Re: Hulu thinks all my IP addresses are "business class", how to reach them?

[Blake Hudson <blake () ispn net>]

tim () pelican org wrote on 11/21/2019 4:32 AM:
> On Wednesday, 20 November, 2019 21:25, "William Herrin" <bill () herrin us> said:
>
> > This is why you don't go after Hulu. You go after the content owners who
> > conspired to compel Hulu to limit distribution in a way that tortiously
> > interferes with your contract with your eyeball customers.
> Am I the only one who's baffled in the context of a paid service why so much focus is put on where the consumption 
> takes place (hard), and so little on where the transaction take place (easy)?
>
> I understand, even if I don't necessarily always agree with, market segmentation, differentiated pricing, accurate P&L for 
> different business units, etc, that mean for example if you're a US citizen you need to pay Disney US the prevailing US price to 
> watch Disney content, but if you're an EU citizen you need to pay Disney EMEA the prevailing EU price to watch Disney content.  
> Surely that transaction is the thing content creators and distributors care about?
>
> If I, as a UK citizen, buy region 2 DVDs at home, take them on my trip to the US and watch them on my laptop, no-one is screaming 
> that I'm violating someone's geographic distribution rights by doing so.  If a US citizen is paying for Hulu, from a US 
> billing address, on a US credit card, but happens to be watching from their hotel in Italy, why does anyone care?
>
> I can see why it's different and more complicated for content that's provided free but geo-constrained (e.g. BBC 
> iPlayer), but IP geolocation for paid services seems a terrible waste of time and effort on both sides.
>
> Or am I woefully naive, and it's actually trivial for a non-US resident to come up with a US credit card and billing 
> address to pay for the service?
>
> Regards,
> Tim.

Tim, like you, I've been baffled by this choice as well. Why streaming 
video providers continue to choose a costly and convoluted path when a 
less convoluted and cheaper path exists to reach (seemingly) the same 
destination I will never know. Perhaps one company did it that way so 
others just copied the mistake? Perhaps providers feel it's necessary 
because not all of them require transactions with a billing/mailing 
address all the time (think free/trial services or gift cards)? One can 
only attempt to conceive of the inconceivable...