Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Good. Bring on the downvotes but like people who stole Adobe Photoshop back in the day leading to photoshop costing $700 for a license or whatever it was before Creative Suite subscriptions came along, we paid for people who were freeloading. If Netflix can get every household to pay their fare share, maybe these price hikes will stop being a yearly festivity.

...and if you don't like it, literally every show on Netflix is available on BitTorrent.
Or maybe they’ll cause the opposite effect and people will leave the service in droves.
 
Then you agree with me then.
As long as the devices are authenticated, and are within the limit of the account, why should this be an issue? This move can actually irk the people who are willing to pay for Netflix' own highest tier, their premium customers.
No, I don't agree at all. You agree to their terms when you start service: screens in a household. If members of that household go on a trip, they are covered. My sister, who is not part of my household, is not covered. The service I pay for doesn't include her.
 
The issue is if you give the password to your neighbor, cousin, etc. And why, because it's not just about the cost of operation to Netflix, it's the loss of a sale.
This is the same argument that led to the MPAA and RIAA’s wars on Bittorrent. Problem with that is there was never any evidence that piracy created a loss of sale. The same is true here, is there any evidence that those sharing passwords are likely to pay for their own accounts? My spouse and I share accounts with our siblings, between all of us we have every major streaming service. If we werent allowed to share I promise we wouldnt all purchase all of those each, we’d just all downscale to less services. And in terms of Netflix: we pay for 4 streams, why should Netflix care how we use them?
 
I wonder how this will affect their viewership. I don’t know how many people share their password but if it’s substantial, it might not play out to their advantage. Some may purchase their own subscription and others won’t. It’ll be interesting to see.
It's not about viewership. It's about paid membership. Say you and your mate pay for four devices so the two of you and your kids can watch at the same time, and Netflix manages successful to block this. Do you stop paying and watching, or do you buy two separate two device memberships?
 
And just like that, Netflix loses 50% of its subscribers. $20/month is not worth what netflix is charging when there are other services like disney+ and apple tv+ for significantly cheaper
 
  • Like
Reactions: WiseAJ and volcanic
And just like that, Netflix loses 50% of its subscribers. $20/month is not worth what netflix is charging when there are other services like disney+ and apple tv+ for significantly cheaper
50%? OK guy.

These are people account sharing, who likely will subscribe on their own and not mooch off friends and family.

And D+ is no where near the same value for content. You get only Disney and Fox stuff with little in terms of new TV and Movies worth a damn.
 
I’m only still paying Netflix because I know a family member who is deployed right now still uses the account. I’ll definitely cancel if they end up blocking his access.
If he or she is still member of your household, then you should be able to call them, and tell them that it is a household member that they blocked, and they should unblock him. At least in the UK, household members can temporarily be elsewhere. On the other hand, unrelated people sharing a home are not one household.
 
Why does it matter if a person is part of someone’s household or not? Netflix already implements a maximum devices limit so only a limited number of people can watch or use the account at the same time anyway. Seems like a petty move on Netflix’s part
 
Good. Bring on the downvotes but like people who stole Adobe Photoshop back in the day leading to photoshop costing $700 for a license or whatever it was before Creative Suite subscriptions came along, we paid for people who were freeloading. If Netflix can get every household to pay their fare share, maybe these price hikes will stop being a yearly festivity.

...and if you don't like it, literally every show on Netflix is available on BitTorrent.
Thoughtless analogy. If they can’t provide the number of streams being paid for, they’re in breach of contact
Sure, if you convince yourself that something is too expensive then you can easily justify stealing it. If you think Netflix is too expensive then don’t subscribe but don’t turn around and steal it anyway.

Whenever you share something you pay for, you’re aiding and abetting theft. What a wonderful world you live in
 
  • Like
Reactions: volcanic
What stops me from having a code texted to the owner and then ask the owner to reveal it to me? Is there a mechanism that prevents this?
Behold Netflix requiring camera access so they can prove its you who are entering the code, not someone else. And then, they use machine learning to determine what the appropriate behaviour of entering code is.

Certainly possible in a poorly regulated market.
 
Netflix needs to stop linking quality to the number of streams. I don’t want to watch SD quality, and I don’t want to pay for four streams when I only use one. I chose to only subscribe for a month every couple of years or so. Other chose to share accounts. An option for a single stream at 4K quality wouldn’t encourage this behaviour.
I agree. I can imagine the vast majority of subscribers pay for the highest tier because it’s the only to offer 4K (despite using only one or two simultaneous streams).

However, Netflix may lose a lot of revenue if they changed this.
 
If he or she is still member of your household, then you should be able to call them, and tell them that it is a household member that they blocked, and they should unblock him. At least in the UK, household members can temporarily be elsewhere. On the other hand, unrelated people sharing a home are not one household.
Why would unrelated people sharing a home not be a household? That’s the silliest thing I’ve ever heard. That argument means every unmarried couple isnt a household for example
 
  • Like
Reactions: volcanic
Thoughtless analogy. If they can’t provide the number of streams being paid for, they’re in breach of contact


Whenever you share something you pay for, you’re enabling and abetting theft. What a wonderful world you live in
It is abetting theft if it violates the terms you agreed to, unless I'm missing something. 🤷‍♂️
 
This is the same argument that led to the MPAA and RIAA’s wars on Bittorrent. Problem with that is there was never any evidence that piracy created a loss of sale. The same is true here, is there any evidence that those sharing passwords are likely to pay for their own accounts? My spouse and I share accounts with our siblings, between all of us we have every major streaming service. If we werent allowed to share I promise we wouldnt all purchase all of those each, we’d just all downscale to less services. And in terms of Netflix: we pay for 4 streams, why should Netflix care how we use them?
There is no evidence that it translates to the loss of a sale, but Netflix doesn't care to serve people who aren't paying. And if they implement this, they'll soon find out how many people were sharing and how many sales they gain.

You're also implying that I consider piracy (through bit torrents) a good thing.
 
Last edited:
Part of the household but not living with you so technically not covered by your plan.
Stop right there. The T&Cs say "members of your household". You'd have to check what is legally considered a "member of your household" in your country. As long as they live primarily in your home they are member of your household. On the other hand, your lodger, or the three workmates that you share a house with, are NOT members of your household.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jhfenton
Why would unrelated people sharing a home not be a household? That’s the silliest thing I’ve ever heard. That argument means every unmarried couple isnt a household for example
In the UK, unmarried couples living together count as a household. They are not unrelated. Three independent people sharing a house to save on rent do not count as a household. If you have a nanny or an au-pair living in your home, you ask a lawyer :)
 
People are already paying for it. Even Reed Hastings said back in the day it was ok to share passwords.
He never said it was ok. He said it was something Netflix had to learn to deal with. As location technology and systems improve, you better believe they will do everything they can to make users learn to deal with their terms of service.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.