The Lens: Netflix password crackdown expands to more than 100 countries

Netflix has expanded its crackdown on users sharing passwords with people beyond their immediate family. “A Netflix account is for use by one household,” the company said in a statement last Tuesday.

Netflix said early this year that more than 100 million households were sharing accounts at the service, “impacting our ability to invest in great new TV and films”.

Netflix has experimented in a few markets with “borrower” or “shared” accounts, in which subscribers can add extra users for a higher price or transfer viewing profiles to separate accounts. Last Tuesday, it announced it was expanding the policy to more than 100 countries.

Growth at Netflix slowed down last year. So the Silicon Valley-based streaming giant started to encourage people watching for free with shared passwords to begin paying for the service. But the company wants to do this without making subscribers leave.

“They are just trying to reduce theft of their service,” independent tech analyst Rob Enderle of Enderle Group said.

He reasoned that Netflix probably pays royalties when subscribers watch some shows or films on the platform, so non-paying viewers could add to the service’s expenses while not contributing to its revenue. “It makes no sense for Netflix to allow that to continue.”

But there is also the risk that people no longer getting Netflix free will opt to “glom onto their friends’ and families’ Prime Video, Disney+, or Max instead,” Insider Intelligence senior analyst Ross Benes said, talking about accounts at rival streaming services.

For the first time ever, American adults will spend more time this year watching digital video on platforms such as Netflix, TikTok and YouTube than viewing traditional television, Insider Intelligence has forecast.

Agence France-Presse

• To what extent do you agree with Netflix’s move to crack down on non-paying viewers?

• What could be the consequences of Netflix’s move?

Streaming giants such as Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime battle for anime supremacy

Sophia Ling, German Swiss International School

The actions of the paparazzi in New York reported last week have been widely criticised as unethical. The pursuit of Harry, Meghan and Meghan’s mother for over two hours, with multiple near-collisions, showed a blatant disregard for their safety. The photographers’ behaviour, such as taking pictures while operating a vehicle and driving on the pavement, endangered the lives of the people they were chasing and posed a risk to others.

This highlights the issue of the paparazzi’s intrusion into famous people’s private lives. Public figures have a right to privacy and safety. The fact that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had to seek refuge in a police station from the paparazzi is a concerning reminder of the invasive tactics used to obtain photos and stories.

It also raises questions about the role of the media and the public’s appetite for celebrity news. While there is interest in the lives of famous people, the invasion of their privacy and risks to their safety cannot be justified. The paparazzi’s actions in this incident were potentially life-threatening.

Laws around paparazzi behaviour vary by jurisdiction. In the US, many states have different laws. California, for example, has laws related to paparazzi behaviour, restricting physical contact, trespassing and invasion of privacy. However, these laws can be difficult to enforce, and incidents like the one involving Harry and Meghan show the challenges of protecting the privacy and safety of public figures.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry discuss racism and mental health with Oprah Winfrey