Movie Studios Pissed Off At Netflix, Don't Want To Allow More Streaming Movies

from the this-will-not-end-well dept

Honestly, at what point do entertainment execs finally figure out that by purposely not making content available in the format people want it in, they're only encouraging them to get that content through unauthorized means? We already knew that the big movie studios were annoyed with Netflix and trying to get Netflix to delay movie rentals until at least a month after the DVD comes out. Now we have an explanation why. As JJ was the first (of a few) to send in, the studios apparently are quite annoyed that, in order to jumpstart its movie streaming offering, Netflix routed around the movie studios, and signed a deal with Starz that allowed it to stream the same movies without a direct deal with the studios. It's not clear how or why Starz had the right to also stream movies through Netflix, but I'm guessing it was a loophole in Starz' deals with the studios -- a loophole that's now closed. So, Netflix is saying it needs to convince Hollywood it's not the enemy, but Hollywood isn't quite buying it yet.

This really shouldn't be a huge surprise. After all, this is Hollywood, where reports that actually show that the movie industry will grow quite a bit in the next decade are also used to claim that rental services like Redbox and Netflix are killing off jobs. It's also the world where Hollywood execs still think that the answer to their problems (problems like its best box office year ever) is to just add more release windows. It's as if they still think that keeping content away from people makes them more likely to buy.

Filed Under: dvds, hollywood, movies, studios
Companies: netflix

Netflix Sued For Revealing Private Info In $1 Million Ratings Contest

from the borked-by-the-bork-law dept

As we've noted in the past, there really is no such thing as an anonymized dataset. There are almost always ways to reconnect at least some of the data to individuals. Now, when it comes to movie rental data, that's especially problematic, due to the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), 18 USC 2710, a special law that was passed after Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork ran into some trouble when his movie rental lists were made public. Last year, Blockbuster and Facebook ran into some trouble over this law, due to Facebook's disastrous "Beacon" offering, that often displayed your Blockbuster rentals. But, what about the famous Netflix prize? After all, that was based on a big "anonymous" set of data. Back in September, we noted that there was some serious concern about privacy associated with that data... and that meant it was only a matter of time until the lawsuit was filed.

Apparently the same lawyer who brought the lawsuit over the Facebook/Blockbuster Beacon snafu has sued Netflix over its contest. It is, of course, a class action lawsuit, filed initially on behalf of an "in-the-closet lesbian mother" who claims that her video rental info was included in the anonymous data, and that it could be used to "out" her. While I agree that the data likely wasn't very anonymous, this lawsuit does seem like something of a stretch, in the typical class action format of a lawyer reaching pretty far in hopes of getting a big payout. I do have concerns about Netflix releasing a big dataset, but this lawsuit is just a pure moneygrab.

Filed Under: anonymity, anonymous dataset, class action, movie rentals, netflix prize, privacy
Companies: netflix

Blockbuster, Netflix Found Not To Have Infringed On Patent For Notifying You Of The Status Of Your Rental Queue

from the how-did-this-get-approved? dept

Slashdot points us to the news that a lawsuit against Netflix and Blockbuster for patent infringement has been dismissed by a California court. At issue was a patent, 7,389,243, that is for a method for alerting users to the status of their rental queue. Read through the claims and look at the drawings and try to figure out how such a patent was possibly approved. It's patents like this one that make people question what patent examiners actually do. So it's nice to see the patent holder sent packing, though you have to wonder if GameFly, who had previously settled a lawsuit over the same patent is now regretting that decision.

Filed Under: movie rentals, notifications, patents
Companies: blockbuster, netflix

Netflix Claims Americans Don't Want Standalone Streaming Movie Service

from the say-what-now? dept

Netflix's streaming movie service has been pretty successful according to most of the analyses I've seen, but it's still tied to the DVD rental service. So it's a bit surprising to find out that, while Netflix is readying a streaming-only service, it won't be available in the US because (according to CEO Reed Hastings):

"the company hasn't seen much interest in something of that nature in the States."

Karl Bode, over at Broadband Reports, has the appropriate response:

Wait, What? 42% of Netflix users have streamed at least 15 minutes of one TV show or movie during the last quarter, up from 22% just one year earlier. Personally, my DVD queue has sat unused for months, with the majority of my film and HDTV viewing now occurring via the far more efficient Xbox 360. The demand is certainly there, it's just not quite mainstream yet. So what's really going on?

His guess... and it's a good one, is that Hollywood isn't really thrilled with the situation, and is holding back the licensing that would enable such a service.

Filed Under: netflix, streaming, us
Companies: netflix

Forget Piracy Or Boxee... Could Netflix Take Down Cable?

from the submarine-innovation dept

A bunch of folks have been sending in the recent Wired Magazine article talking about how Netflix's online streaming offering may be a disruptive innovation that takes down cable. The thinking is that, with Netflix service being built into lots of different settop devices, and the ability to watch various TV shows that are offered via DVD (and the Netflix streaming service, as well), why would people need cable any more? They can just wait until the "video" is out, and stream it via Netflix. The article may go a bit far in proclaiming Netflix as the winner of this battle right now, but it does suggest that (whether it's Netflix or some other provider) the model that cable television has relied on for so many years is certainly facing a pretty big disruption, one way or another.

Filed Under: cable, dvds, movies, streaming
Companies: netflix

Netflix $1 Million Award Shows The Value Of Collaboration... But Kicks Up New Privacy Questions

from the good...-and-bad dept

Back in July, we wrote about how the Netflix $1 million prize showed how much further research efforts could get by collaborating, rather than hoarding. Now that the official prize has been awarded, we're hearing even more about that point:

The blending of different statistical and machine-learning techniques "only works well if you combine models that approach the problem differently," said Chris Volinsky, a scientist at AT&T Research and a leader of the Bellkor team [which won]. "That's why collaboration has been so effective, because different people approach problems differently."

Indeed. There's plenty of research out there showing the leaps that are made in innovation when people with different approaches collaborate. Yet, with so much of a focus on "patents" representing "innovation," the opposite occurs. The patent system is all about hoarding information and making it harder to collaborate by putting tollbooths in the process. Many of the final "teams" involved a whole bunch of different approaches. Imagine if each one had a patent on their method. Think of how expensive that kind of innovation would be. Then, realize that there are plenty of technologies that face that exact problem today.

In the meantime, Paul Ohm is raising some serious questions about people's privacy on the new Netflix Prizes that are being announced. While Netflix claims that the data is anonymized, we've seen before that anonymous datasets are almost never anonymous, and in Netflix's case, the details are pretty bad:

Although I give Netflix a pass for its past privacy breach, I am astonished to learn from the New York Times that the company plans a second act:

The new contest is going to present the contestants with demographic and behavioral data, and they will be asked to model individuals' "taste profiles," the company said. The data set of more than 100 million entries will include information about renters' ages, gender, ZIP codes, genre ratings and previously chosen movies. Unlike the first challenge, the contest will have no specific accuracy target. Instead, $500,000 will be awarded to the team in the lead after six months, and $500,000 to the leader after 18 months.

Netflix should cancel this new, irresponsible contest, which it has dubbed Netflix Prize 2. Researchers have known for more than a decade that gender plus ZIP code plus birthdate uniquely identifies a significant percentage of Americans (87% according to Latanya Sweeney's famous study.) True, Netflix plans to release age not birthdate, but simple arithmetic shows that for many people in the country, gender plus ZIP code plus age will narrow their private movie preferences down to at most a few hundred people. Netflix needs to understand the concept of "information entropy": even if it is not revealing information tied to a single person, it is revealing information tied to so few that we should consider this a privacy breach.

Ohm also points out that this prize almost certainly violates the law:

Because of this, if it releases the data, Netflix might be breaking the law. The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), 18 USC 2710 prohibits a "video tape service provider" (a broadly defined term) from revealing "personally identifiable information" about its customers. Aggrieved customers can sue providers under the VPPA and courts can order "not less than $2500" in damages for each violation. If somebody brings a class action lawsuit under this statute, Netflix might face millions of dollars in damages.

Additionally, the FTC might also decide to fine Netflix for violating its privacy policy as an unfair business practice.

It seems rather surprising that Netflix's lawyers did not consider this.

Filed Under: innovation, netflix prize, privacy
Companies: netflix

Netflix Refunds Money Without Being Asked

from the that's-how-it's-done dept

With so many stories out there of companies screwing over customers or making life difficult for users, it's always nice to hear a good story. Apparently, Netflix recently had a problem with their Xbox video streaming, and proactively refunded money to customers without them asking. I can't think of any other company I've heard of that's done that. Hell, I remember a past broadband provider who I would call (regularly) without outages, and the best they would do is say that after the service came back, I could call and then they would process a refund -- knowing that when that finally happened hours later, it wouldn't be worth the hassle to call back in and wait on hold.

Filed Under: customer service, refunds
Companies: netflix

Hollywood's War With Redbox Expanding To Netflix As Well?

from the shooting-the-foot dept

Hollywood really never learns, does it? Following 20th Century Fox's decision to try to stop Redbox from getting movies to rent via its kiosks (to which Redbox has responded by suing Fox), Warner Bros. has joined in as well, but isn't just trying to stop Redbox, but Netflix, too. It wants to force both companies not to rent DVDs until a month after the DVDs are actually released... unless the companies agree to share revenue from the rentals.

There's basically no legal basis for this move, which would only serve to piss off consumers (yet again). These companies are free to buy the DVDs and rent them out, but the studios want a cut of every rental. It's sort of like video game makes demanding a cut of every used game sale, or an artist demanding a cut every time a piece of his artwork is sold. It's entitlement society all over again. Nothing should happen without the original company getting paid. What they don't realize is how this limits them. Netflix and Redbox become less interested in promoting Warner Bros.' movies, because they're now a lot more expensive to those companies. Instead, Hollywood is handing incentives over to these companies to promote other films that don't demand their tithe.

Filed Under: dvds, redbox, rentals
Companies: 20th century fox, netflix, redbox, warner bros.

What The Netflix Prize Tells Us About Innovation, Collaboration, Info Sharing And Game Theory

from the fascinating! dept

While there's lots of attention being paid to the fact that some team has won the Netflix Prize (it probably won't be announced who until September), there's an interesting side story that's worth noting -- which is how important collaboration was in breaking through. Plenty of studies have shown that innovation happens much faster when you have the free and open sharing of information (rather than having it locked up, say, by patents), as that mixture of different approaches and ideas allows for breakthroughs to come much faster (in fact, studies have shown that much of the success in Silicon Valley came from the free sharing of info across companies as people rapidly moved around).

And, in fact, that's exactly what happened with the Netflix Prize. The first "team" to break the 10% finish line, BellKor, was actually a merger of a few separate teams, allowing them to combine different pieces of different approaches to actually leap ahead. So, rather than trying to hoard the idea for themselves to claim the entire prize themselves, they realized it was better to team up to make the real breakthrough.

But, then a second interesting thing happened. Since the rules allowed another 30 days for other teams to offer up solutions that beat the first one, a bunch of other teams realized that it was in their best interest to team up as well, in order to leap-frog the original team. So they created the aptly named Ensemble -- and, again, the merger of various teams and different approaches allowed them to jump forward. It's not clear who actually had the best solution (both teams claim they did), but it's nice to see yet another clear example of the value of collaboration in innovation, against the standard myth of the lone inventor having a "flash of genius." It's also interesting to see the game theory aspect of the "loser teams" recognizing that they had to team up in order to catch up with the leader in the space.

Filed Under: collaboration, game theory, innovation, netflix prize
Companies: netflix

Did Someone Finally Win The Netflix Prize?

from the nice-work dept

For years, we've been fascinated by the Netflix Prize -- the $1 million offer to any team that can come up with a recommendation algorithm that is shown to be 10% better that Netflix's current recommendation engine. For years, different teams worked on the problem, and the early improvements were fast, but then progress seemed to stall out. Some different approaches were tested out which pushed the numbers up even further, but getting that last little bit has proven quite elusive... until now. Apparently, two of the leading teams combined efforts and have submitted an entry that breaks the 10% barrier for the first time. If the results are verified, then other teams have 30 days to submit an algorithm that performs even better. But, if they can't, then this team should win the $1 million... at which point they're supposed to tell the world how they did it. Seems like a much more innovation friendly approach than locking it up with a patent.

Filed Under: innovation, netflix prize
Companies: netflix