Hacker News Reader

I find it difficult to accept a copyright claim on commercial content never sold in a country. In my views, if you cared about getting paid for the content, then you would have sold it legally in that country. IMHO, refusing to distribute content is essentially forfeiting any commercial claims to its distribution.

View on HN

Game of Thrones is notable due to the use of VPN-blocking, and credit card blocking.

There are people who pay for HBOgo, do so through some forwarder which makes their credit card appear to come from a US bank, and then have to find a VPN service to actually watch it with.

Multiple steps in this transaction - completely unncessarily due to the nature of the underlying technologies - cost the consumer money, to circumvent protections implemented by HBO (or more likely whatever BS contract their parent company signed), for the express purpose of preventing the consumer paying HBO to lawfully watch their content.

So, something is sold exclusively in Target, but isn't sold in, say, Best Buy. You only have a best buy near you, therefore you're... justified in stating they have no commercial claims to the content they own and chose to distribute through Target? I'm not sure I follow your argument.

Of course you don't understand, cause you completely slaughtered his argument.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com