Sharing Your Netflix Account
help.netflix.com
help.netflix.com
However, if they block her access I can't see any reason to keep my 4k plan. I can get anything we want on a Plex server and give her whatever she wants to watch that way.
I was already on the fence with the lack of content on Netflix, but this may just be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
I stuck to using torrents for years but about 6 months ago I switched to Usenet and the $10 p/m for the Usenet provider and $30/year for an indexer is definitely worth the money. Now instead of having hundreds of seedless torrents in my queue, my system downloads even the most obscure media at a speed that completely saturates my connection.
Torrents tend to stay somewhat alive way longer.
I miss the glory days of rapidshare, fastupload, rapidleech, megaupload ...
Thankfully I've already introduced them to Emby (similar to plex/jellyfin), and they are already familiar with the app that I installed on their Android tv box. They've been using it more than Netflix over the past few months, as the current show they are watching
Cancelling Netflix will be a very small disruption for us.
The Premium plan is 4k streaming, and up to 4 devices. But now they want to keep those two features bundled, while limiting your ability to stream to 4 devices (because now they'll all need to be in the same house). Sharing my account was my reason to suck that up and pay 20 bucks a month for 4k streaming.
Now only I can watch it, or in OP comment's case only his mom can watch it, so there's no reason to not just switch to the basic plan with 720p for 10 bucks a month. Point is, there will be cancellations, but also a ton of people halving their subscription cost. It's going to hurt Netflix on both ends.
I can keep my account and downgrade my plan and then pay for a separate account for my Mom, then they would make about the same or even less money. They certainly won't be getting any ad revenue from either account.
I can cancel my account outright and get my content through alternative methods where Netflix is not compensated.
It seems to me the choice is obvious here and the calculus doesn't swing in Netflix's favor. Perhaps for the majority of the subscriber population it will, but that's a bit of a gamble when my generation and really every other generation after grew up knowing how to pirate whatever they wanted.
If they force me to either pay for an entire family without being able to share it with my mom or to stream the content in subpar quality I will probably just go elsewhere.
Once upon a time, Netflix itself was considered the case in point! Then video streaming splintered into a dozen services and now Netflix has decided to make things even more complicated. People don't learn, I guess.
> First, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.
"Tiktok's enshittification", by Cory Doctorow
The truth is that Netflix could continue profiting billions per year more or less indefinitely without risking the company by shifting focus from growth, and the only people who would be upset about it would be shareholders. And the only reason they'd be upset is because of greed. They could stop trying to grow and be a strong dividend company overnight.
Nothing grows forever, so in fact this "grow at all costs" mentality forces many otherwise healthy companies that could maintain a nice break-even with some dividend to pay into doing stupid short-term thinking and desperate financial engineering and then in time collapse and go into bankruptcy.
Yet nearly everyone complaining here today about Netflix is complaining about the price.
A couple extra taps is not sufficient friction to claim that “service” is the problem.
There's mental overhead from having multiple services, as well as the price.
At some point you just decide it's not worth the hassle.
Or call up a cable or satellite TV company and had to have equipment installed and pay equipment rental fees, and watch whatever was on without any control.
It is, objectively, pretty easy and convenient to watch what you want, when you want (assuming you are in the right jurisdiction). The only question remains is, are you willing to pay the amount the seller asks?
Sure, between Netflix, HBO, Disney, Paramount, etc, etc, etc... all with their own "exclusives".
So to watch what you want, when you want, you would need to pay multiple monthly fees and deal with the aforementioned mental overhead of multiple subscriptions to manage.
At least in the old video store days, one only had to go to a single video store.
Now they're even differentiating by the quality of the stream. That's more consumer-hostile arbitrary garbage that the video store never had. Who in their right mind would pay for blurry SD streaming nowadays, when even phones are 4k? But of course there's no single HD stream plan available.
Piracy is unfortunately relatively easier and more convenient, and that's a failure of the entertainment industry. Not to mention the terrible quality of the average show... and the fact that shows that you've "purchased" go missing from streaming sites randomly... and now they're putting ads in there. The downward spiral is now.
The price of the service isn't the problem, which is why everyone I know has a netflix account (we'll see how long that stays true) it's the cost of what they're turning the service into while charging more and more that's the problem.
If you want artists in this world, you must support them. If you don't, be honest and don't complain about service.
Games are much better in pirate releases where you are not riddled with bullshit launchers and online "services". Music, Audiobooks and Movie rips shared on the high seas are of much superior quality and high-efficiency encodings than those provided by Netflix and Spotify. And don't even get me started on Book DRMs. Not to mention the things you paid for can be taken away without consequence at any time in these services. So keep your "anti-artist" rhetoric to yourself, most of those scared of piracy are often just scared of losing out on their cheap income in fears that more people will realise the actual quality of the "art" before buying than they would have.
A lot of art was created without financial incentive.
In fact, financial incentive ruins art in a lot of ways.
Even if your area allows it for "backups" or interop, you're making it available in multiple locations at once. I'm sure it wouldn't take much to demonstrate this was some sort of performance or other act explicitly disallowed by the EULA. But I'm sure you're just sharing Big Buck Bunny ;)
My point isn't that it's illegal, only that it's disingenuous enough to suggest it is legal. Plex definitely lies in a grey area of tolerated home use, with features that turn it into a piracy nightmare.
Netflix got captured and is now in the process of killing its core user experiences paying customers enjoy. It's inevitable poor performance as a result of these unfriendly changes and the terrible content they create has enacted death by a thousand cuts we see for each one of the online platforms like Facebook.
quality! mwah! beautiful! I want the product team working on my tombstones...they know death
The one saving grace is that all of this streaming mess is still a better experience overall than cable and satellite TV.
I really think such a feature is necessary if Netflix really wants people to only share with those in the same household. People in a household change over time and their current model doesn't really facilitate that.
I get the annoyance of starting over on something like YouTube or Spotify where you've built up libraries of people/artists you follow, videos/music, playlists, etc. But Netflix is just watch history basically. You can't even really trust stuff in "My list" to stick around because their library of content rotates so much. And it's not like their recommendation system does much more than recommend whatever is new and popular. I feel like you could watch 10 movies on a new account and it'll dump you into a bucket of recommendations identical to where you were before.
When Google Play Music ate the dust I had to re-add all the albums in my library to Apple Music. It was a few hour project, and that's with Apple Music's slow, janky Mac interface. On Netflix I feel like you could search for + add like 10 movies/shows per minute.
Not knowing where you ended up, which episodes you have already seen are annoying. Especially if its between seasons
that is a big part of the netflix value proposition. You sit back in your coach, and just binge watch the next recommended thing
If people are watching but not paying, then there's less money to invest in new, exciting content so subscribers get screwed.
I am not at all looking forward to it again thinking I'm sharing my account within the same household. Last time they were trying this, I had to setup the kids TVs, again. Was very annoying.
But not worth $20 for 1 movie or show a month. Better off just renting stuff or buying shows. Or for some people, worth toggling subscriptions as needed eg I subscribed to Hulu to watch The Bear, Peacock for the Olympics, Fox for the World Cup, etc. Then cancelled immediately after (with Apple I can cancel immediately after subscribing, so I don’t forget!)
(And before you think that is obviously wrong, realize that some buildings do just that sort of agreement for cable tv access.)
If someone has a secondary home like a chalet they go to from time to time, they'd have to pay for a second account?
Perhaps you didn’t know, but Netflix operates one of the biggest CDNs on the planet: https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/
I suppose we can take turns watching content on their 3 screen(!) plan. My ticket #1,204,394,701 should come up in around 30,000 years.
That said, probably easy enough to deal with that, as I'm guessing most of them take a common device with them? Not sure.
But, yeah, your example is pretty much how I view this. Was nice for a few cases where it was working. But hardly earth shattering.
That said, with how many folks leave their contacts in rental cars, I wouldn't be too shocked to know folks try to login at other locations. I imagine that would be a popular integration with hotel booking systems. Basically, make it so your netflix is attached to the hotel tv when you get there.
My gut is that hotels also don't want that?
Granted... We don't actually watch too much television, such that it may not actually impact us if they do it this way. Still, I imagine many families with children would be heavily impacted by this strategy.
If the friction becomes to much, Netflix looses its value and illegal downloads look more appealing again.
When current budgets are tight I can’t see how Netflix wins with this as likely will push away users as it’s a non essential service with declining content quality as they’ve gone for quantity not quality now and Netflix isn’t the only streaming provider in town now.
Sure. It's also fine for everyone they're betraying to cancel their subscriptions. I don't understand what your point is. Are you saying it isn't fine to be upset?
Netflix specifically promoted account sharing. Paying for multiple streams, "love is sharing your password," etc. And they made millions of dollars off that marketing during the pandemic lockdowns. Now they want to pull the rug out from under people. They deserve every bit of criticism they're getting.
Nobody is "pretending" that this came out of the blue. That train of thought is just as disingeous as expecting people to stay silent and cancel their subscriptions over what may not end up becoming policy.
Your proposed heuristic is both objectively terrible from a game-theoretical perspective and completely unnatural for any primate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma#The_ite...
I don't know where people get the energy from to do this sort of thing. It must be exhausting.
Decreasing the value to their customers thrice is a bold strategy.. let's see how it plays out.
Very curious to see how stringent they are going to be in enforcing this. This is going to disrupt a lot of multi-generational families who share an account but don't all live under the same roof.
I would have no problem with paying a little fee to allow a second primary location.
But I don't suspect my parents will go through the hassle to create and pay for a separate Netflix account.
Secondly, I don't know if I could justify paying for a Netflix account just for myself.
Answer: nothing!
Their 4k plan wording: "Watch on 4 supported devices at a time"
OK - I pay them, we use up to 4 supported devices at a time. End of story!
What's next, you can't get a 4-line cell phone plan unless all 4 lines are "under the same roof"? Makes just about the same amount of sense!
The "live together" limitation is being added for "business" reasons to charge more for the same service. There's no way to get 4K without paying for 4 simultaneous screens, but they're making a new limitation so you have to pay for 8 simultaneous screens to still get 4k if there's a second roof involved.
Give me a 1 stream, 4K plan for $10/month and I'll be happy to pay for a second plan for my in-laws (who watch 1 or 2 episode a week)!
They've changed the terms, and people on the wrong end of that change are unhappy with the change, with good reason. It's not gaslighting to have situations where you pay for something under terms of a contract, and the contract changes.
Why are you all for Netflix's term change? It seems like it's worse for consumers, and I fall into the "consumer" bucket, so I dislike it. Are you suggesting consumers suck it up, keep their mouths shut, and submit to corporate overlords? Or are we allowed to complain that the terms of the agreement have been altered, and we'd like them to please not alter them further.
And I'm not saying they can't make the change. Just that it is clearly worse for me. If it's enforced, the change in value proposition will be significant enough that I will opt out of it. We're a family without kids, but with in-laws. Why should kids living at home with lots of screens be favored by Netflix over a family like mine? Either way, I pay for the number of simultaneous screens, as per the previous version of the agreement. Ah yes - they want to squeeze more money out of my particular family arrangement. I feel entitled to complain about it, and take this change in contract as an opportunity to end it.
Of course the new enforcement is worse for everybody who was exploiting it this way. Any enforcement would be worse for somebody.
Hey, it's me. A person that reasonably believed that 4 simultaneous screens meant 4 simultaneous screens. Not 4 simultaneous screens on the same household.
I guess, Ask me anything?
If any of these make a difference, why does Netflix care where your walls and roof are, or what the layout of your home is, or who's living with who?
E2A: From their own marketing of their subscriptions:
>Watch on 4 different devices at the same time with Premium, 2 with Standard and 1 with Basic.
Now, that is separate from the argument that because they didn't strictly enforce their ToS, that people now feel entitled to something and may drive some people away from the service.
They definitely did the latter.
It reminds me of the West Wing series where President Bartlett is mad that his wife expects him to hold to the promise of talking to her before he makes the decision to run again. He says: "Damn it Abbey! That was 4 years ago!", as if a promise expires because it's old.
Now, Netflix didn't make a promise, but they did set consumer expectations about their service. And that expectation doesn't expire just because it's old.
I mean, they obviously have every right to change their behavior, but it's totally reasonable to point out that this is a change in their behavior, and a change in the agreement between them and the consumer (maybe not a literal change in the TOS, but a change in the practical agreement that we had).
Here's a tweet from netflix itself about how great it is to share accounts: https://twitter.com/netflix/status/840276073040371712
I don't see why that's "obvious". Not only is that the way many other plans work (see: cell phone plans), it's literally how Netflix itself marketed the service for years.
Coming soon to HN: announcement of massive layoffs at Netflix.
If you don't want people sharing their login with people, then maybe sell them a single-seat 4K plan.
Netflix should stop whining about account sharing when they demand I pay for two screens to get minimally acceptable TV, but can only use one per their terms.
It's not cheap, but the fact that I and other commenters here are willing to pay that money and spend the effort of setting up piracy engines is a pretty loud signal that the entertainment market has failed. Again.
There was a golden age when Netflix had a great catalog and didn't engage in dark patterns. It's long gone, and the streaming industry has become worse than the cable tv industry. I'm happy paying multiples of the netflix subscription cost for my piracy setup just to have the convenience and ownership of the content.
>Later in Q1, we expect to start rolling out paid sharing more broadly. Today’s widespread account sharing (100M+ households) undermines our long term ability to invest in and improve Netflix, as well as build our business. While our terms of use limit use of Netflix to a household, we recognize this is a change for members who share their account more broadly. So we’ve worked hard to build additional new features that improve the Netflix experience, including the ability for members to review which devices are using their account and to transfer a profile to a new account. As we roll out paid sharing, members in many countries will also have the option to pay extra if they want to share Netflix with people they don’t live with. As is the case today, all members will be able to watch while traveling, whether on a TV or mobile device.
>As we work through this transition – and as some borrowers stop watching either because they don’t convert to extra members or full paying accounts – near term engagement, as measured by third parties like Nielsen’s The Gauge, could be negatively impacted. However, we believe the pattern will be similar to what we’ve seen in Latin America, with engagement growing over time as we continue to deliver a great slate of programming and borrowers sign-up for their own accounts.
https://s22.q4cdn.com/959853165/files/doc_financials/2022/q4...
2 years ago: “Netflix to start testing warnings for people borrowing login info” https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26424186
2 adults, 2 kids, multiple devices (Phones/Tables/AppleTV/"Smart" TVs), multiple homes, one 4 stream subscription. On average i would say each user has about 3 devices capable of watching Netflix, and on any given day i would say 8-12 different IP addresses are in use, depending on commutes to/from school/work.
Add to that the summerhouse which also has AppleTV.
And while i don't mind them trying to limit password sharing, i will not spend my time defending myself over legitimate use, so the second this bothers me i'm hitting the unsubscribe button. I have enough "time robbers" to deal with, and i'm too old to deal with stuff that doesn't work by itself once setup. Keeping the internet/wifi running is work enough, i don't need the extra stress of signing in my kids devices every n days.
Im paying for the 4K plan in the UK which comes with up to 4 devices simultaneously.
We have Netflix installed on the TV, consoles, mine and my other half’s mobile devices and based on the T&C when I signed up it’s ok because it’s a single household.
However I don’t see how they’ll enforce no sharing whilst not breaking existing household account usage.
Then again, it's easy to arm chair other people's decisions.
There should be a clear exception for IPs belonging to hotels. Or if a lot of different accounts are all coming from the same IP. That should indicate a transient population and would likely mean that the account holder is the one trying to watch Netflix.
I fucking logged in. I pay for 4(?) screens at once. It's the same whether you're delivering 4 streams to one IP or 4 streams to 4 IPs.
> If you are traveling or live between different places, you can continue to enjoy Netflix.
> If you are away from your primary location for an extended period of time, your device may be blocked from watching Netflix. You can request a temporary access code to continue watching.
Vague answer. It's ok until it's not ok. How long is an "for an extended period of time"? A month? a couple of months?
The truth is that the article has been up since at least March last year (http://web.archive.org/web/20220321152735/https://help.netfl...)
So many comments below talk about giving parents/siblings access and they barely use it (I fall in this camp). If that’s true, you’ll almost never notice the restrictions.
But if it’s Friday night and your mom is watching Emily in Paris and you want to watch Seinfeld, you’ll decide to either watch something else, pay up for another account, or decide you don’t want to pay more for something you and your mom are both wanting (at the same time).
What is abusive is that Netflix used that possibility as a selling argument justifying the premium of the 4k plan. And it is like they are trying now to make you pay again for the same thing by pretending that they did not expect you to share and that needs a separated option.
I understand that now that they reached the ceiling of growth in term of new users they are trying to pivot to continue the growth, but I consider this as a breach of trust for customers, bracing the promise they did before.
Does not seem unfair, IMO.
Email, phone, password manager, ... any other internet based service.
Netflix is not like cable. Cable is provided by a physical wire connected to one location. Netflix is delivered over any internet connection. If I pay to have multi-device access, it should not matter where those devices are located.
If that's not what you're saying, then if I don't need sharing for use in the home, then what purpose does the share tier serve if I can't share it?
What you can't do is give your password to someone outside your household and have them watch Netflix from their house whenever they want. Which, I mean, obviously that was never really OK.
Curious, how did you extract that from the above? Inviting people over to watch with you isn’t sharing your account, nor is it watching from outside your household.
The resolution I want and the number of screens I want are almost completely independent, so it is annoying to me that they don't have plans that decouple them.
Only people who live with you may use your account. Watch on 4 different devices at the same time with Premium, 2 with Standard and 1 with Basic.
I think I'll just drop it.
On Netflix’s side, they would see multiple accounts accessing the service via the same IP ranges.
Way back when Netflix was mostly still non-original content and movies, the US had a far superior selection compared to Canada, so a lot of us Canadians used VPNs to get access to US content.
Around 2015 Netflix clamped down hard on VPNs, such that I couldn't even use them to watch any content, let alone content from specific countries. I tried a few options and all failed, so I assumed most other people gave up with me.
Regarding concurrent stream plans, I'm afraid you're going to have a very bad not great day if you get mad about every tech-y company over-selling to unsuspecting consumers...
Or are we keeping with the feigned-ignorance thing and acting like a company growth-hacking and rug-pulling customers is anything but absolutely run-of-the-mill.
Lol! Its like this site having more pity for consumerist tech workers that pissed away hundreds of thousands a year versus rhe empathy displayed for otherwise actually poor, disenfranchised folks.