<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Owen DeLong wrote on 11/20/2019 11:51
AM:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7DBD08D9-C0FB-405A-A427-3708639705F0@delong.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Nov 20, 2019, at 07:38 , Tom Beecher <<a
href="mailto:beecher@beecher.cc" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">beecher@beecher.cc</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Never did figure out
if it was stupidity<br class="">
or malice driving that.<br class="">
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Personally I think it's neither; it's just
$$$$$. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">They could invest in a robust system to
accurately identify what they chose not to allow to
access the service. Or, they can choose to run with a
'close enough' system with some legitimate users caught
in the middle. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">They've most likely done the math and
decided that the revenue lost from people getting caught
up in inaccurate blocking is small enough that the
investment in a more accurate method isn't worth it.
This is unfortunately the more common decision in this
age of worship at the Altar of Maximum Shareholder
Value. </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
</div>
I think you are exactly right here. It’s yet another example of
how the incentives around DRM are all messed up and are creating
economic bias in favor of screwing consumers as much as possible
without loosing too much revenue.
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">What is needed is either a more conscientious
consumer base that will see this and react by voting with their
wallets, or, regulation which provides more costly penalties for
screwing over legitimate consumers.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
I suppose a Hulu subscriber could dispute the charge or file a suit
(class action?) for damages: "Hulu took my money, but didn't provide
the services they advertised." As an ISP, some of us might even be
in a position where we encounter losses due to Hulu's
(mis)classification resulting in customers moving to the
competition; I would think that would be sufficient grounds for a
suit.<br>
</body>
</html>