On 10/05/12 14:29, Dean Pemberton wrote:
So with my InternetNZ IP technical policy hat on, it got me thinking...
Are people using a "New Zealand IP Address"[1] to access the internet having their freedom impacted by not being treated the same as someone using a "US IP Address"[2] ?
Freedom? Tough call. Holistically, yes. The argument from the 'rights holders' is that it's their content, thus theirs to do with what they wish. The argument from pretty much everyone else is 'we're all talking the same protocol(s), what does it matter where we are? And yet Geolocation services are becoming more and more relevant - as are restrictions based on (inferred) geography. If the reasons for this were purely technical ('lets serve this user their data from a closer node, for better performance and less cost') then that'd be fine. But as we're all aware, that's rarely the case when it comes to media.
Has Internet Citizenship got anything to do with where you are physically located any more? Or does it purely come down to where a content provider believes your IP address is originating from? If that's the case then there will be times when having an IP address from a certain country is an advantage, as well as a liability. Just like different passports really.
Ive seen geolocation used to prevent fraud (sorry, your credit card comes from a country other than the one you appear to be in. Unable to complete transaction.) No doubt it does prevent (or perhaps just reduce) some of the more obvious (less tech-savvy) fraudulent CC users. But there's the case just the other day that I heard, of an AirNZ customer trying to use their AirNZ airpoints via the AirNZ website, and being unable to do so because they were overseas (no thanks to Air NZ, right?...)
FYX would have us believe that they are providing their users greater access to the Internet and allowing Kiwi's [sic] to enjoy the freedom of a better internet experience. So here are my questions for people.
1) Is this claimed lack of freedom something real? Do New Zealanders feel that they are being somehow restricted by having their internet traffic originate from a "New Zealand IP Address"
The number of times i've found Music Videos in my Youtube Playlist suddenly don't work due to geographic or (arbitrary) copyright restrictions (when it worked before) - and then found several other copies that work fine - is my chief geographic frustration. Oh, also: http://theoatmeal.com/pl/game_of_thrones/nz
2) If it is real, given that one of InternetNZs objectives is "To promote easily available access to the Internet for New Zealanders". Is there anything that InternetNZ could be doing at a policy/advocacy level to address this restriction on freedom.
Get onto whichever bandwagons include the argument that arcane geographic restrictions encourage piracy. Content providers are slowly wizing up to this for the NZ market but as someone pointed out, we're relatively small fish and don't get a lot of priority attention as a result. Perhaps InternetNZ can throw some weight behind the argument and get some attention with the rightsholders who're holding the people who *want* to buy this content, but can't, to ransom - by leaving the options of 'pirate, or go without'. Interesting to see that even the TV Networks are realising this is true... some good work by them in getting some new TV series on the air here very quickly after US screen dates, and then in making the content viewable via on-demand. Again, unfortunate that some of the rights-holders make this difficult for them!
3) Again, if it is real, do you think that just having FYX offering this service will encourage other providers to follow suit, and therefore solve the problem? Or is some other action required?
It's an interesting marketing angle, but one has to assume that eventually a) the geo-limits will become irrelevant due to some sanity finally prevailing, or a local player filling the gap in the market, or b) whatever technical means they have in place, will be defeated in response to the flagrant disregard for the wishes of the rights-holder. When that occurs one hopes that the other selling points (like the bandwidth model they're using, perhaps) are enough to draw in and retain business. All the technical arguments posted to date don't address the core issue, as I see it; Geographically restricting viewers by whatever means is chosen, is a policy decision being made for whatever arcane reasons the rights-holders see fit.... ultimately those restrictions wont go away until the demand for traffic from those rights-holders diminishes or until those rights-holders learn that the Internet is, indeed, the Internet, and is all about TCP/IP, not GeoPolitical boundaries. Of course, that said, there's other examples of Geo-limitations that remain in place and invisible to many in the public; like crypto export restrictions imposed by the USA. It just so happens that Game-of-Thrones (etc) is much more visible to the world-at-large...? Mark.