You do not like the answer.
The point I am trying to make is that I shouldn't have to take 10 steps to watch my favourite shows. It should be a two step process. Pay -> Watch. Easy.
It is just crazy how many conditions they impose instead of just taking my money, then complain when people who are less patient than me just go ahead and pirate the damn thing.
Purchasing a single tv show or movie is the same price as a few months of Netflix, though.
More like; I buy a loaf of bread and I am never around to eat it. The whole loaf goes mouldy so I don't buy it. My friend gives me a piece of bread when I want it at 12 am, I would GLADLY pay for it but he doesn't accept money and he only complains.
You probably meant "definitely" or "certainly" comparing "apples to oranges". It's an expression, it's not literal unless he LITERALLY was comparing apples and oranges, where an apple is a fruit from an apple tree, and an orange is a fruit from an orange tree. Such a comparison may sound like "most apples are red and fat around the middle, most oranges are orange and evenly round".
You know, I think that's what he actually meant. In fact, you knew that to and so did everyone else.
Something that often annoys me about the "piracy" debate is that the debate is very difficult to have, since there is very little to compare it to. No, it's not like stealing a car, but it's also not like making bread from scratch, and it's also not quite like sharing a (physical) copy with your friend, or like making a physical copy and handing that around (it's also not really like piracy, which is why I put that word in scare quotes)
A better analogy would be that you wanted to buy a loaf of bread, but the grocery store forced you to also buy hot dog and hamburger buns with it along with some bagels. Say you're a vegetarian or don't like hot dogs or hamburgers, and you'll never use them, but you have to buy them anyway.
Ultimately, the issue here is that content producers don't have simultaneous releases of this content online (for a worldwide standardised fee) because they don't want to.
Selling and delivering a virtual product in Australia doesn't cost significantly more than it does in the USA.
I would gladly pay for half a book after I'm done reading the half that i read, but stores don't sell me half a book, for half the price.
So instead, I borrow the book from my friend, read half of it, and then return it. The store doesn't get any income from me at all.
The grocery store will not sell half a loaf because they cannot figure out how to keep them fresh enough to sell them. They don't try hard to sell half a loaf and they basically tell the public to accept whole loaves as a fait accompli.
A the growing demand for half loaves meets a innovative group of people who found a way to deliver fresh half loaves to people. They sell them on the city streets -- without a license -- near the grocery store. Customers are happy again.
The grocery store finds out they have been losing revenues to the street dealers and the engineering efforts they developed for delivery are based on knowledge in the public domain. Instead of using this knowledge to serve their customers the fresh half loaves they want, they try to stop the street dealers from selling because they operate without a business license.
Even if everyone in the USA agrees with you, Bell won't. They have far too much money invested in TV broadcasting technologies, and too little tied up in Internet infrastructure. There's no real upside to them providing you the content online, because not only will they'll lose their broadcasting revenue, but you'll fill up their oversubscribed tubes, making their internet services more costly to operate. A token fee for the program isn't going to offset that.
All i m saying, and i think most people agree, is that their cost/benefit/profit analysis of the situation hinges on the false assumption that consumers have no way of obtaining the content in their own way (via piracy or waht not). and this is increasingly not the case.
I do agree that the time will eventually come, but it is wholly up to the consumers. So long as we continue to fund the TV infrastructure in a big way, there is no incentive for the business to change.