Irony: The Internet Party doesn’t understand the Internet

Regan Cunliffe reports

Yesterday afternoon, the Internet Party posted the following tweet:


Let’s be blunt. Not having Netflix in New Zealand has nothing to do with infrastructure.

This tweet was 2 days after the Sunday Star Times published a story about how an estimated 30,000 Netflix subscribers had been unable to access the streaming content service. The problem had actually been resolved 3 days earlier to that as we reported.

The Internet Party’s statement seems to overlook entirely the number of subscribers to Netflix. 30,000 is not an insignificant number for a service that isn’t technically available in New Zealand. With that number of subscribers being prepared to hand over cash every month it would be safe to assume that the current infrastructure is entirely capable enough to deliver the service its subscribers are paying for.

It is actually so easy to do, it is a surprise that Sky Network Television shares haven’t crashed.  I was watching the Warriors live a few days ago with beautiful 720p quality.  All it takes is one little plugin.

It has nothing to do with copyright either.  Much more so with licensing.  I’m still watching a legal version of it, but it isn’t licensed for the New Zealand viewer.

It was a good game to watch.  As for the quality of the transmission – it didn’t miss a beat.

By comparison, if those numbers are correct, then Netflix receives more by kiwi subscribers than what Kim Dotcom has reportedly invested into his political plaything.

An Internet Party that tries to tell us that we don’t have the infrastructure to stream HD content, and yet, we have 30,000 New Zealanders paying for Netflix.  How many are ‘hacking it’?  How many, like I did, simply find a different way to watch the Warriors, or the All Blacks anbd cut Sky out altogether?

There is  nothing wrong with our Internet infrastructure.   Watching Netflix in New Zealand has nothing to do with copyright.

An Internet Party that tries to tell you that just proves, once again, that it has absolutely no clue about the Internet.

New Zealand Internet Party Logo



THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • POY

    Was watching iSky rugby game on Saturday night. Was pretty good quality.

    Why doesn’t sky license Netflix and sell it here?

    • Geoff Vader

      Because it doesn’t stack up – they like setting up channels such as Soho to get extra revenue for a few shows, not a little extra for most shows.

      Netflix is a great service that’s on demand. Sky isn’t. If they ever lose the rugby, look out.

      Interesting the Todd family got out last year.

      • Jas

        You can’t compare SOHO to Netflix as most of the content on SOHO is provided by cable companies who dont let Netflix or HULU show their content.

        • John Q Public

          Netflix has the prior series, or older, of stuff you see on SOHO. Hulu is rubbish by comparison to Netflix.

          I’d happily pay Sky $10 a month to watcjh SOHO on line, but they’ll never play that game.

    • Jas

      Problem is that you would not get the US version as the rights holders may restrict same content and/or want a different price for content which would make the NZ version not as viable as the US version thus NZ viewers would still get US version.

  • They may not understand the internet.
    But they seem to have no issues understanding pirating copyright!

    • James

      Also why does this point to copyright reform being needed?

      At the moment people are legally streaming video from Netflix; it may be against Netflix’s terms of service but, as with purchasing a region 1 DVD in the Warehouse, this has nothing to do with copyright.

  • Alloytoo

    Given that the “Current” government is already investing in an advanced Fibre network, given that another international cable (perhaps two) are in advanced planning stages, what more exactly does the Internet party want? (apart obviously from cancelling’s extradition)

  • Geoff Vader

    If the Internet Party tell lies in the forest, and no one hears it, does anyone care?

    They are playing us all for idiots. But their trump card at election time will be a much, much greater and destructive play. Beware.

    • Dave

      They are playing the idiots for idiots, I doubt anyone frequenting these parts wants a bar of the Internet party. They are pitching to the isolated and foolish who believe they might change things that are not broken.

  • James

    An important question for me from this article is who does Pete use to watch the rugby? I only watch ABs games on telly so haven’t forked out for Sky’s overpriced offerings … but it would be good to be able to stream the games rather than watching the delayed coverage on Prime!

    • All in good time. In the mean time Mr Google is your friend.

      • Muffin

        What’s the name of the plugin to hide or de regionalise the IP address?

        • Aaron
          • Muffin

            Cheers Aaron

        • hola…… a certain DPF had an article on it…..

          • Muffin

            Thanks Roger

        • James

          I use unotelly for mine – DNS based and works at a router level or on all devices. Which means that I can watch Netflix off the Apple TV rather than watching it on the computer.

          • Muffin

            Cheers James will check it out

          • Aaron

            The Link I posted tells you how to set up Unotelly as well as how to do it on other devices as well. Thing to note is if you set up UnoTelly at the Router Level it stops you from using skygo (isky) But it also has the added benefit of allowing you to use the BBC iPlayer

        • kaykaybee

          I use HOLA. Won’t work on Safari have to use Firefox and Chrome – FF the best streaming for some reason for me

          I watch on m TV using Apple TV

        • Jdogg

 $4.99 US per month and netflix 7.99 US permonth + Apple TV device. I dumped SKY ages ago.

  • Aaron
    • Time to dump Sky stocks! :)

      • Aaron

        Just need a way to watch V8 supercars, Cricket, league, Rugby then I am dumping it as a customer.

        • I think most people would pay for it, but we’re still in a situation where you have to get a bit from here, and sneak a bit from there… another 5-10 years and I expect it to be relatively integrated.

          I don’t have sat TV nor Sky and choose to take everything via the net now.

          It means I have to make do with poor quality sometimes, and I do miss out on some things.

          But none of that is worth the $1000 a year that Sky want from me.

          I suspect that things will only get better.

          Personally I’d be happy to pay $100-$150 a month to watch, listen to, download or read anything at all.

          The problem would be that the money needs to be split to the content providers and then to the rights owners.

      • John Q Public

        There’s zero sport on Netflix

        • If the general population knew how easy it was to access live sports already…

          Personally I can’t be bothered to be a cheerleader for how to get stuff by skirting around current regional licences, but the fact remains that the Sky stocks don’t reflect the true risk that company faces.

          12-24 months and the proliferation of fibre and Sky can not protect its market.

          It still has some unique product, but nothing worth paying $1000 a year for when for less than half of that you can get 90% of it via the Internet.

          • Jas

            So you are not at all concerned that you don’t have the owners permission to watch ‘THEIR’ content?
            Would be ok if someone made a hole in the fence so you could enter the ground to watch?

          • What I am concerned about or not isn’t relevant. The problem here is 30,000 Netflix subscribers. People paying to get something they can’t get here (yet). This is a huge threat to other media here in NZ. They need to have a coherent response.

            My illustrations are what is possible today. It will only be worse (for Sky), in the next year or two.

            As a business, and as shareholders, they have to have a more coherent response than trying to tighten up the delivery model when the market wants to pick and choose.

            Sky has had its hayday with satelite delivery. Now that internet delivery provides a parallel channel, they really need to get their offerings sorted out quickly.

            I would, for example, pay $5 to see an AB game. What I don’t want is to pay $90 a month to see an AB game.

            Sky should offer pay per view, or sports-only streaming packages, and so on.

            They will.

            Well, I’m guessing they will have to. Because right now they are competing against the very same products that are being offered at no charge at all.

            The point is that I can not, right now, legally get an AB game to my screen at a reasonable per game cost.

            But I can get it free.

            Morals aside, this is a business threat that Sky needs to deal with.

          • Jas

            No doubt they will. However I think that it won’t be as cheap as some seem to think it will be. What if the cost to watch a premium All Blacks game was actually $15 a game? If it is offered as a stand alone product but you don’t like the price, what will you do?
            It is well known fact that basic subsidies sports package so if the true full cost was actually charged the $27 a month will be going up. The overhead of the company will be added also so the package will be a lot more.

          • I guess we’ll have to see what happens.

            The same problem exists with the likes of Pandora and Spotify. I pay for Spotify, but its catalog is still too limited in my mind. But at $10 a month – it’s a great start. I still need to go ‘elsewhere’ to find the missing parts. On the good side, some artists are now getting some money. On the bad side, artists that don’t want to sign up to Spotify or Pandora are still missing out.

            There are five factors 1) be able to get it legally, 2) for a market acceptable cost. 3) must be easy 4) cross platform 5) household license

            It will be up to Sky to figure out how to do it. The rest of the world isn’t going to wait for them. They’ll roll over the top.

            Maybe Sky will become a sports-only content provider for locally generated sports. But I can’t see why they should license the FA cup just to put a margin on and provide worse local delivery than going ‘direct’ by adding a small bit of tech trickery. That simply will not be sustainable.

          • Jas

            Maybe the model isn’t right. Still doesn’t give you the right to take someone else’s property without their permission.

            And even if they did move to a pay per view model the amount of priracy will still be high free is free or you can justify it by saying price isn’t right

          • That’s the thing, you’re not taking it. You’re tuning into a broadcast stream. Depending on where you physically are at that time, even though the stream is accessible to you, you’re allowed or not allowed?

            It’s not sustainable.

            There are so many things you’re not allowed to do. Like rent a DVD and then show it to the cubs on cub night. Nope. Against the license.

            You buy a CD and play the CD in your restaurant. Nope. Against the license.

            Life is full of these. Some you live with, others you don’t.

            You should see what happens in schools. Good grief, the copyright infringement that goes on there is astronomical.

            If I don’t OWN a particular piece of music, but if I go to Youtube I can listen to a lot of it for free. Legally, I guess. Artists get nothing.

            Same with certain TV programs.

            And so on and so on.

            The internet broke the distribution model. It needs fixing.

            Of course, the distribution model has been broken in places many times, and licensing has been used to try and contain what will end up being uncontainable.

            I wonder what Sky would do if I deliberately and publicly decided to watch the Warriors live but not using Sky in any way. You know, taunting them by telling them I am doing so, where and when.

            What if I invited friends?

            What if I showed the whole footie club and we made it a fund raiser?

            What if 50,000 people are already doing it now, quietly, without Sky knowing.

            It’s uncontainable.

            You need to get past your need to make me look like a thief. I’m not the problem here.

        • Sooty


  • Cowgirl

    I have Netflix and a “to watch” list a mile long already lol

  • Con the Neo

    I wish there were more options for pay perview, online or not. I would happily pay $10-20 to watch each F1 race, if that included P1-4 and Q1,2 and 3, as well as the race. But I don’t really want to watch any other sport, so I don’t pay whatever it is that Sky charge for sport every month.

    • POY

      Torrent them lol

    • WABloke

      ” pay perview” ?? Isn’t that the Origami channel?

  • TreeCrusher

    Even Netflix is a bit shit in the grand scheme of things. I had a subscription to it a couple of years ago but after you’ve had it for a while and watched all the back catalogs you quickly crave the new season stuff (hose of card excluded). Most of the networks don’t give netflix access to their stuff until it is a season old, and then there are many networks that don’t give them access at all. Many very good shows are not on netflix at all.

    All TV my wife and I watch now is downloaded. With access to good private trackers you have access to all content from anywhere in the world within minutes of it being aired for the first time. With a good seedbox overseas and a cable/fibre connection in NZ you can have an hour long show in hi def in a few minutes.

    About a year ago I stopped downloading music. This is because Spotify is better. I happily pay my subscription and get a streaming service better that any private tracker could provide. Until a movie/tv subscription service can provide access to everything the world has to offer, instantly, the “industry” will continue to loose.

  • Lesley Young

    We watch nba games via Apple TV. The streaming quality has got better and better lately. We upgraded to vdsl and the lag has gone, to the point where we wonder if we would even need fibre. We live in a high density neighbourhood in the city. The only kind of people who will vote for internet party are those that want a free piss up in return for voting for the internet party. You know the demographic, they were going to vote left anyway. Anyway looking forward to seeing Laila Harre crash and burn over the next few months. I expect she’ll be back at the unions by Xmas.

  • Mdj

    Off topic slightly; people who are saying “what’s wrong with the infrastructure we have now? I can do (insert current internet activity here) perfectly fine on my 8Mbps ADSL connection” are the ones who have no grasp on the Internet as it stands. Nor where it is heading.

    On topic; irony – more justification below in disregarding content providers (TV studios, NZRFU, Etc) rights to control distribution and consumption of their material.

    Yet, someone who deprived content owners (Hollywood, Major Labels Etc) the ability to determine when & how & for what price, that content is sold for, by allegedly making it available for free to download = the new Satan, and all that is wrong with the world.

    Someone, along the way, is making money to provide you a means to sidestep the regular, NZ legal, channels. Like KDC. If not from you directly in VPN fees, or for DNS services, then indirectly through advertising; on the torrent sites, and those awful free streaming sports sites, and those annoying ads you have to sit through before your stream starts. No one rides for free.

    As I’ve read a million times recently “the hypocrisy is breathtaking”.