRM free, even though I'd need a DRM enabled player to play everything else, and oh yeah this only applies to web streaming anyway."

[kalleboo]

I would argue the increased customer satisfaction from being able to stream 1080p/4K quality in more browsers with less esoteric hardware would be worth the extra implementation complexity (currently higher resolutions are disabled on browsers with weaker DRM or hardware without a pure HDCP path)

[jedberg]

Most people don’t stream 4K on a computer. And most people don’t have the bandwidth to stream at 4K. Ie most customers would never notice.

[jrockway]

Netflix 4k streams are like 25Mbps at best. The US average broadband speed in 2017 was around 50Mbps. There is no problem getting 4k to consumers.

Whether or not they have a 4k display... that is probably the blocker. I have a 4k display but it's not my primary display (instead opting for a 165Hz 1440p panel) and I never bothered to buy a 4k TV, given how dirt-cheap high-end 1080p TVs are. Would much rather have the black blacks of a $500 1080p OLED TV than a $3000 washed-out 4k LCD.

[jedberg]

That average broadband speed is deceptive, because it includes people who have gigabit at home. The more interesting number is the median speed. But even using averages, not a lot of countries yet have the speed to support 4K streaming[0], and like you said, even if they have the bandwidth, they need the equipment.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_...

[morpheuskafka]

Both Amazon and Netflix make the most money and are best known for their excellent original shows. Why did they bother to setup DRM for them? If they opposed it, they could have made it a selling point that you could watch them in 4K on any device without hassle.