> What does Netflix gain at this point for instrumenting DRM free streaming for a small subset of their content rather than just piggybacking off their current infrastructure?
They gain more trust by showing that it's not their intention to use DRM. Since they don't, they are viewed as liars when they claim that they don't want to use it. And they very well can be liars. Let them prove their intentions with actions rather than with empty words.
> That someone is consumers, not Netflix.
No, that's false logic. Users of course should push for it too. But you can't compare the scale. Individuals voting with their wallets are less visible to publishers than distributors voting with theirs. GOG already demonstrated it. And that actually feeds the cycle. Once some distributor breaks the wall of stupidity by making some DRM-free deals with publishers, then more users start supporting them from those who care about buying it DRM-free.
The bottom line, Neflix are not interesting in fighting that fight. They oblige insane publishers willingly and their claims that they "have no choice" don't sound sincere.
> Netflix has little incentive to care about it also
That's exactly the point. So they can't claim that they don't like it. In the best case they don't care, and in the worst they prefer using it even for their own content and push for that garbage into HTML standard. Incentive for caring about it should not come from estimating how many users care about it.
> ll that still doesn't change the fact if Netflix could, they would most likely drop DRM, if not for all the technical reasons
That's what they say, but no one is inclined to believe them when they don't do it for their own content as above. There is no technical reason for them to use DRM where publishers don't demand it. And when they are the publishers themselves it means they demand it themselves too.
They gain more trust by showing that it's not their intention to use DRM. Since they don't, they are viewed as liars when they claim that they don't want to use it. And they very well can be liars. Let them prove their intentions with actions rather than with empty words.
> That someone is consumers, not Netflix.
No, that's false logic. Users of course should push for it too. But you can't compare the scale. Individuals voting with their wallets are less visible to publishers than distributors voting with theirs. GOG already demonstrated it. And that actually feeds the cycle. Once some distributor breaks the wall of stupidity by making some DRM-free deals with publishers, then more users start supporting them from those who care about buying it DRM-free.
The bottom line, Neflix are not interesting in fighting that fight. They oblige insane publishers willingly and their claims that they "have no choice" don't sound sincere.
> Netflix has little incentive to care about it also
That's exactly the point. So they can't claim that they don't like it. In the best case they don't care, and in the worst they prefer using it even for their own content and push for that garbage into HTML standard. Incentive for caring about it should not come from estimating how many users care about it.
> ll that still doesn't change the fact if Netflix could, they would most likely drop DRM, if not for all the technical reasons
That's what they say, but no one is inclined to believe them when they don't do it for their own content as above. There is no technical reason for them to use DRM where publishers don't demand it. And when they are the publishers themselves it means they demand it themselves too.