This episode is currently only available to viewers living in the United States？
Wednesday, October 14, 2009 by Wu Hao
In Monday’s tutorial, the question that whether the media companies have the rights to provided their programmer, such as television drama online but only to the audiences who live in a particular nation. Ones may claim that these are their products, and these companies have rights to decide who they’d like to provide. Although it seems fair, I’d like to argue that there are double standers here.
I’d like to use the official website of FOX TV drama Lie To Me as an example. The address is http://www.fox.com/lietome/. On the main page, we could see all those amazing pictures, textual guides and a very noticeable picture link with the invitation of “Watch the latest Episode” on it. There is not any notice or warning that this is an American resident only website. Moreover, under this invitation, there is another significant flash, the vehicle advertising. I clicked this advertising and it successfully bring me bring me to the website
http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2010/equinox/overview.do
So, apparently it is not an American resident only advertising. I suppose this is not voluntary, Fox must get paid for putting this advertising on this website and advertise to people who visit this website and no matter where they are living or from. Then the important part comes. I finally clicked the link of “Watch the latest Episode”. I was told politely that “Thank you for your interest in FOX. This episode is currently only available to viewers living in the United States.”
Isn’t there any problem? While portending the website is facing global and advertising to global, the companies provide service only to local. Supposing a theater told people there is a free movie, then after everyone comes in and watches the advertising before the actual film, they were told that “sorry you cannot watch the film, because you are not living in American.” It is not a problem that the global audience benefits the companies as local audience, but it is a problem when the global audience requires the same treatment as the local ones. Do these companies really have the rights?
I’d like to use the official website of FOX TV drama Lie To Me as an example. The address is http://www.fox.com/lietome/. On the main page, we could see all those amazing pictures, textual guides and a very noticeable picture link with the invitation of “Watch the latest Episode” on it. There is not any notice or warning that this is an American resident only website. Moreover, under this invitation, there is another significant flash, the vehicle advertising. I clicked this advertising and it successfully bring me bring me to the website
http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2010/equinox/overview.do
So, apparently it is not an American resident only advertising. I suppose this is not voluntary, Fox must get paid for putting this advertising on this website and advertise to people who visit this website and no matter where they are living or from. Then the important part comes. I finally clicked the link of “Watch the latest Episode”. I was told politely that “Thank you for your interest in FOX. This episode is currently only available to viewers living in the United States.”
Isn’t there any problem? While portending the website is facing global and advertising to global, the companies provide service only to local. Supposing a theater told people there is a free movie, then after everyone comes in and watches the advertising before the actual film, they were told that “sorry you cannot watch the film, because you are not living in American.” It is not a problem that the global audience benefits the companies as local audience, but it is a problem when the global audience requires the same treatment as the local ones. Do these companies really have the rights?