Piracy surges as streaming costs drive viewers away
cross-posted from: programming.dev/post/35892866
::: spoiler Comments
- Reddit.
:::Republished here, as AI content is in the Public Domain. References are available in the original article.
Frustrated by rising subscription costs and fragmented content availability, viewers worldwide are returning to piracy at unprecedented levels, reversing years of progress made by affordable streaming services. Recent data from London-based monitoring firm MUSO shows piracy visits skyrocketed from 130 billion in 2020 to 216 billion by 2024, with the industry facing projected losses exceeding $113 billion.
Subscription Fatigue Drives Digital Exodus
The streaming landscape has transformed from Netflix's early promise of "everything in one place" into what critics call "Cable 2.0"—a fractured ecosystem requiring multiple subscriptions. According to The Guardian, the average European household now spends close to €700 annually on three or more video-on-demand subscriptions. With Netflix's standard plan reaching $15.49 monthly and competitors following suit, consumers are increasingly viewing piracy as a rational alternative."Piracy is not a pricing issue, it's a service issue," Valve co-founder Gabe Newell observed in 2011—a prediction that appears prophetic as streaming platforms struggle with content fragmentation and rising prices. In Sweden, birthplace of both Spotify and The Pirate Bay, 25% of people surveyed admitted to pirating content in 2024, predominantly driven by those aged 15 to 24.
Content Wars Create Consumer Casualties
The fragmentation crisis has worsened as studios create exclusive content silos. Viewers face scenarios where favorite shows vanish from one platform only to appear on another, or require separate purchases despite existing subscriptions. Even purchased content can become unavailable due to licensing disputes, prompting consumer lawsuits against platforms like Amazon Prime Video.MUSO data reveals that unlicensed streaming now accounts for 96% of all TV and film piracy, representing a fundamental shift in how content theft occurs. Modern pirates leverage sophisticated tools including AI-driven search engines and encrypted networks that adapt faster than anti-piracy measures can respond.
Industry Scrambles for Solutions
Streaming executives are experimenting with bundled offerings and cracking down on password sharing, but these measures often backfire by further alienating users. According to Antenna research, one-quarter of U.S. streamers are "chronic churners," frequently canceling subscriptions due to cost and frustration.The resurgence marks a stark reversal from the mid-2010s when convenient, affordable streaming services nearly eliminated piracy. As one industry analyst noted, studios have created "artificial scarcity in a digital world that promised abundance", suggesting that without addressing core affordability and access issues, the piracy revival may continue reshaping entertainment consumption patterns.
like this
AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor
in reply to Pro • • •Anything but solve the main issue: pirate sites offer a better service, with no stupid licensing problems, having everything on a single app and without geolocking bullshit.
When the pirate alternative it's not just cheaper but also way more convenient, it's no wonder they are losing customers.
like this
qupada, slothbear, Get_Off_My_WLAN, InvestBurnout e dcpDarkMatter like this.
Rai
in reply to AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor • • •Netflix: Pay for 4k, max at 720p in Firefox or Librewolf
Trackers: Don’t pay, actual 4k
cmnybo
in reply to Rai • • •Rai
in reply to cmnybo • • •toad31
in reply to AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor • • •I absolutely love rubbing it in the face of people subscribing to streaming services that I get more content without even having to enter in my credit card info.
Brains > wallets, every time.
Zwiebel
in reply to Pro • • •SpikesOtherDog
in reply to Zwiebel • • •If three or four people did that and shared their library with friends then they would have a massive catalog between them.
Legally, you are allowed to make backups of the media you own (in the US). If a group of friends got together and shared their media libraries, proving that only one person was accessing the media at a time, then there would be no issue.
yoriaiko
in reply to Pro • • •like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
GenosseFlosse
in reply to yoriaiko • • •like this
dcpDarkMatter e metaStatic like this.
mybuttnolie
in reply to GenosseFlosse • • •suswrkr
in reply to yoriaiko • • •underline960
in reply to Pro • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
frongt
in reply to underline960 • • •Mr. Tambourine Man
in reply to Pro • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
puppinstuff
in reply to Pro • • •There’s just too many shit shows packaged along a few gems to make subscribing to the whole lot worthwhile.
And as a Canadian right now it feels downright patriotic to divert money from US-owned streaming companies who region-lock my purchases so I have to buy terrestrial cable to view them.
Aviandelight
in reply to Pro • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn, JowlesMcGee e metaStatic like this.
nullptr
in reply to Aviandelight • • •toad31
in reply to nullptr • • •And they only do it to maximize profit off of people's low standards.
It has never been about putting food on the table or keeping the lights on. It's always been about fleecing idiots with more money than sense.
cerebralhawks
in reply to Pro • • •There’s an easy solution to this. I pay for Apple Music because I get access to pretty much all the music I want. I can sideload what they don’t have, which isn’t much. They have better audio quality, and aren’t stiffing artists to pay some right wing nutjob science denier like the other streaming platform of note. I pay because I love music and want to support what I love. Why isn’t there a similar service for TV and movies? That’s the solution. Let us pay for what we love and make it easy. Apple figured it out with music. Valve figured it out with games.
I think they don’t want to solve the problem. I think they want to solve a different problem. I think they’re making this a problem so they can push legislation to protect their profits.
like this
Endymion_Mallorn e dcpDarkMatter like this.
Marshezezz
in reply to cerebralhawks • • •like this
metaStatic likes this.
cerebralhawks
in reply to Marshezezz • • •Absolutely. But to clarify, Apple Music pays more per stream than Spotify and others. Spotify trends to cut bigger checks to popular musicians because they have more subscribers.
Also — someone feel free to fact check this — I’ve heard that if, say, you put an album out on BandCamp but not streaming, and I buy it and sideload it into both services, and you later add it to both services, Spotify won’t pay you for my streams because I’m streaming the sideloaded copy whereas Apple will match it. I keep the metadata if it’s different but you’d get paid for the streams because it matches it.
metaStatic
in reply to cerebralhawks • • •Because the Artists involved don't see the royalties in those industries. They've already been paid and the rights holders want to extract every drop of profit possible. and the sad truth is that splintering streaming worked for a very long time to this end.
Clent
in reply to cerebralhawks • • •Because Steve Jobs died before he could hypnotize the executives into do it.
Only half kidding, people forget that's how we got all the music labels together, it was Apple iTunes Store which later became streaming.
There were a few weird awkward music stores but Apple did it better and this was early 2000's when their brand was barely recovering from near bankruptcy.
Netflix streaming didn't launch until 2007 and didn't really take off until 2011, the same year Jobs died.
Netflix was the only one that was positioned to do it but they couldn't pull it together because they didn't have the reality distortion field that Jobs had. Netflix had to push into original programming instead to survive and the brand has long since enshittified.
Can't help but wonder if whatever pitch Jobs used to sell record labels couldn't have been reworked to convince the movie studios.
cerebralhawks
in reply to Clent • • •Here’s what’s wild though. At first with music streaming it was largely just American, Western, popular music. I left Spotify for Apple Music because the latter had Japanese music and I was tired of sideloading it into Spotify. Now Spotify has Japanese music too.
The Japanese music market is super weird. Anime is to Japanese music in the 2010s and 2020s what MTV was to western music in the ‘80s and ‘90s. It’s the international hit maker. So anime is bringing western eyes to all this music, not you go in YouTube and a lot of them have “YouTube edition” videos that are like half the video. Because they don’t fully trust us I guess? Sometimes the video is on Apple Music though.
I know Japanese music is more expensive than ours. I mean like the cost of a CD. So when bands would release a Japanese album, they’d add bonus tracks to help increase the value. Western bands do it too. Look up an album you know on Wikipedia and see if there’s a Japanese version with some bonus tracks.
I’m wondering how Apple Music and later Spotify more or less tamed the Japanese music market but TV and movies are so much harder.
cRazi_man
in reply to Pro • • •“We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem. If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate’s service is more valuable.”
When what you're selling isn't appealing, then people won't buy it. It's not super complicated.
Blackmist
in reply to cRazi_man • • •Realistically, if there was a service that had everything on it that was past the cinema/pay per view stage, and was a reasonable price (say £35 a month, the price of two current streaming services), then I would probably be on that instead of Jellyfin.
And I mean everything back to the dawn of time. Anything you want, TV series, movies, the lot. Original versions, directors cuts, etc. George fucking Lucas, I'm looking at you here.
But there isn't. There never will be. Because they're all in a race to grab as much money as they can, before literal heat death engulfs the whole planet.
ryathal
in reply to Blackmist • • •cRazi_man
in reply to Blackmist • • •They could make a Steam style store for movies to buy individual movies that then stay on your account. Deep deep discounts on some oldie movies intermittently. People would eat that shit up and buy whole movie libraries to keep. Way more movies than they could watch (like people do with a Steam library).
I've got my server more stable now so it works a lot more reliably for Jellyfin. Before now, my wife would wholeheartedly agree with this and insist on paying for Netflix
Derpgon
in reply to cRazi_man • • •infinitesunrise
in reply to cRazi_man • • •RvTV95XBeo
in reply to Blackmist • • •This is the Spotify/Apple Music/etc model and the reason why music piracy is practically dead (yes, I know there are a few sites still going).
These services are doing their best to find ways to push people back to piracy but for now they
keep it at bay through competition to provide better service.
If there was a catchall video streaming service where all publishers released and got a cut of their plays it would be game over for piracy. Fortunately that'll never happen.
jatone
in reply to RvTV95XBeo • • •Derpgon
in reply to cRazi_man • • •I don't think I've pirated a game since I started working and actually spending on Steam. Except Borderlands 3, because fuck Epic Games Store, their dumb fucking exclusivity deals, and their shitty launcher - they won't EVER see a penny from me.
I bought it on Steam a year later when it came out, on sale, with DLCs.
toad31
in reply to cRazi_man • • •Stamets
in reply to Pro • • •frongt
in reply to Stamets • • •coyotino [he/him]
in reply to Stamets • • •like this
metaStatic likes this.
pH3ra
in reply to Pro • • •HobbitFoot
in reply to Pro • • •like this
clove likes this.
HakunaHafada
in reply to HobbitFoot • • •StocktonCrushed
in reply to HobbitFoot • • •Streaming services had it so fucking good, too.
When the price was $9 a month I'd forget it even existed and go months without using a particular service I was paying for. But I didn't mind it because sometimes I'd get the urge to go watch some cult classic I hadn't seen in awhile, or guests could use it.
And I could eat that $9 each month because it was the equivalent of skipping one McDonald's burger a month.
Now? I use them one at a time and pirate anything not on that service. And if the cheapest option they have is ad-supported I skip paying entirely and head straight out to sea.
HobbitFoot
in reply to StocktonCrushed • • •Of course they had it good. Studios didn't understand streaming and so sold long term rights to Netflix for pennies. Now, everyone is cutting out cable, making it impossible for those studios to fund new production on cable and broadcast alone.
New production is going to hit a cliff as streaming isn't going to be able to fund golden era of television any more.
Aggravationstation
in reply to Pro • • •That Weird Vegan
in reply to Aggravationstation • • •sp3ctr4l
in reply to Pro • • •Action?
Reaction.
Choice?
Consequence.
thedrizzle
in reply to Pro • • •Streaming issues aside, what is this?
Why the hell are we posting this crap instead of linking the original article?
theguardian.com/film/2025/aug/…
Can’t pay, won’t pay: impoverished streaming services are driving viewers back to piracy
Guardian staff reporter (The Guardian)Marshezezz
in reply to Pro • • •jonesey71
in reply to Marshezezz • • •like this
metaStatic likes this.
QuazarOmega
in reply to jonesey71 • • •porksnort
in reply to jonesey71 • • •jonesey71
in reply to porksnort • • •nullptr
in reply to Marshezezz • • •nonewanted
in reply to nullptr • • •“progress”? I think you mean “profit”.
There’s nothing really progressive about LLMs. But, some people are making a lot of money and others are pouring money in and hoping for a big payday.
InvalidName2
in reply to Pro • • •Hopefully this won't get me too much negative reaction: I'm not a proud pirate. I'd rather not pirate at all. I'm kind of ashamed that it's come to this.
There were a few solid years where I literally did not do it and felt no desire to, back when streaming was new, and there were only a few serious players. I'd love to return to that era, but I know it will never exist again.
So now, I and other members of my family, pay a ridiculous amount of money for a rotating suite of services, trying to do things the right way, and still, there are way too many times when we can't find anything we want to watch on any of those services and/or the thing we wanted to watch is not available on any of those services.
Finally broke down and just said fuck it. I tried to support this mess as best I could in hopes it would get better, but fully knowing it wouldn't. When it definitely did not get better I said no more.
sibachian
in reply to InvalidName2 • • •you could account share? most services banned account sharing last year afaik.
and anyway; how is it a bad thing to reject predatory services?
piracy wad literally always a service problem. they solved it by netflix monopoly providing a great service people wanted and piracy was practically dead for an entire decade - then they all got greedy and we're all headed back to piracy.
the solution here seems pretty obvious, and i think even the execs are aware of it.
nullptr
in reply to sibachian • • •bender223
in reply to Pro • • •Oh noes! Who could have seen this coming?
/s
like this
metaStatic likes this.
A_Chilean_Cyborg
in reply to bender223 • • •krunklom
in reply to Pro • • •I was recently travelling and tried to sign up for Netflix and couldn't. Because I didn't have a phone number in the country I was in. And they block vpns.
You can see where this is headed. Mullvad needs the money more than Netflix anyway.
toad31
in reply to krunklom • • •riseup.net/en/vpn
Here's a VPN that's available for free and funded by donations.
I'd say they are providing a better service and need money more than mullvad.
/home/pineapplelover
in reply to Pro • • •wooki
in reply to Pro • • •hornedfiend
in reply to Pro • • •I received an email from them last week, telling me my current plan is no longer available and I either switch to a more premium one or a lower ad-driven tier.
That’s atrocious and will be the final nail in my subscription. I’m already running a jellyfin powered infrastructure and I will cancel my Netflix. Screw them, Black Mirror loving MFs.
Edit: wording.
katy ✨
in reply to Pro • • •outhouseperilous
in reply to katy ✨ • • •iegod
in reply to Pro • • •NauticalNoodle
in reply to Pro • • •Eyedust
in reply to Pro • • •We may put up our hats for a while, but we never pull in the sails.
Translation: I'm more than happy to pay for a fair service, but I'm not stupid enough to believe it will last.
Garry
in reply to Pro • • •nullptr
in reply to Garry • • •Brunette6256
in reply to Pro • • •