Same here (Czech Republic). I have been on a kick to change my pirating ways, and go legit for most things, but this shows why it's hard at times.

About 1/8th of the content for more money...

Shame there are no open source alternatives for movies. (Most of my switching from piracy has been to open source software - Libre office, gimp, Inkscape, krita, audacity, Scribus, darktable etc. As I don't really play any games anymore it's been quite nice being on Linux full time instead of just through VMs)

Netflix engineer here.

To the commenters above who are disappointed with their country's catalog and plan to cancel their trial: sorry to see you go, but we did the best we could for launch. We make sure canceling is easy, just go to the account page on the website.

As you can imagine, buying the rights for titles in a new region is expensive, so we start off with a giant loss on the balance sheet. But as we get more members we'll be able to buy more content in each country. Here's a list of a few dozen big-name titles that are coming later this year [1]. So we hope you come back soon.

About the patchwork availability - that's not what we want, it's just what was for sale. In the recent past the only buyers of TV shows were just buying for their own country - like country-wide TV networks. For each show, that left a random set of regions where the license was still available. We're trying to get global licenses for everything, so it'll gradually become consistent country-by-country.

[1] https://pr.netflix.com/WebClient/loginPageSalesNetWorksActio... (sorry for the PR link but it's the most complete list of 2016 releases I could find)

> buying the rights for titles in a new region is expensive, so we start off with a giant loss on the balance sheet. But as we get more members we'll be able to buy more content in each country

Sorry to pick on your comment, but I resent (maybe a strong word) businesses telling me things like this: Unless you'll give me something extra when you make massive profits (a discounted subscription? shares?) then don't expect me to make sacrifices for you when you have losses or cash flow problems. Why should I fund your business? Am I an investor? Where is my return? You're selling a service for a price; if the service has problems, the reason why generally is not the customer's concern - that's an internal issue.

I agree with you that businesses shouldn't excuse themselves, but I don't see that happening here. Let's not mistake a personal post by an employee with official communication - at least I like that one can still talk about the company we work for without speaking on their behalf.

> Let's not mistake a personal post by an employee with official communication

A good point; I agree.

Please don't be offended. HN comments regularly discuss startup business models, so I thought it might be interesting to point out to my fellow entrepreneurs how we are bootstrapping our streaming TV business in new countries.

Thanks and I'm not offended at all. It was interesting to hear what Netflix is doing. I was just using your post as an example of a larger issue and addressing that issue; as icebraining pointed out, one post by one employee doesn't signify an official policy of Netflix.

You should look at options for charging per movie/show. Then hopefully the copyright owner wouldn't care where the paying customer is living. I realise that a large portion of the public wouldn't pay for it, but I suspect there's a substantial market for it: A lot of people are still going to cinemas these, which I personally fail to understand, but it makes me think that a lot of people will pay per movie from the comfort of their home if charged at a reasonable price.

I don't understand why you were downvoted. I actually think this is a valid point.

But: isn't that what Google Play and Apple's iTunes are doing already - pay per show / movie? How would Netflix differentiate itself by offering such a service?

Not to mention that many TV providers already have their own movie rentals.

But you have to first pay for there basic service, and then their catalog is very restricted. The attraction of Netflix + VPN are the very significant catalog, and the price. I'm ready to pay a bit more, but basic cable fee + rental fee is not reasonable. Also, I do not want to sponsorise the garbage on basic cable.

I suspect iTunes require an Apple device. As far as google Play (and Amazon) goes, I had assumed that they have a fairly restricted catalogue with only newer shows/movies, but will take a look.

If you want to be able to rent things, use Amazon Instant Video instead. Personally between a Prime subscription and the odd rental of new titles I don't feel like I'm missing much after cancelling my Netflix subscription, although I'll probably renew when they release a new season of one of their originals.

What did I say that is worthy of downvotes?

Unfortunately, this would destroy Netflix's subscription service. Why? Because the moment you start having titles that are "exclusive" to pay-per-view, your subscription users would riot, seeing this as just a way to raise fees (see: the uproar when Netflix tried to spin off the DVD business) on "exclusive" titles. It also goes against / dilutes the whole addictive nature of Netflix.

As an aside, the HN guidelines mention you should avoid complaining about being downvoted.

The addictive nature of Netflix?

A more accurate phrase would be the binge-watching nature of Netflix.

What this is showing is how geographically slicing up the rights to movies is highly damaging to not just Netflix, but to any movie or series owner. Every time that this occurs, it just means that to watch that series you need to subscribe to anything up to 3 services. Regardless of the validity of this, it just leads to piracy.

Once you get global distribution rights to major series, then piracy will probably fall greatly. Until then, either piracy will increase, or folks will bypass geoblocking. I think that the hope should be that people will bypass geoblocking, because the rights holders at least get some money. With piracy, they get absolutely nothing.

Just don't charge the same price for 1/10 of the contents. If I didn't feel like I am robbed off, I would probably pay.

Could you explain me why would you have to buy rights to emit House of Cards?

Netflix didn't actually "make" House of Cards despite that being the popular public perception. Netflix simply financed the production by buying the streaming rights to all the countries Netflix operated in. TV rights internationally were sold to a patchwork of local TV stations in exchange for exclusivity. Now, Netflix is in those countries, it has to reacquire streaming rights after the exclusivity window has closed.

Even in the US, it seems they only bought the rights to do the first broadcast, since Comcast has bought the rights to do the re-runs: http://www.wired.com/2014/03/comcast-bites-netflix-snagging-...

It's actually not Netflix making the series directly; it's being made by a separate company and Netflix is paying for US rights.

Sony has the international rights, if I am not mistaken, and they sold it to different companies across the globe, that now want exclusive rights, so Netflix doesn't eat from their table.

Perhaps global rights were sold or something like that?

> Shame there are no open source alternatives for movies.

I'm not quite sure I understand what "an open source alternatives for movies" would be, but as for open distribution, there's at least:

http://vodo.net/

Unsurprisingly, their catalog is not as impressive as Netflix US. But there are at least a couple of titles that are worth (IMNHO) checking out:

http://vodo.net/joshbernhard/pioneerone/

http://vodo.net/vodo/stf/ (Steal This Film)

Then there are of course a few other projects, like:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1282316546/c-299792-km-...

Just a quick note from a U.S. subscriber (well, sometimes-subscriber, I subscribe a few months a year.)

Netflix is usually good at expanding their content across the countries they service. I would not be surprised if they increased their content availability over the months and years across all the countries.

Not being a Netflix apologist here, but I think you're eventually going to get to see more content.

I'm probably dropping my Netflix subscription when the VPN-route fails (seems to work for me now oddly enough). It is silly to expect customers outside of the US to pay a slightly higher subscription fee for a significantly smaller catalogue. The Netherlands hasn't got it as as bad as Poland, but still our catalogue is only half that of the US.

I am willing to pay, and I understand that regional licensing is a complex topic, but I am often interested in the older films and series. It is great that Netflix is rolling out their own shows world-wide, but without the VPN-route it feels like I am subsidising a catalogue I cannot access myself.

> Netflix is usually good at expanding their content across the countries they service. I would not be surprised if they increased their content availability over the months and years across all the countries.

Why pay now for a service that won't be sufficient for months or years? Netflix can try to sell to those customers again at that point, though some reputation and trust will have been lost.

Netflix has no chance in Poland, we have cda.pl. Want to watch The Martian? http://www.cda.pl/video/5378262f

mad max? http://www.cda.pl/video/49320174

as an added bonus almost everything is nicely localized with subtitles and/or voice-over. cda.pl was already in court and won :)

Ha. I should investigate this a little more and see whether they lockout the rest of the EU.

[EDIT] I just turn on JS and I can watch? Sounds more like youtube and hollywood movies before they get booted off by Big Copyright.

It's just another piracy site. It streams stuff downloaded from torrents, with zero respect towards the copyright holders.

Whilst I don't condone it, that's precisely what is going to keep occurring until markets are totally unlocked. Piracy and torrent trackers will continue to be effective until this sort of thing is freed up.

Rights holders might not be happy about it, but then again people like myself, who don't pirate, aren't very happy about having to pay for multiple services just to watch content that we would be able to view if we lived in another country. Frankly, it pisses off a lot of people that nationality has anything to do with what we watch or have the opportunity to purchase.

Why should being a U.S. citizen be more advantageous for viewing streaming content than being an Australian? This sort of thing pisses off people. It's often funny listening to those from the U.S. who say "So what? It's the law, just deal with it", when if they found they had the same treatment would probably complain just as loudly.

not 'just another'

http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/PL

#14 overall, higher than any other movie/video related website other than YT.

http://www.wirtualnemedia.pl/artykul/najpopularniejsze-serwi...

#4-5 entertainment

yt has content id = hollywood content is filtered during upload

Same here in Lithuania. I signed up for free tutorial and browsed their content - and it was basically empty. Confused browsed similar site - lo and behold - all tv series I wanted to watch were in US and not here in Lithuania. Netflix may have launched for the rest of the world, but the rest of the world still uses torrent trackers to watch TV series...

Except that it has nothing to do with Netflix, more likely due to copyright/licensing regulation in your country.

And nobody is blaming Netflix for the situation. But sadly for Netflix, their customers bypass the geoblocks, or they cancel their subscription with no judgement of Netflix and then pirate their content. Which has nothing to do with Netflix either :-)

This means that Netflix had really better up their game in getting global licensing deals for their content.