First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last

I am banned for using vpn, wtf

Post Reply
Der Zoodirektor
27253 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
36 / M / Germany
Online
Posted 10/17/18 , edited 10/17/18

Bourmegar wrote:

And that is mostly because of competitors who then don't make it worldwide and you guys don't have all the money, right?

so why are the other License holders not making their content worldwide? is it because they don't have all the Money?


Some streaming services or disc publishers have no interest in acquiring larger territories or multiple languages.

A streaming service based in France, dedicated to serve a French-speaking audience, would have very little interest in acquiring streaming rights in Germany, Spain or Italy. Or a German disc publisher only retailing in Germany, Austria and Switzerland would not need disc rights in Poland or the Netherlands.

The moment a licensor decides to give one of these companies the rights in a specific region or language, the World ex. Asia deal will not fully work out any more.
61 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/4/18 , edited 12/8/18
Yeh it does suck but although they have a point they should lower the premium fee for people in more obscure regions because if both US and Europe customers are paying the same price why dont they get the same service??
56340 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
62 / M / Earth
Offline
Posted 11/4/18 , edited 11/4/18

Redbird56 wrote:

Yeh it does suck but although they have a point they should lower the premium fee for people in more obscure regions because if both US and Europe customers are paying the same price why dont they get the same service??


You don't pay for content. If you did, the price would go up every three months when new shows come out.

You can still watch for free with commercials, the same shows, whether you pay or not (except Canada). You pay to turn off ads and get the most recent simulcast episode a week earlier.
61 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/8/18 , edited 11/9/18
I see, fair point.
7 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/22/18 , edited 11/23/18

Demonskid wrote:

You aren't the only ones who have to pay multiple services to watch anime. America does too. It would be nice to have a legal place that has all the anime, world wide, but I doubt that will ever happen.



The problem isn't having to pay for multiple services but actually most shows not being available AT ALL from ANY service. Like you can pay all the services you want if you want to watch certain shows you just can't legally other than straight out buying the episodes on amazon or somewhere else.

A good example for this is Death Note. To my knowledge, you can only legally stream this in my country (Germany) if you buy it. And thats only one example. There are tons of Animes that you just have to illegally stream because no legal service seems to have gotten the license for it. Problem with that is that streaming from illegal sites is officially illegal in my country since last year so you risk really high fees if you do it. I understand that thats not crunchyroll's fault at all but this really sucks. I just can't understand why the producers or whoever holds the licenses act like this. Cause they're only losing money on people who just go and stream their shows illegally in the long term cause no one else has a license.
7 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/22/18 , edited 11/22/18

asharka wrote:

You don't pay for content. If you did, the price would go up every three months when new shows come out.

You can still watch for free with commercials, the same shows, whether you pay or not (except Canada). You pay to turn off ads and get the most recent simulcast episode a week earlier.





Except in most EU countries you pay and still have mostly no content. Most shows I look up say due to licensing regulations this isn't available in your country.
56340 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
62 / M / Earth
Offline
Posted 11/22/18 , edited 11/22/18

SalzigeHeringe wrote:


asharka wrote:
You don't pay for content. If you did, the price would go up every three months when new shows come out.

You can still watch for free with commercials, the same shows, whether you pay or not (except Canada). You pay to turn off ads and get the most recent simulcast episode a week earlier.

Except in most EU countries you pay and still have mostly no content. Most shows I look up say due to licensing regulations this isn't available in your country.

So don't pay then... Paying doesn't change what you can watch there; it isn't meant to do that. CR simply cannot offer you anything different whether you pay or not; they were unable to obtain the licensing to do so.

The only real reason to pay is to turn off the ads on what you are able to watch. You can see that full list here:

/videos/anime/alpha?group=all
74 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 12/8/18 , edited 12/8/18

namealreadytaken wrote:

using VPN is against the Terms of Service because it bypasses license restrictions. Crunchyroll doesn't have the legal rights to stream some content in certain regions, so they don't. it's not Crunchyroll that is being malicious and 'unfair' - Crunchyroll is just following the law as a legal streaming source.


You are actually right, but CR, then, should not charge the same amount of money for half the licenses. Why should people who cannot access the whole library subside those who can? CR is getting money for a service they are not providing; since they charge X money to access the whole catalogue, and the same amount for half of it (and I said X money for this message to endure the testing of time: CR's rapidly increasing fees).

If you charge, let's say 50 bucks for the whole catalogue ad-free and delay-free, and you only grant me access to half of it, then I should only pay 25. The fee needs to be apportioned or prorated, or they cannot morally enforce this rule. If this guy in Romania pays the same fee as someone in the States, he should get access to the same shows
7 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 12/11/18 , edited 12/11/18

ElChOrC wrote:


namealreadytaken wrote:

using VPN is against the Terms of Service because it bypasses license restrictions. Crunchyroll doesn't have the legal rights to stream some content in certain regions, so they don't. it's not Crunchyroll that is being malicious and 'unfair' - Crunchyroll is just following the law as a legal streaming source.


You are actually right, but CR, then, should not charge the same amount of money for half the licenses. Why should people who cannot access the whole library subside those who can? CR is getting money for a service they are not providing; since they charge X money to access the whole catalogue, and the same amount for half of it (and I said X money for this message to endure the testing of time: CR's rapidly increasing fees).

If you charge, let's say 50 bucks for the whole catalogue ad-free and delay-free, and you only grant me access to half of it, then I should only pay 25. The fee needs to be apportioned or prorated, or they cannot morally enforce this rule. If this guy in Romania pays the same fee as someone in the States, he should get access to the same shows


Theoretically you are right, and in theory it should be this way. But what happens when european members start paying leds for a smaller catalogus? Cr loses money which means leads to less available shows and eventually no more Cr.

The sole reason why Some shows are not avalaible in europe is simple. Either Cr did not have enough money to have legal rights here or the producer of the show thinks the show is to unpopulair in the region where it is not available. It is all about money....
110939 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
58 / M / U.S.A. (mid-south)
Offline
Posted 12/11/18 , edited 12/11/18

ElChOrC wrote:

You are actually right, but CR, then, should not charge the same amount of money for half the licenses. Why should people who cannot access the whole library subside those who can? CR is getting money for a service they are not providing; since they charge X money to access the whole catalogue, and the same amount for half of it (and I said X money for this message to endure the testing of time: CR's rapidly increasing fees).

If that were economically viable, then over the years there should have been a service pop up that offered a similar number of titles to your region, but at a lower price.

Have you seen such a service? I'm betting you have not.

The fact that other larger services (e.g., Netflix, Amazon Prime Video) often have smaller catalogs for other countries, but pricing similar to the US should give you an indication this simply isn't how subscription services work. So should the fact that in the US, CR still charges they same price as when they launched in 2009, with far fewer titles. Like it or not, with subscription services, you are paying for access, not the size of the catalog.
74 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 12/15/18 , edited 12/15/18

TheAncientOne wrote:

If that were economically viable, then over the years there should have been a service pop up that offered a similar number of titles to your region, but at a lower price.

Have you seen such a service? I'm betting you have not.

The fact that other larger services (e.g., Netflix, Amazon Prime Video) often have smaller catalogs for other countries, but pricing similar to the US should give you an indication this simply isn't how subscription services work. So should the fact that in the US, CR still charges they same price as when they launched in 2009, with far fewer titles. Like it or not, with subscription services, you are paying for access, not the size of the catalog.


It is viable, they choose not to do it. And while other subscription services do have similar or the same fees, they also offer products that are not available in the US, balancing out the difference in amount of titles; the main recent example being DC's series Titans, which DC streaming service offers in the US, while the rest of the world sees it through Netflix (or at least we will next month).

So, while Netflix does not offer the exact same catalogue, they do offer a similar amount of titles. CR does not offer exclusive content to other regions, you either live in the US and have access to all titles, or you don't, and you have a fraction of those same titles.

Like it or not, the fact that they charge for access and not for the size of the catalogue is because they decided to do so, and is not because they have to. They actively choose to do it, it's not "how it works".
74 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 12/15/18 , edited 12/30/18

ArturiaP3ndrag0n wrote:

Theoretically you are right, and in theory it should be this way. But what happens when european members start paying leds for a smaller catalogus? Cr loses money which means leads to less available shows and eventually no more Cr.

The sole reason why Some shows are not avalaible in europe is simple. Either Cr did not have enough money to have legal rights here or the producer of the show thinks the show is to unpopulair in the region where it is not available. It is all about money....


If you are right, then, they should charge more in the US. Let's say France has access to 70% of the catalogue (just throwing a country and a number, no idea of the actual data). AT&T allegedly can't afford charging 70% of the fee to French users. AT&T should charge more for the full catalogue, and then 70% of that to France, which would end up in France paying about 85% of what they pay atm. AT&T doesn't "lose" money, and French users aren't overcharged. Win-win

And since they charge for the catalogue, and not by viewers, it doesn't matter if a show isn't popular, they'll get the exact same amount of money.

EDIT: They do get money for amount of viewers in non-premium accounts, because they insert ads in the middle of the episodes, which are paid for amount of views, but again, that doesn't affect the price of the "Premium" service, it's just another way for AT&T to get even more money.

110939 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
58 / M / U.S.A. (mid-south)
Offline
Posted 12/30/18 , edited 12/30/18

ElChOrC wrote:

If you are right, then, they should charge more in the US. Let's say France has access to 70% of the catalogue (just throwing a country and a number, no idea of the actual data). AT&T allegedly can't afford charging 70% of the fee to French users. AT&T should charge more for the full catalogue, and then 70% of that to France, which would end up in France paying about 85% of what they pay atm. AT&T doesn't "lose" money, and French users aren't overcharged. Win-win

As I understand it, France has at least one streaming service of their own (https://www.wakanim.tv/un/v2). I'm curious how about the size of their library compares to what CR has available there, and how much they charge.

Also, the only way your proposal would work is either if a service completely disallowed streaming if you traveled outside your home country, or if they restricted you to just the titles that were available in both that country and where you actually were. (No worse if you traveled to the US, but terrible if you traveled to almost anywhere in Asia).
74 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 12/31/18 , edited 12/31/18

TheAncientOne wrote:As I understand it, France has at least one streaming service of their own (https://www.wakanim.tv/un/v2). I'm curious how about the size of their library compares to what CR has available there, and how much they charge.

Also, the only way your proposal would work is either if a service completely disallowed streaming if you traveled outside your home country, or if they restricted you to just the titles that were available in both that country and where you actually were. (No worse if you traveled to the US, but terrible if you traveled to almost anywhere in Asia).


No idea about France, as I said, it was just an example because they mentioned Europe. Don't care about France streaming scene, and it's not relevant at all in this particular situation, and you know it (but if they can compete, it's because their service is on par, better or cheaper. Any other way it would've disappeared). We're not talking CR is worse or better than X or Y service, I'm arguing that, what AT&T does, is not ok, it's full of ill-intent, and how easy it would be to start making some changes in favour of the users/customers, who make Crunchyroll a thing.

And actually, it's way easier than you try to put it.

Option 1. The ideal one. If you travel aboard for, let's say, < 7 days, you keep your catalogue as it is. If you travel from country to country staying less than 7 days or so, you keep your catalogue as it is, and if you stay 8 days in a determined country, you start getting their catalogue and being charged accordingly. That kind of deal could be easily brokered with the license holders, since it doesn't actually affect the business of exclusive licensing. A foreign guy in a country you own exclusive rights to an anime, staying a week or less, and watching anime won't keep any interested local from buying your product

Option 2. The EASIEST. Whenever you visit a country with different titles you see their catalogue, and your fee gets prorated accordingly. EZ AF. (Currently, if you travel, this is what happens, and you get charged full price anyway.)

See? Not a problem with a little will to make things work. Took me less than 5 minutes to come up with this, and I'm no expert in the matter, surely AT&T's CR could do way better is they wanted to.

If you stopped playing CR's lawyer for a second (they have some pretty ruthless and expensive ones, they don't need you) and thought of what's actually fair, you'd see. This practise, charging full price and screw everyone, is ill-intended, and abuses IP laws. The rationalisation "I do it 'cause everyone else does it as well" is false, a plain fallacy. There are no rules, written or unwritten, to make them do X or Y. It's not that "everyone does it the same way" but "Hey, they got away with it, let's do it the same way to get extra, undeserved money!" Ill intent. Not far, ideologically, from a liquor store thief: the easiest road to someone else's money, without a fair claim on that money. Technically, it's not a theft, ideologically it's the same thing.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.