casemon writes "Ok, so it's been a while since internet video became popular; and increasingly video sharing sites are supporting lock-out schemes based on where the viewer's terminal is located. Even YouTube is getting in on this grotesque display of excessive greed (can you say "death knell"?)
I posit that such location-based lock-out features are decidedly ANTI-INTERNET, considering the fabric of the internet is infused with "anyone anywhere" sensibilities. What more, I am surprised to find the crazy / wacky / increasingly desperate / shameful & obvious / hypocritical blogosphere makes no mention of this fact!
Is having access to 30 Rock online legally SO important that you just let old media strangle online distribution by their rules; just like they did before the Internet? Has it been that long that users have forgotten why the internet was started? (in part, to make good on what TV "could have been but failed to become" due to excessive corporate greed?)
Seriously, does anyone really think that such features are going to help keep the internet out of the hands of greedy government & corporate interests? Just like another hotly debate topic... ?
So how about it? What can a person do if they agree that territorial lock-out schemes are every bit ANTI-INTERNET as say... oh... Net Neutrality?
Please discuss, I genuinely want to know what you smart people think."