var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
sir_eccles
June 2, 2009 8:37 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

\"charging us the same price for half the service\"

A little break down in logic there. Roku streaming is a no fee extra to Netflix. You don't pay extra for streaming. Following his logic, anyone without a Roku should be demanding a refund.

Reply
8 replies
\"user-pic\"
Hector Omar Ramos
June 3, 2009 12:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sir_eccles:
@YardanCabaret:
When Netflix added Instant Watch, it became an extra freebie to my subscription. You are right, they didn't charge extra. However, if you read further down my post, you'll notice why I do take issue with this: I suspended my account for a few months, only to re-activate it later when Microsoft enabled Netflix streaming on Xbox 360. That was a strong enough incentive for me to go back to Netflix, so actually, YES, I was paying for the Instant Watch service. During the months I was able to use Instant Watch, I only exchanged around 3 discs. I couldn't use Instant Watch if I didn't pay the Netflix membership fee (and Xbox Live Gold), so yes, I was denied part of what I was paying for.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 2, 2009 9:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sir_eccles:

The reason no one pays \"extra\" for streaming is because EVERY customer is paying for streaming. Netflix obviously calculated that whatever they currently make minus whatever the streaming feature costs them still will still make them money (probably counting on current customers not leaving, and making new customers with the new offering).

That last part of the equation could easily be upset if they start losing customers because of this inequitable business practice.

Even if the restriction is borne out of Netflix's contract with the movie studios, I guess Netflix has now been given an incentive to actually make sure the studios also know that Puerto Rico deserves to be included in their agreements. I honestly don't see why they wouldn't be, because, state or not, the same Federal laws that protect copyrighted content in the 50 states will protect it in any U.S. territory.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
kepler11
June 2, 2009 8:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sir_eccles: It doesn't take much for a free add-on to become a defacto part of the paid service in many people's minds.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
calquist
June 2, 2009 9:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kepler11: \"Then Netflix came up with an even greater idea. Instant Streaming of movies! As part of your membership, with no extra cost....\"

Hector even says it himself: No extra cost for the streaming movies. He is paying the same price for Netflix as he was before there was online streaming. It's not like they raised the price.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Gokuhouse
June 2, 2009 9:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@calquist: Yes, you are correct. Unless we're both mistaken, Netflix did not increase the cost of their services when they added some movies to be available for streaming.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
larrymac thinks testing should have occurred
June 2, 2009 9:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@calquist: How do you know that all these customers had Netflix subscriptions before streaming was added? They market the streaming option quite prominently these days, so if I were new to the service, I'd expect to be getting everything that's advertised.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 2, 2009 9:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@larrymac: Once you cancel your service in Puerto Rico, one month later NF sends you an e-mail asking you to come back and enjoy \"unlimited instant streaming and no late fees\". I think that's wrong, even if there is a good reason they can't offer it in Puerto Rico.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 2, 2009 10:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@NessaDeion: Considering there's laws against false advertising here, especially since it's very prominently announced in every store I've ever been in, isn't Netflix liable for promoting a feature that they can not provide?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
calquist
June 2, 2009 9:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@larrymac: Well, I just went off of what Hector, whose blog this article is based on, said. His price didn't go up when the switch took place, so why should he get a discount for being able to use a free service? I'm not saying it isn't fair, but I'm not sure a discount is the right solution.

And does Netflix advertising the streaming videos there? Never been to PR, but do they have the same Netflix commercials/website as us?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
alexawesome
June 2, 2009 9:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kepler11: If it's a truly free part of the service, you shouldn't have to have a paid account to access it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YardanCabaret
June 2, 2009 10:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@alexawesome: It's a free PART of a paid service. Meaning they didn't charge more when they started offering it. It's just an extra besides their normal movie rentals. Like going to starbucks and getting your coffee and adding sugar to it, the cinnamon, sugar and other stuff that is on that \"condiment\" bar are all free parts of a paid service. Netflix just has the added security (over starbucks that is) that you have to be paying for their service to even enter their store.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 3, 2009 5:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YardanCabaret: Are you for real? Do you think that just because it has been added to the service (without a price increase), its no longer an add value of the subscription? So if tomorrow they decide that they will not allow streaming to your state (doesnt matter the reason), you wouldnt feel as if they limiting your subscription?

Netflix can charge what ever price they want, its their prerogative of how they want to run their business. But if you have a single plan for everyone, and then you don’t deliver all the services, we as the consumers are compelled to take action. And if tomorrow they decide to run a 50 states price/service and a US territories price/service, then us, the consumers, can decide if we want to buy their services.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YardanCabaret
June 12, 2009 5:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SubrataBogdan: While I understand why you are saying what you are saying I think you're approach to it is a selfish one. As an example(an extreme one but an example none the less) imagine your landlord brings you a car one day to use anytime you want. Then out of the blue the landlord can no longer afford to loan you that car and he has to take it back. According to your argument that car has now become a value added service. Would you move out now that the car was taken away? As for your comment about the single plan one price no matter where you are at. If you live in one of the places they don't stream to you should already be well aware of the streaming limits going into your territory, Canada is, they whine about it constantly as do Peurto Ricans and well just about anybody that lives on an island. Now, just because you pay for a service that allows streaming you expect your internet streaming experience to improve just for that \"channel\"? That's not how it works. And you are correct netflix can raise/lower their prices as they see fit, like with the BluRay increase. But they haven't increased their main member fees in a while and if they did I can leave them as I see fit, again as you mentioned it's our right as consumers. So I guess my whole argument comes down to this: Until I can stream 1080p videos to my house streaming will never be considered a \"value added service\" for me, I want full quality and streaming can't deliver that yet. Also all of the free streaming sites, while limited in material, limit the marketability of a paid streaming service. While I understand that this is what brought you back to the service for many others it is just a nice unnecessary perk.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
frank64
June 2, 2009 10:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@alexawesome: How about available with no additional charge?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
alexawesome
June 9, 2009 9:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@frank64: That doesn't address my point - it's not considered an additional charge, but you must pay to access it, meaning it's actually part of the overall fee. Either give folks in PR a discount, or make it accessible. When you charge people in two different areas the same price, but only give folks in one area part of the service, it's not fair.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Coles_Law
June 2, 2009 8:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sir_eccles: You can stream to a PC as well. Well, not if you're in Puerto Rico, apparently.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Laura Northrup
June 2, 2009 9:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Coles_Law: Or an XBOX. Or an HD TiVo. Or a Mac, for that matter....

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
June 3, 2009 5:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Laura Northrup:

No, only Mactels can stream Netflix. It is misleading to suggest that most Macs can do it, because most Macs are not intels.
If PR gets some sort of discount for not being able to stream, then I demand one as well. There is no reason to not support PPC Macs; they just make sure that they don't have to by claiming they need an MS product that purposely leaves out PPCs...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Elcheecho
June 2, 2009 8:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sir_eccles: you're assuming you need roku to stream. don't do that.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
TCama
June 2, 2009 8:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

DC isn't one of the 50 states. Do residents there get Watch Instantly?

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
Bs Baldwin
June 4, 2009 2:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: There is a difference between DC and PR. Washington DC is a district within the US, Puerto Rico is just a territory like Guam. It is the same with Indian Tribes, that land is not technically part of the US.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 5, 2009 2:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Bs Baldwin:

But Indian Tribes get addresses located in the state that surrounds their reservations, and should have the same IP range as the country that surrounds their land, which would negate the problems that PR, GU, and VI face.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jeffjohnvol: @MooseOfReason: @linoth:

Some corrections:

1. Puerto Rican residents pay 1/3 of their income to the government. Except that it all goes to the Puerto Rican state government instead of the US federal govt. Fair enough if you ask me since we don't get to vote for the prez and get shafted on pretty much all federal aid programs.
2. All of Puerto Rico could vote for statehood, and it still wouldn't happen. Our political status is at the mercy of the U.S. Govt (Congress, specifically). So please, don't be ignorant talking about things that you don't know or understand.

And as far as the Netflix stuff goes, EVERY US corporation screws Puerto Ricans with international shipping and handling if they can get away with it. Dell charges $200-400 more for computers sold to residents of Puerto Rico claiming that it is an international location. It seems like it is just a part of being boricua :(

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hector Omar Ramos
June 3, 2009 1:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama:

The Netflix website states that Instant Watch will only work on devices within the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

If only they'd state that in their local ads in Puerto Rico.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
tse-tse-fly
June 2, 2009 9:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: I have, in fact, spent the last two days watching \"30 Rock\" instantly from my fancy non-state address in DC.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Corporate_guy
June 2, 2009 9:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: I would assume not. Otherwise there are racial implications.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SpruceStreetPhil - in a new Pine flavor
June 2, 2009 9:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Corporate_guy: They could easily say that DC is in fact an enclave United States' 50 states as a whole and therefore \"within\" the 50 states.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
lordargent
June 2, 2009 11:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SpruceStreetPhil: They could easily say that DC is in fact ...:

This is Three Dog, awooooooo!

/sorry, Fallout flashback, I just came from Kotaku.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SpruceStreetPhil - in a new Pine flavor
June 3, 2009 12:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@lordargent: 2 atoms walk into a bar, the one says 'i believe i have lost an electron' the other says 'are you sure?' the first atom says 'I'm positive

Communism is the very definition of failure!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
benh57
June 2, 2009 8:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Puerto Rico could be a state at any time if they voted for it. However, statehood has been consistently voted down. The last time, in 1998, it was pretty close.

Perhaps netflix is simply promoting PR statehood. :P

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 2, 2009 9:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@benh57:

The residents of puerto rico could have a 100% turnout in favor of statehood, but unless congress approves it, it's pointless, since the decision is in their hands, not ours.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Megladon
June 3, 2009 12:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000:


And i hope we'd get a say in the approval so we can say hell no, join cuba. 50 is enough. Dont go screwing up my flag for an extra star. If they wanted in they would have asked for it long ago.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
June 3, 2009 11:34 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Megladon: Hell yeah! You call up Tom Tancredo and tell those brown people to get the hell out of our country! My flag don't need no goddamn extra star! You stay down there with those other brown people that we also don't like! What would our Founding Fathers say if they knew that people wanted to be equal and free and loved America? They'd say \"I don't want to be speaking no Espanole...And get off my damn lawn!\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 3, 2009 3:27 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Megladon: \"If they wanted in they would have asked for it long ago.\"

Orly?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insular_Cases

Puerto Rico and even the Philippines could have been states a century ago, but the people living there were too brown and spoke too much Spanish, so the federal government made a new classification, \"unincorporated territory,\" to distinguish it from places like Oklahoma, Arizona and New Mexico. The Supreme Court said the Constitution doesn't count there, just like Guantanamo Bay, unlike Alaska and Hawai'i. Thanks to that, Congress is effectively the supreme dictator of the island; no citizenship and no Bill of Rights unless Congress says so, and it can be revoked at any time.

It surprised the heck out of the Filipinos who sided with the Americans against the Spanish, only to find out that being under the Stars and Stripes didn't mean they had any rights and liberties. So then they wanted their independence, but Congress wouldn't let them have that, either. And then the shooting started.

Congress has a long and ignoble history of turning down potential states because of the number of brown people. We could have annexed Hawai'i during the Pierce administration, without the messy Dole coup. We could have annexed the Dominican Republic during the Grant administration. And heck, it's no coincidence that we only took the sparsely populated portions of Mexico.

So yeah, Puerto Rico could have been a state whenever they wanted, just like the Philippines. Whatever.

\"Dont go screwing up my flag for an extra star.\"

WTF? For most of our history, we added a star at least once a decade! Five were added since we claimed Puerto Rico! Should we kick out the 37 newcomers as well? Have Maine and West Virginia annexed by their parent states again? Sure would look funny to see the Republic of Vermont all by it's lonesome...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rugbydan
June 3, 2009 12:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Megladon: Can you imagine the amount of money the U.S. would need to pump into PR to get it up to statehood standards?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rugbydan: I agree with Mr. Pacheco, WTF is that supposed to mean. Have you visited Volusia County, FL?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Christian Pacheco
June 3, 2009 3:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rugbydan: What the hell you mean by that??

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Megladon
June 3, 2009 6:04 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Christian Pacheco:


He means other then the touristy beaches the place looks like the ghetto... But then if we did own them we could do full scale bombing training on the island. They cant bitch about it then when we start it back up after they apply for statehood.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
korybing
June 3, 2009 2:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Megladon: I'm sensing a lot of hostility towards Puerto Rico coming from you. Could you tell me where exactly Puerto Rico hurt you, using this doll?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
tse-tse-fly
June 2, 2009 8:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is why I am always worried about my residency in the District of Columbia. I feel without statehood, my claim to being part of the \"United States of America\" is tenuous, at best. I have seen, in fact, forms without a \"DC\" in their dropdown list of states. And, Netflix has been taking an extra day to process my returns. IT BEGINS.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Mary
June 3, 2009 3:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tse-tse-fly: I used to work for a switchboard at a company inside the District, and once a co-worker of mine got a phone call, and an old man was trying to send something to us. He kept asking her what state we were in. She would reply that we were in the District of Columbia.

\"I know that, but I have to pick a state on this form, what STATE are you in?\"

This went on for ten minutes. I can't recall how she finally got him to check for DC in the drop down box.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
catskyfire
June 2, 2009 9:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tse-tse-fly: Because as it stands, they get most of the benefits of being a state without most of the responsibilities?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
GearheadGeek
June 2, 2009 10:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@catskyfire: Do they indeed? What responsibilities does DC shirk in order that its citizens can be taxed by the federal government without benefit of voting representation in Congress or the right to govern themselves in matters not constitutionally reserved for the federal government?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SpruceStreetPhil - in a new Pine flavor
June 3, 2009 12:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@GearheadGeek: The responsibilities to have to go and vote for a governor AND a mayor. Its so hard. Trust me. Don't try it. You don't want such a heavy weight on your chest. I'm thinking about moving to the Virgin Islands for this very fact.

oh, and because they're a prime vacation spot.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
AirIntake
June 2, 2009 9:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tse-tse-fly: Just say you're from Washington State, sounds close enough.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
gqcarrick
June 2, 2009 8:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why don't they just become a state? I never understood the whole U.S. Territories, obviously netflix doesn't either.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
jeffjohnvol
June 3, 2009 12:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tvh2k: Yep. They want social programs but don't want to pay income taxes. If they vote for it, and Congreess approves which they would to get the extra taxes, I'll be the first to complain to Netflix, but while they don't pay any income taxes they'll get no sympathy from me.


Come on, PR, join the team! :)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
linoth
June 2, 2009 10:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tvh2k: Thank you. They seem to think they can enjoy all the privledges of being a state without coughing up a third of their pay. Sorry, but no. You're a territory. Territory != state.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 5, 2009 2:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@linoth:

I cough up a third of my pay. Where's my presidential vote?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Christian Pacheco
June 3, 2009 4:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@linoth: Yes you are correct but you forgot one little fact, We have to buy everything from the US.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 2, 2009 9:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gqcarrick:

The residents of puerto rico could have a 100% turnout in favor of statehood, but unless congress approves it, it's pointless, since the decision is in their hands, not ours.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 2, 2009 8:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Hi, I'm from Puerto Rico and am also a user of Netflix. It is very true what is going on here, and disappointing as well, but it goes far beyond Netflix as well. Not only can we not stream just from Netflix, but from many websites as well. We are also, for some reason, restricted in what we are allowed to buy over the internet as well as it seems, since many companies restrict what will and will not be shipped to us. For example, Amazon, Apple, and many other companies restrict what we may or may not by, forcing us to seek ways to bypass their restrictions, which comes at great expense for us. Yet, this restriction are applied to items and services that can be found here.

So if I were to buy a Mac, one can not buy it from Apple, we have to seek a reseller or store such as Best Buy, which, by the evidence provided on this very site, don't offer the best customer service. Furthermore, if we were to seek repairs, we can't even send the computer to Apple, we have to go through a third party, specifically Geek Squad, and have to deal with them so they will send it to Apple.

In Amazon's case we are restricted to buying only video games, movies, music, and books, among other things. This make sit really difficult to by other things, computers as an example, if we find other companies don't either have the prices we seek, or simply, as is most commonly seen, won't ship to us.

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
Mary
June 3, 2009 3:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26: So this is less a \"Netflix\" issue and more a \"U.S. Companies and trade law\" issue.

Important distinction I think, though no less bothersome for you. Seems like something that lawmakers need to take a look at and fix.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
cunninglinguine
June 3, 2009 1:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26: Clearly, you should switch from Apple to Pineapple.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Corporate_guy
June 2, 2009 9:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26: Then become a state and blow their minds.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jeffjohnvol
June 3, 2009 12:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Corporate_guy:
Spot on dude. They need to at least vote for statehood. Congress would vote for it, especially one owned by the Democrats.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 2:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jeffjohnvol:

Like I said before, that's really optimistic. The reality is, unless the US gets tangible benefits (6 million new taxpayers isn't enough apparently), then congress won't do a thing about it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Corporate_guy
June 3, 2009 3:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: Congress would vote it in in a heart beat. There is no way they would vote down a new tax base. Not only that but if they feel puerto rico is solidly democratic, they would happily create 2 new democratic senators. I am also not sure republicans could vote against it, because they would have no real reason and it would mean going against the vote of the people.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 2, 2009 9:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Corporate_guy:

The residents of puerto rico could have a 100% turnout in favor of statehood, but unless congress approves it, it's pointless, since the decision is in their hands, not ours.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Corporate_guy
June 2, 2009 11:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: If puerto rico votes to become a state, congress will approve it. And until puerto rico votes to allow congress to approve it, there is really no point in worrying about what congress will or will not do.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 2:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Corporate_guy:

That's really assuming a lot, since when we voted none of the above when it came to statehood or independence, we weren't asked what we would like... or when we voted to amend our territorial status, no changes were made.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rugbydan
June 3, 2009 12:57 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Corporate_guy: I think that's assuming a lot. What possible benefit would PR have as a state to the US in it's current state?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 2:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rugbydan:

6 million new taxpayers and new consumers of suddenly cheaper US made goods for starters

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Christian Pacheco
June 3, 2009 4:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rugbydan: Something called voting for a President, also having a voice on the senate and many more

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hector Omar Ramos
June 3, 2009 1:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rugbydan:

Sure, lets just keep sending those Puerto Rico soldiers off to our war in Iraq, what other possible benefits could they offer to the USA?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rugbydan
June 3, 2009 1:48 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Hector Omar Ramos: And I respect those soldiers immensely. They are heroes. PR becoming a state, however, wouldn't change that PR soldiers join and fight in the US Army already. I was just asking for any ADDITIONAL benefits of PR becoming a full fledged state at this time.

Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nakedscience
June 2, 2009 9:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@calquist: Corporate_guy tends to need things beat into his head.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 2, 2009 9:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@calquist:

I think you do too... but with multiple people saying the same thing... well, y'know. It was the thing to do.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 2, 2009 9:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Corporate_guy: I'll just point you toward kepler11's comment.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 2, 2009 8:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26:
I Copied this directly from Amazon

U.S. Protectorates (including Puerto Rico)

Only the following items can be shipped to U.S. Protectorates:

* baby items
* books
* DVDs
* music
* software
* toys
* VHS videos
* video games

This can be found here:
[www.amazon.com]

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
kepler11
June 2, 2009 9:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

There are different legal protections in Puerto Rico -- it is not the same as simply being in one of the US states for trade purposes. Maybe that's why some companies do not simply and easily translate their operations to that jurisdiction.

And for people who say that Puerto Rico should \"just become a state already\" -- there are a lot of issues that are more complicated than your desire to be able to say that it's a state.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
dumblonde
June 3, 2009 3:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kepler11: That is not true. Puerto Rico is bound by federal copyright and trademark laws.

And the PR relationship with the US started out of the Spanish-American war. An invasion and later passed on as part of a treaty. Open a book, people!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 2, 2009 9:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kepler11: One of those issues being how many Puerto Ricans view the US in a very negative light because of past actions. Including, but not limited too, sterilizing women without their consent when they visited hospitals for other reasons, and testing potentially harmful birth control pills that permanently sterilized and cause permanent damage on many a women in this island. The issues go far beyond just economic and political ones.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Biggbrother
June 3, 2009 6:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26: So then why don't they vote for independence if they hold the U.S. in such a negative light? Apparently this negative light doesn't extend to accepting social programs like Social Security, Disability, and Section 8, among numerous programs.

I tell you one thing, the Dominican Republic would vote for statehood in an instant. And if PR were to vote for independence, they'd be in the same bind as DR with lots of corruption, which I am sure they have plenty of already.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
June 3, 2009 3:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26: Then one would also wonder why the relationship with the US was started and why they don't cut loose entirely.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 3, 2009 5:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jamar0303: Because not every one sees them in a negative light. Some hate the US, others love it, and others like it from a distance, like that friend you greet on the other side of the street, but don't actually cross the street to greet. There's also the fact that in the political spectrum it is rarely debated or the people rarely informed of the benefits or non-benefits of either choice. The choice is casually mentioned as a \"We'll be a state!\" or We will not be a state!\" and then moves quickly to character assassinations, which in the end creates much misinformation within the less informed, who are usually greater in numbers and the most vocal.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jamar0303: The relationship was started in 1898 when the U.S. invaded Puerto Rico as part of their victory over Spain during the Spanish-American war. The U.S. also took over Cuba, the Phillipines, and various other Spanish territories, most of which were eventually allowed to gain independence. Puerto Rico was retained because of its strategic geographical position in the Caribbean.

Some Puerto Ricans do want to cut loose entirely, but unfortunately that is all up to the U.S. Congress.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Artagnan
June 3, 2009 3:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26: This didn't only happen in Puerto Rico. It also happened in the 50 States. Granted, it was completely wrong, but it wasn't something that was only being done to Puerto Ricans--compulsory sterilization was a common punishment for criminals and a eugenic treatment for the mentally ill/mentally disabled population, and frequently happened to minorities (most notably Native Americans) all over the United States.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Firethorn
June 3, 2009 3:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Artagnan: Very true.


I was just reading about the program to steralize Indians on the reservations here in the states.


I used to be a lot prouder of my country; I still am in many ways, but it's a bit more in the 'look at how far we've come' way.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 2, 2009 9:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daryl26: For anyone interested, there's an article about this, here: [clem.mscd.edu]

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 2, 2009 9:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The very same problems are present here in the US Virgin Islands (Another US territory ~50 miles east of Puerto Rico), although the mail service is so abysmal (I'm still waiting for some mail that was sent to me ~18 months ago) I've not tried Netflix. Luckily Hulu and CBS.com work without any problems.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Daurys Nolasco
June 2, 2009 9:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Great article! I'm also from Puerto Rico and former Netflix customer. I also canceled my membership because of snail return times and no streaming.

Although it's true that Puerto Rico's situation is kind of confusing, at the end it's up to the company's management and how friendly they are with us. If there were a law discriminating against PR, then there wouldn't be ABC.com streaming, or Hulu. However, we're excluded from Disney's, NBC's, CBS's etc. streaming services.

Same with online stores. BH Photo, JR, Adorama happily ships everything to Puerto Rico and cheap! NewEgg will ship to Puerto Rico for an eye, and Amazon & others (even Walmart - can U believe that?) leave us behind in some or all of their offerings.

At least we have something in common with DC residents, now U know how we feel -worst.

Now, the best/worst part is: Isn't my US Department of the Treasury issued Dollars worth the same as the ones in mainland USA?

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
June 3, 2009 1:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daurys Nolasco: If you mean that you don't have representation in Congress, then yes, you have something in common with D.C. But other than that, you can pretty much have any item shipped to you in D.C. and you can stream pretty much anything.

The reason for PR's problem is that it's a trade issue but also a distance issue. For the same reason shipping to Alaska or Hawaii is doable, but it'll take more time or money. With PR, it's a trade issue as well as a distance issue.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: What do you mean it is \"a trade issue?\" It should be no more of an issue than a Kentucky resident purchasing something from a Georgia company.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Artagnan
June 3, 2009 3:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daurys Nolasco: Technically, your Dollars are printed by the Department of the Treasury, but issued by the Federal Reserve, which is a separate government entity--just another reason that the Fed has to be reformed...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Mary
June 3, 2009 3:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daurys Nolasco: I'm sure it's not so simple for them as just deciding what they want to do, otherwise it wouldn't be such a large problem that you could name five or six other companies off the top of your head that do it as well.

There has to be some legal issue involved, or at least some complicated business or economic one. What other situation has come up where Netflix has turned away paying customers just because they didn't feel like doing something? Maybe different companies interpret the laws differently, or maybe there really are various and sundry situations that are more complicated than we know.

It's worth looking into further, I think, if you're a resident of PR.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Coles_Law
June 2, 2009 10:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Daurys Nolasco: Keep in mind Hulu is owned by the content providers-they \"negotiate\" with themselves for viewing rights. Netflix is hamstrung by the studios.


I have no Idea as to why Amazon et. al. have shipping restrictions.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Coles_Law: Those companies have shipping restrictions because they are unscrupulous and Puerto Rico's legal status gives them loopholes to charge more for shipping, even though they would ship to Alaska for the same rates as other states.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 2, 2009 9:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

We are tired of being treated unequally in terms of these types of services. We can fight and die on meaningless wars in the dessert but we cannot have the same treatment from companies in the USA. We should switch to redbox instead.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Hector Omar Ramos
June 3, 2009 12:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SiyaIxion:

You bring up a good point. Red Box kiosks have been popping up ALL OVER the island in the last few months. Most of the people I know, who cancelled Netflix, have switched over to Red Box since it is actually cheaper. Do the math (it usually takes 5 days for a disc to get to Netflix and then get your next disc back)

30 days / 5 days turnaround = 6 discs per month. That would be $8.99 on the Netflix unlimited plan, or roughly $1.50 per disc. You can get the same with Redbox for only $1 per disc. (You may argue that Red Box charges $1 per disc PER NIGHT, but the 30/5 math assumes that you watch the disc the same night you receive it so that you may send it back the next day. You can do the numbers and find out that keeping a Netflix disc for more than one day in Puerto Rico would be much more expensive than Red Box.)

There's also the $4.99 two disc a month Netflix plan, which comes down to $2.50 per disc. The only advantage to this over Redbox is that you could keep the disc for a week and some change before returning it in exchange for the second one. You're still limited to two disc a month, whereas for $5 you could rent five movies in the same time frame from Red Box.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
twophrasebark
June 2, 2009 9:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Distance between mainland and Puerto Rico is about 2,300 miles.

Distance between mainland and Hawaii is about 2,600 miles.

Netflix, don't be a hater.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
MooseOfReason
June 2, 2009 11:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@twophrasebark: From Puerto Rico to what state?

There's plenty of \"mainland\" from which to choose a starting point.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hector Omar Ramos
June 3, 2009 1:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MooseOfReason:

Puerto Rico is 1,038 miles from Miami, Florida.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
twophrasebark
June 2, 2009 9:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@twophrasebark:

Sorry, I meant:

Distance between mainland and Hawaii is about 2,600 miles.

Distance between mainland and Puerto Rico is about 1,000 miles.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 2, 2009 9:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The best trick I've learned thus far when having to ship to PR is to use Pennsylvania as the state.

Everything I've ordered to San Juan, PA 00907 has arrived on time to San Juan, PR 00907 ;)

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
Senencito L
June 4, 2009 2:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000:

ohh thank you for this, best tip ive read all day.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: Yep, that works! Virgin Islands residents, try this as well, Billy D swears by it. Use \"VA\" as a state instead.

But keep in mind that this only works with the U.S. Postal Service.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dumblonde
June 3, 2009 3:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: Wow that's pretty ridic. Good trick!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
wcnghj
June 3, 2009 1:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: Good idea, mail ships by Zipcode, not by the listed state.

Saves money and the post office sees it as a mistake.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nakedscience
June 2, 2009 9:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: Some databases will recognize that the Zip doesn't match the state, though. I know our UPS program does.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Daryl26
June 2, 2009 9:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: Thanks for the tip. Might give it a try and see.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 2, 2009 9:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My husband and I cancelled our Netflix account as soon as we weren't able to stream using our Xbox 360 anymore. By giving consumers raw deals like this one, they are encouraging them to use torrents, etc... and wasting opportunities to make more money. I would much rather pay for a service for the convenience and ease of use, rather than use peer to peer technology to get my entertainment, but they don't leave you with much of a choice, do they?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Bs Baldwin
June 4, 2009 2:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MerrickNike: This isn't netflix fault in anyway. It is the MPAA's restrictions that netflix has to follow. Mail your congre, oh right, nevermind on that. you guys have to have a governor to complain to.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Mary
June 3, 2009 3:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MerrickNike: So, the dvds I get in the mail and the stuff I stream through my computer (hooked up to my big screen tv) isn't a service? The only thing that Netflix could possibly offer that would interest a consumer is Xbox streaming?

Or are you in PR, where there is apparently a mail lag as well, making their services generally unusable? That makes more sense. But I think Netflix far and away delivers to me everything I pay for, and then some. But I live about an hour from a distro center.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Laura Northrup
June 2, 2009 10:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@NessaDeion: Ouch. That's not nice.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
H3ion
June 3, 2009 12:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I thought that Puerto Rico had a vote a few years ago where they could have elected to be a state, to be independent, or to retain possession status and the vote was in favor of possession status. That would make sense to some degree since Puerto Rico residents are entitled to many of the same federal entitlement benefits as on the mainland but have different and lower tax obligations. There used to be federal tax incentives for some corporations (drug companies in particular) to manufacture in Puerto Rico. I don't know whether that is still the case.

In DC, the District was a part of Maryland and was never intended to be a state (the Virginia part was given back from the original grant). While I don't think that anyone would rationally object to DC having a vote in the House, statehood and two senators is a reach. On that theory, almost every major city in the United States would be entitled to statehood on the basis of population before DC would be eligible.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
Bs Baldwin
June 4, 2009 2:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@H3ion: Hey I have a solution for DC's argument about paying taxes with any representation. How about the federal government place a restriction on DC residents from working for the government in DC? They won't pay any taxes and the government won't spend money on DC residents.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Artagnan
June 3, 2009 3:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@H3ion: DC can have a House member, because that's population based, no matter what state one lives in. However, I'll be damned before DC gets two Senators and NYC has to be represented with the rest of New York State.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
H3ion
June 3, 2009 4:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Artagnan: I'd say that your opinion is shared by many, probably a large majority, myself included.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TCama
June 3, 2009 2:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@H3ion: The relationship between Puerto Rico and the U.S. is far more complicated than that. You make it sound like P.R. is getting all of the benefits of statehoood without any of the responsibilities. That is simply not true. Read up on it.

As for DC, yes, many people object to giving DC a vote in the House. Once again, read up on it. And no, DC doesn't want statehood just because it's a major city. DC residents just want the same rights as residents of the 50 states, and the options for that are either statehood or re-joining Maryland.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
H3ion
June 3, 2009 2:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: I don't think we disagree. On the DC issue, I didn't say that people didn't object to a vote in the House. I did say that people could not rationally object. The city does deserve representation, IMHO, but not two senators or statehood. Under the Constitution, it is not a state; it is a federal district.

Also, with Puerto Rico, I don't think that the Commonwealth is receiving all the benefits of statehood, quite the contrary considering it has no say in the House or the Senate, but its citizens enjoy many of the same federal benefits as mainland citizens but bear what I believe is a lower tax burden. Unless they've changed in the last few years, Puerto Rico's tax code was based on the 1939 US Tax Code. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

To cmdrsass, one of the principal objections to full DC statehood is that it automatically puts two Democrats in the Senate and one in the House. That and the fact that it would take a Constitutional amendment give a lot of people pause. But I do think that DC's citizens deserve a voice and a full voting representative in the House. Again, that's opinion.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
cmdrsass
June 3, 2009 2:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@H3ion: There are many rational arguments for excluding DC as a state, chief among them is that granting DC statehood would give it undue influence as the center of the federal government.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
HogwartsAlum
June 3, 2009 12:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I ship stuff to Puerto Rico using FedEx all the time and I have to use International shipping. They don't consider it part of the United States. But the people I send to have a zip code. Figure that one out.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 3, 2009 4:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HogwartsAlum:

I had to ship a gift (a bluray player) to my family that live on St Croix, FedEX and UPS were horidenously priced. Try the USPS Priority mail if possible, got to them on time and didn't cost an arm and a leg.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Edgar C. Rodriguez
June 3, 2009 1:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm from Puerto Rico and would like to add that i have sprint mobile broadband for when i'm on the go. And Cable Internet at home. For the time I had Netflix (which i cancelled). The streaming worked using the Sprint Connection (probably the IP helped) but when i went home and fired up the xbox on my cable connection, it wouldn't let me saying I wasn't in the US,etc.

it reminded me of a problem Sony had with their Playstation Video Store when it launched. It wouldn't show up for Puerto Rico customers, and it was a Region Lock, but according to the sony represantive at that time. it was an Automatic Region Lock it set. And didn't even label Puerto Rico as even remotely part of the US. And after that they quickly fixed it in a few days. If only Netflix had that kind of support.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Daurys Nolasco
June 3, 2009 7:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Edgar C. Rodriguez: That's because Sprint Data Connections have IP Addresses from Oklahoma City ( at least in my experience).. which is another weird way of asking \"are we a state\" since we have Sprint's, AT&T & T-Mobile service just like mainland USA, and no roaming.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Bog
June 3, 2009 1:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Well, If they only serve 50 states of the United States of America, then they must exclude Washington D.C. as it is not a state.

What about Guam, and The Virgin Islands?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Ryan Ellison
June 3, 2009 1:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Bog:

The US Virgin Islands can't receive streaming either.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hector Omar Ramos
June 3, 2009 2:05 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Bog:

Only DC is supported, outside of the 50 states.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Juan Mendez
June 3, 2009 2:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

What about Texas, did they ever become a state!

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
KeVin GreIner
June 3, 2009 2:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Texas is a state on contract, they are the only state that can break away from the US legaly

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
shiftless
June 3, 2009 2:49 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ever visit Puerto Rico? The people look at you in disbelief when you say it's US territory. Heh.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 4:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shiftless:

It's not like the US has paid any attention to what Puerto Ricans have had to say ;)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 3, 2009 3:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I was born and raised in PR and now live in the states. Puerto Rico has always been a gray area when it comes to shipping stuff. An example is that I was able to use UPS ground service from PR to the US but not from the US to PR. Same goes for airlines, sometimes they consider you an international flight, and sometimes a domestic flight. Don't even get me started with internet companies. It is a crap shoot at best, and most of the times the ones with the best price will not ship to PR, even though they use the USPS. When I had Netflix back in PR I had a turnaround time of about 10 days!!! The USPS has a horrible handling record for PR, it usually takes 7-10 days to get mail from PR to many of the states, while it takes about 3-4 days to get it from the states to PR. Another part of the problem was that the shipping facility used was in New Jersey, when I called them on it they said that there was nothing they could do because the USPS assigned the shipping centers and they had no control over that, yeah right!!! By the way, the USPS has the exact same services to PR at the exact same price, even for flat rate priority packages. And for those of you who think that this will all be solved by becoming a state, all I can say is that you should read up on history and understand why it is not that easy.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
bwcbwc
June 3, 2009 9:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@CurtisMandarano: Another difference between UPS and USPS is that UPS will collect the Puerto Rico excise taxes for stuff you ship in (if applicable). The USPS wasn't doing that the last time I had something shipped there.

I think the Netflix streaming issue is probably because the streaming rights for media PR are sold separately from the US. They used to do the same thing for TV shows on air and satellite, as well as movies in the theaters. Part of this could also be related to the release dates in PR. For some movies the movie is out on DVD in the US while it's still in theaters (with Spanish dub and/or subtitles) in PR.

The media companies could cause the same kinds of problems in the US by separately licensing streaming rights for the northeast and southeast. So for example you might go to Hulu in NY to watch a show, but you'd go to YouTube to watch the same show in FL. The difference in PR seems to be that no one has the rights, or the rights haven't vested yet in order for the theater revenue to come in.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
badr
June 3, 2009 3:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

To Juan Mendez: Dude Texas is the equivalent of the Rebel Alliance in SW. Remeber who won in StarWars at the end?
---

Now having addressed that it's funny that I argued these same points at someone else's blog and I was nearly ratified a Puerto Rican biggot...

Before anyone looses a cardiac valve, I am from Puerto Rico, where I lived most of my life before moving to the states.

You seriously need to get a grip. Just because you are in Puerto Rico doesnt make you a member of the 50 states in the United States. It makes you part of a country that has gotten a rotten deal thanks to politicians govern it. You should be pissed off at the idiots, who gave the US the rights to make Puerto Rico a territory… rather than make it a state once and for all. Its like being a member to Sams Club or Costco, but instead of buying the full boxes of cereal, you get the regular ones. Sucks doesnt it?

Now what netflix is doing for puerto rico is kind of rotten. I mean if they are going to offer only %50 of their service they should only charge %50 of the cost don't you think?

What you need to do instead is rant to NetFlix CEO, Reed Hastings. You should be able to email him at reed[dot]hastings[at]netflix[dot]com. According to Wikipedia, he is an educated man, graduated from industrial engineering at Stanford. I know the email cuz, I emailed him =)

I am pretty sure if you write tons of sensible emails to his email address he will (or mostlikely one of his lackeys) will answer your emails or get something done about it.

Just dont pretend because \"PR is a US Territory, that you need to be served in a golden platter... It sucks they are charing the full price, and only delivering half the service. I am not a lawyer, but I think the word \"Class Action Suite\" it does ring a certain bell.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
dumblonde
June 3, 2009 4:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Another ex-customer from Puerto Rico here. I canceled Netflix because the movies took forever and I was too busy to watch the ones that took forever to get here. So I was basically giving them my money for free.
I don't understand how this DRM works. Federal copyright laws apply in their entirety to Puerto Rico and all US territories. And we get Hulu and ABC.com. I don't know exactly how the content negotiations work but there's definitely some kind of explanation to this and it isn't legal.
Anyway to all those that say Puerto Rico gets all the funding and doesn't pay taxes, that is patently untrue. While residents of PR don't pay federal income tax, there is the Social Security payroll tax, medicare, federal employees pay federal income tax, etc. And the Federal government is allowed to discriminate against Puerto Rico on all sorts of funding. We get a lot less of many funds and some not at all like highway funding.
And for decades the population had to deal with military exercises that caused cancer, the destruction of coral reefs, mines on the ocean floor that are still being cleaned with only a glorified lobbyist to represent us in Congress. And this lobbyist also known as resident commissioner in no way represents the interests of the population and is always looking for some newfangled way to bring about a bill for a referendum on the island's political status.
Whoever thinks it's a cakewalk is an asshole. Puerto Ricans have the most ridiculous identity crisis of anyone and don't fit in anywhere. When I write down my address I have to think about whether it's better to say I'm in a state or a country depending on the task at hand. So complicated and unnecessary.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 4:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dumblonde:

Don't forget PR residents pay federal income tax on income derived from mainland US sources, as well as all federal employees on the island. As for the highway funding... we refused that one when we refused to raise our drinking age to 21. We can keep issuing bonds to pay for our highways for all I care... I'd rather keep our drinking age low. It's little things like this that keep us from becoming another Hawaii.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
nacoran
June 3, 2009 7:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

This may be what we need to keep Texas in the Union!!!...

Damn you Netflix.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Justifan
June 3, 2009 8:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

puerto rico is a close friend.
they are not a state and thats what matters, there is a difference. try telling your wife about your g/f and u'll find out the same.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
secret_curse
June 3, 2009 3:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Justifan: That is quite possibly the dumbest analogy I've ever read.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Justifan: We are not a state, agreed. We do, however, HAVE to use U.S. dollars, the U.S. Postal Service, be U.S. citizens, and get U.S. Passports if we want to travel, so I don't see why we should get screwed by big corporations when we already get screwed by the grand old U.S. of A.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Winteridge2
June 3, 2009 11:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

But isn't Puerto Rico one of our 57 states, along with Mexico and Nigeria?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
slickdealer
June 3, 2009 12:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think the bigger question is....WHY is Puerto Rico part of the United States? Drop the Netflix argument and let's look into mine. If I am not mistaken, it's.....acquisition was so we, as a nation, could have a bridge to Latin America. Yeah, that worked out great. Might as well annex Mexico while we're at it. Right now all we have is an island of people who:
1) Mostly can't even speak English
2) Don't want to be a real part of our country
-They don't want to join as a state
-They wave/display their little flag around all the time but not ours, just going to show that they consider themselves independent.
3) Don't pay taxes
4) Have the ability to send their children off into our country unimpeded.

It's put up or shut up time in my opinion. If they want to reap the rewards, they should have to pay the price.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
gamephase
June 3, 2009 5:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@slickdealer:

Most importantly, PR has severe restrictions on trade. Because of Federal laws, 90% of what we buy comes from the mainland. PR is not free to buy or sell from any other country. That more than makes up for not paying federal taxes. Trust me, if the US wasn't benefiting from that, they would have forced us out a long time ago.

[en.wikipedia.org]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Joel Perez Irizarry
June 3, 2009 4:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@slickdealer: Please call my employee and let him know that we don't pay taxes. Its seems they haven't got the memo yet.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@slickdealer:

I think YOU need to shut up until you become more informed.

FYI, all Puerto Rican's study English since kindergarten, and most can at least talk basic stuff with tourists. How much Spanish do you remember from high school? About 48% - 51% of Puerto Ricans would like to pursue statehood, depending on the year. The U.S. flag is displayed at all public institutions that display Puerto Rican flags. Puerto Rico residents pay the same % of their income as taxes as you do - in PR it goes to the state government. BUT any income not earned in Puerto Rico must pay federal income taxes any way.

Finally, I'll reserve the right to come into \"your country\" whenever I want, mostly as payment for 100 years of using Puerto Ricans as cannon fodder, exported labor, and unwilling scientific test subjects. Don't feel bad, you can also come to \"my country\" whenever you happen to want a Caribbean vacation without the hassle of international travel.

If you want to be jingoistic while discussing U.S. immigration law, be my guest, but please keep it to yourself when you are talking about my island which has the county with the highest per capita cancer rate in the entire U.S. because of bombing exercises with depleted uranium rounds performed on our beaches and coastal waters.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
slickdealer
June 4, 2009 3:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dlab:
1) Taught or not, most Puerto Ricans who don't work in the service industry and live in the rural parts can't speak English. Contrary to liberal pop culture, English is the official language of the US. If a student in a US mainland public school only knew 'basic stuff' in English, they wouldn't be graduating (unless they live in Florida).
2) I'm not talking about the official policy in public institutions regarding the flag. Of course they are going to follow proper ettiquette. I'm talking about the people. Every Puerto Rican I've met or seen will hang/display their flag all over the place. Especially on the rear view mirror of their car. I grew up in NJ, but I never hung my state flag up. If they don't like being part of the US, then leave.
3) What's your point? We, in the US, pay federal taxes AND state taxes (with a few exceptions). Why should you be exempt? You reap the benefits of membership in the country, yet feel like you have to not pay your dues. Instead you think that money should stay on your own island. You prove my point. It's put up or shut up time. The free ride should end.
4) Waaaaaaaaaaa. Jesus Christ (not pronounced hay soos btw), are you gonna start on one of these \"your ancestors screwed over my ancestors so now I want reparations\" tracks now too? People get conquered and fucked all the time in life. Should Italy pay Germany a monthly stipend because Rome enslaved their ancestors two millenia ago?
5) I am not discussing immigration law. I am discussing US domestic policy. What is the US benefiting by having Puerto Rico as a territory? Please fill me in on what your beloved island has given back. My federal taxes go to people and programs on your island, and yet the only thing I've seen of value coming back are some good baseball players once in a while. But I guess that's my fault to because of how oppressed you and your people are right?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 9, 2009 1:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@slickdealer:

So you are intimately familiar with education in Puerto Rico?

As far as flags go, there is nothing wrong with displaying your state flag. Try to tell that to a Texan or a Hawaiian. What's wrong with having national identity? I mean people like you certainly make me feel unwelcome as part of the US, so its no wonder we have to remind ourselves that we have a place where we DO belong.

My point about taxes is that 1/3 of a middle class Puerto Rican's income goes to the state - because we have to fend for ourselves. Here in the US I pay the same percentage except it gets split between federal and state. How is that paying less taxes? So you're saying I should tack on another 20% and give it to the federal government in exchange for representation and not being able to vote for president.

No, I don't want reparations. I want you and the other half of America that thinks like you to give us some respect, and I want the US government to either give me representation and a vote for president, or let my country go. I don't want reparation, I want emancipation.

Personally I'm of the opinion that 100 years of being cannon fodder, 40 years of being cheap exported agricultural labor, 50 years as a nuclear submarine base, 50 years of having our fishermen's waters polluted by the U.S. Navy, and 50 years of being a cheap-labor pharmaceutical manufacturing heaven have all been things that the U.S. has profited from. I could ask you the same question - what has NJ ever given the union besides Sinatra?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 5, 2009 3:02 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@JessicaHizee: @slickdealer:

You simply don't know what you're talking about.

1) As was already said English is taught in all institutions from a very young age. Hell, Pedro Rossello (a pro-statehood governor) a few years back even tried to make English the official language in the island. People in more rural areas might not speak it as well but the population in those areas is very small. More than half of the population lives in metropolitan area and I can assure a lot of those people especially younger generations can speak English very well. As can people in somre of the bigger towns throught the island.

2) Puerto Ricans in the states tend to be more of the flag waving crowd, especially nuyoricans, a lot who have never even been to PR. But so what? I guess you've never met Texans who consider themselves Texans first and foremost.

However claiming people here don't wave the American flag is ridiculously wrong. I suggest you look for footage from the celebrations when the last governor, pro statehood Luis Fortuño, won. There were people all over San Juan with American flags. There are a lot more people here that favor statehood than those who favor independence. Your claim that \"Don't want to be a real part of our country\" once again shows you don't know what you're talking about. I guarantee you that if tomorrow Puerto Ricans had to choose between being a state and being independent they'd choose statehood. Just to put things in perspective since Puerto Ricans earned the right to vote for governors there have been 0 pro-independence governors compared to 4 pro-statehood.

3) You act as if Puerto Ricans had a choice in being part of the USA, as if they had a choice in wanting statehood or not. 1) Puerto Rico was INVADED by the USA. They had absolutely no say whatsoever in the matter. They chose to make us part of them so if you have a problem with it take it up woth your government. 2) The Jones Act which granted Puerto Ricans American citizenship was rejected by a lot of Puerto Ricans at the time. They still forced it upon us mainly because they wanted more soldiers to go fight in World War I. You have no clue about Puerto Rican history, don't act like you do.

You have no clue about taxes either. The entire point is that we don't reap all of the benefits states do. We have to abide by the US Constitution, the US has maximum sovereignty over the island, we have to pay certain taxes among other things, there have been hundreds if not more of Puerto Ricans who have died represting the US, if we were to trade with another country we would need the USA's permission, among other things yet we have ZERO representation in the US government save for a lobbyist with no real power.

There's a tinyly veiled racism to your post. It's funny since people like you is why I've always argued the island will never become a state but the pro-statehood people here will never understand.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Brady Cox
June 3, 2009 12:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Then they should become a state.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Brady Cox:

Please write your representatives and congressmen about that. We don't really have much of a say in the matter.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 2:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dlab:

exactly... even though I am not pro-statehood (hey, look at that.. prostate), I am so frustrated and fed up with the politics of status on this island, that I would accept statehood as a means to end this mess down here.

So in short... WRITE YOUR CONGRESSCRITTERS!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 4:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000: Oh wait, we don't HAVE any congresmen. :(

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 11:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dlab:

Well... there's Pierluisi, but he's useless.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 3, 2009 1:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm from Puerto Rico and the people here are very divided in political parties and if Puerto Rico ever become a state or Independent it would sadly turn family members against one and other because of politics.Also there are a number of people who life from the government and have never work and bad administration of another has cause some economic problems over the years. That has brought each year more suicides, younger pregnancy and more crime.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Ryan Ellison
June 3, 2009 1:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This isn't just Puerto Rico. The Virgin Islands are hosed in this deal as well.

It's absurd that US citizens living in a US territory aren't considered Americans by Netflix.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
jeffjohnvol
June 3, 2009 1:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

They'll get the full protections of the US government (and my sympathy) when they start paying income taxes. I'll let my kids stay up as long as they want and stay out as long as they want if they start paying part of the mortgage. Until then, my kids have limited priviledges.


I'd love for PR to be our 51st state. Currently they drain the treasury since they get social programs but don't pay income taxes.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 3, 2009 2:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jeffjohnvol: Income taxes aren't the only definition of American.

For the record, this Puerto Rican pays full federal income tax AND PR income tax... yet I don't get a vote on a federal level.

Excuse me if your offer to appease me when my island starts paying federal income tax is refused.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 2:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jeffjohnvol: By the same token, the U.S. Federal government exploits Puerto Rico and its national resources for economic and military purposes without re-investing in the local economy.

Frankly its ignorant of you to say that Puerto Rico should endure economic punishment by corporations that have no connection to the U.S. government simply by virtue of the fact that we are stuck in a crappy political situation that NONE OF US ASKED TO BE IN.

I hope you are never stuck in a situation that is truly beyond your control, cause you'll get no sympathy from me.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 3, 2009 2:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have lived in Puerto Rico for 4 years already. This island is forever in the grip of these ridiculous problems. As someone else mentioned, Amazon.com won't ship here. Here's a better one - PayPal business accounts won't work with Puerto Rico. So if your website uses PayPal, I can't buy. Wal-Mart won't ship here - EVEN THOUGH the world's most successful Wal-Mart in terms of sales is in Plaza Escorial, Carolina Puerto Rico. If you don't believe me, just check the numbers. Better yet, try to run inside and \"just grab\" something. Inevitably, you will wait in lines that stretch halfway across the store. Puerto Rico is a wonderful place, but it sucks for consumers. Customer service here is nonexistent. Responsibility is unheard of. At least our new Governor Fortuño is doing what it has to be done and is firing the lazy swine in the government offices; I support his actions even though they caused both me and my wife to be thrown out of work (we worked for associated vendors). Whenever you have a problem with ANYONE, it is always your fault. Oh, and for you nationalists, I speak Spanish well and I am married to a puertorriqueña, so it's not that.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
korybing
June 3, 2009 2:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I've actually gotten into knock-down drag-out fights with a friend over Puerto Rico being part of the US or not. He absolutely 100% refuses to believe that Puerto Rico is part of America solely because it is not part of the 50 states.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
weaselbit
June 3, 2009 3:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I live in Phoenix area and if there's a movie out that's popular, you might get to see it about 4 months after everyone else has seen it.

In a video store, they get extra copies if there's a higher demand. Netflix could care less. I called them and asked why they don't buy more copies so this doesn't happen. They said it was customers' fault because they hold on to movies too long.

I wish there was competition out there.

Blockbuster does a similar thing at ripoff prices with limits on how many you get per month, so forget that.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
xphilter
June 3, 2009 3:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm sure this has more to do with the MPAA than with netflix. And as for not charging for a service they can't use, that's probably because they don't offer a standalone streaming option (save for the Starz Playz which is only Starz movies). So if there is no set price for this, how can they discount for it? It's not like they raised the price for all users to get streaming movies, it was just a bonus.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
badr
June 3, 2009 4:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So i went ahead and did the following. I wrote an email to Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, regarding the situation:

\"From: badr
To: Reed Hastings; Hastings; rhastings - reply
Sent: Tue Jun 02 20:12:06 2009
Subject: Question about Netflix & Puerto Rico

Mr. Hastings;

I was born and raised in Puerto Rico. I live now in the states, just because I got offered a job with a government agency that doesnt have an office in the island.

With all due respect I would like to know, why if Puerto Rico is a sanctioned US Territory (until a couple of years ago, the US Navy bombarded an island where civilians lived less than 5 miles from the blast radius... Vieques, google it), the residents have to pay the full price but not be able to stream the content.

Just curious if you could answer it it would be awesome... Thanks!\"

I got a reply just now, not directly from Mr. Hastings, but either way a reply is a reply:

\"Dear Mr. Badr:

Thank you for your email. Mr. Hastings makes every effort to read each and every email that is sent to him, but is unable to personally reply to all of them. Please know that we appreciate you taking the time to provide us with your feedback and comments.

You are unable to utilize our instant watching functionality in Puerto Rico due to licensing restrictions. We're only able to provide this functionality within the 50 United States. Unfortunately, our licensing agreement does not include U.S. territories at this time.

You are charged the same rate without instant watching is because instant watching is not a paid service. Currently, instant watching is a free added benefit to a paid DVD rental subscription. There are limitations to this functionality and unfortunately not everyone will have access to this feature. However, because it is a free feature, we do not discount accounts that do not have access.

If you have any further questions or comments, please feel free to contact me directly. I can be reached via email at Kgrey@Netflix.com.

Thanks,

Kristy Grey
Netflix, Inc
----------------------

And there you have it. If someone wants to post this in the consumerist, since I am at work and I cant access that site from here, be my guest since I think it would clear some people up from their doubts and what not. I am going to write back to them asking them to make an official statement on this on the Consumerist, so that people know what is going on.

Badr

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 4, 2009 3:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@badr: The licensing issues are a hunk of crap. If its licensed for the US, its licensed for Puerto Rico... it really is that simple.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
badr
June 4, 2009 5:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mkt3000:

I know about it, you know about it... Tell it to them jajaja...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dlab
June 3, 2009 4:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@badr: You should write back and ask them if they are going to be deactivating their streaming service in DC.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
badr
June 3, 2009 4:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dlab:

They probably abide by DC being the Capital of the USA and therefore it doesnt apply... but I will ask anyways.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Joel Perez Irizarry
June 3, 2009 4:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Bye, bye Netflix. I just cancelled my account until they decide to treat us equally. And for those who are saying that we don't pay taxes, please call my employee and let them know. It's seems they haven't got the memo yet.

And for our fellow U.S. Citizens that are complaining about Puerto Ricans getting federal funds, remember that the reason the U.S. became independent from England to begin with was because they had to pay taxes to the crown without any representation. Sounds familiar?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
slickdealer
June 4, 2009 3:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Joel Perez Irizarry:
Ahem..
\"Puerto Rico is classified by the U.S. government as an independent taxation authority by mutual agreement with the U.S. Congress. Contrary to common misconception, residents of Puerto Rico pay some U.S. federal taxes: import/export taxes, federal commodity taxes, social security taxes, etc. Most residents do not pay federal income tax but pay federal payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare), and Puerto Rico income taxes.\"

Are you claiming that your puerto rican employees who work for your puerto rican company who live in puerto rico are paying federal income taxes? If so, then you should be the one telling them they are getting fucked.
The conversation here is discussing federal income taxes, not social security/medicare or import/export taxes. Or do you think that you shouldn't have to pay those either??

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
rob_p
June 3, 2009 5:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

To make a slightly different point, Puerto Rico is not one of the United States of America. They have a particular relationship with the United States but they are a Commonwealth. The status of Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans is entirely in the hands of the U.S. Congress, unlike those of us who live in a state or the federal district.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 3, 2009 5:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wanted to clarify some things, especially for those people who keep saying that this and many other issues would be resolved by becoming a state. Just because we don't pay state taxes does not mean that we don't pay federal taxes. We pay federal taxes. So to say that we want social programs but don't want to pay the taxes for them is a farce. Do some research before you post jeffjohnvol. Second of all, we are a commonwealth, not a territory, there is a difference.And please explain to me what the fact of paying taxes has to do with getting streaming movies on netflix? Puerto Rico is a part of the USA, so I find it hard to understand why they would block that service. I think that many of these companies need to review their policies, and maybe even take a couple of history classes to understand what is considered a part of the USA and what isn't.I am Puerto Rican, I have a social security card and it states me as a US citizen. I spent 12 years in the military serving my country. So why then, can I not receive the same services as others if we are all US citizens and a part of the same country?

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
esd2020
June 3, 2009 8:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's not about netflix, it's about how movie companies license territory distribution rights.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 4, 2009 3:57 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@esd2020: In which case Puerto Rico falls under US.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Randy Haddock
June 4, 2009 4:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The restrictions on streaming are ridiculous. There's no valid reason for that. As far as shipping, it's always been a tricky thing. It's the same way with Alaska and Hawaii.

And as far as whether or not Puerto Rico is part of the US? Heck yea! I was born in San Juan, raised in Guaynabo, and I am one proud American!

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
badr
June 4, 2009 5:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I just got the response to yesterday's email:
Dear Mr. Badr:
Thank you again for your email(s).
I understand that not having the ability to stream might be frustrating. However, please keep in mind that customers are paying to receive DVD's by mail, not to instantly watch movies & TV episodes. Like any of our site functionalities (Friends, Community, Profiles) the ability to watch movies and TV episodes instantly can be removed at any time without affecting the service itself.
We are aware that this functionality has limitations. This does not only affect customers residing in Puerto Rico. As per our terms of use, not all of our customers will have the ability to use instant watching.
As a comparison, many cable companies offer free video on demand. Often times, some customers will receive the video on demand and other customers will not. The cable company does not offer a discounted rate to the customers that do not receive the video on demand feature. Video on demand is a free added benefit (with limitations); similar to watch instantly.
Our streaming service is different than Hulu or ABC. We are not streaming our own content and do not necessarily own the rights to the titles. We are bound by our licensing agreements and do not have the rights to offer this functionality to Puerto Rico residents at this time.
In my previous response, I should have said that our streaming service is limited to the 50 United States and the District of Columbia.
I hope that I've answered all of your questions. If you have any further questions, feel free to read the Features & Functionalities section in our Terms of Use, which is where you will find information about instant watching.
Thanks,
Kristy Grey
Netflix, Inc
To which I responded:
Kristy;

Thanks for responding.

I understand all your points, except one.

Washington DC is not a state, I dont know if its something between a state and a territory, but historically DC is not a state, yet they receive the same treatment as a state. Is it because it's the nation's capital (not trying to be sarcastic), and i bet if Obama doesn't get his streaming there are going to be problems. HA!

I understand the \"streaming\" portion of Netflix is a \"free\" service, then again its a service you offer to your paying customers, so people see it as a part of the package.

I would completely understand if Puerto Rico were outside of the US Territory Range, but even the Virgin Islands, get the streaming service, but Puerto Rico can't…

Why is this then? Can you explain to me how that \"licesing\" issue works and why specifically it cannot be offered in the Island?

I appreciate the time you take to answer my questions. I love Netflix, we enjoy it very much at our home, but I have taken an interest in this issue on behalf of other people.

Thanks for your time and wait for your next email.
Again, waiting for their response.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 5, 2009 5:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The author has updated the blog with Netflix's response:

http://www.hectorramos.com/journal/2009/6/5/netflix-responds.html

Kind of funny timing...

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
LastError
June 6, 2009 1:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Reminds me of the embarrassment of the 1996 Olympics when the USOC put the tickets up for sale and refused to sell any tickets to residents of New Mexico.

Well, Mexico is a whole other country, you know! New or Old makes no difference. We can only sell USOC tickets to Americans!

This went on for some length of time even after they were advised to get thee to a MAP and look over by Texas and Arizona. A sad number of people in this country just don't know their own country. They don't know about Guam, PR, VI, APO addresses, etc. Most of them only know the area where they live and they've never been anywhere else much less to a far away place like NEW Mexico.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
badr
June 8, 2009 6:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Last Update from Netflix:
It seems Netflix is done with my questions. I am publishing my last letter from them, and my response. Sorry Puerto Rico, you either going to have to suck it up or cancel your subscription. I honestly think you should do the latter, canel your account although I dont think that will help as much as just calling their offices or emailing them. I'd sue them honestly…
Dear Mr. Badr:
You are correct, DC is not historically a state. They do still have instant watching functionality. Please note that we do not control who does or does not receive this functionality. Unfortunately, I cannot comment specifically as to why they are included while some territories are not.
Our licensing limitations are a proprietary agreement and I cannot divulge any further information than what I have already provided to you.
Please know that we're always looking to improve our service, and its features. We look to a time when all of our customers can enjoy all of our offerings. If and when that time comes, I will reach out to you directly to let you know.
Best,
Kristy Grey\\Netflix, Inc
Frankly I think they didnt like me telling them that if Obama doesn't get his Netflix streamed to the White House, there would be problems in Netflix with the Federal Government.
My response:

Kristy;

No problem. I appreciate what you have divulged already. Bottom line people in Puerto Rico have to suck it up once more. This will never change for us, until we become a state.

I appreciate your responses, frankly I was surprised you were able to talk so much about the topic before getting yanked in the chain. I will be relaying this info to the people in my blog and the rest of the news papers in puerto rico covering this situation. I wont be bothering you anymore with questions. It is clear that Netflix wont do anything on behalf of Puerto Rico and their customers.

I had a good conversation with a couple of Lawyers that cover copyright, FCC, and movie distribution into Puerto Rico and the US. They said, that Puerto Rico is sanctioned under Federal Law, to enjoy any priviledges the United States of America has. Meaning that if a movie is streamed, sold or rented in any of the 50 States including the Disctrict of Columbia, it had rights approving its distribution, digitally, sales or rent in Puerto Rico without any restriction or condition.

They also explained that if a movie was prohibited in the 50 States or the District of Columbia, then it would also be restricted in Puerto Rico under the same laws without exception.

This is greatly explained in detail under the Distribution Law and the Puerto Rico Regulation of Fair Competition No. VI - January 21, 1980:

\"For new enterprising companies wishing to include Puerto Rico into their venues, the safest option is to draft a detailed and precise contract that includes alternative dispute resolution options, limitations of jurisdiction and clauses which reserve the right to sell their products on a non-exclusive relationship.

Otherwise, they run the risk of facing several years of costly litigation, and seeing how a fruitful consumer market such as Puerto Rico turns into a sour venture for everyone involved.\"

This means that if Puerto Rican customers of yours that lived in Puerto Rico, and were affected by the Decision of Netflix not transmitting the streaming service (that is free for paying customers, but not free to everyone else), and they made a Class Action Suite against Netflix for discrimmination. I'm afraid Netflix would loose. This would be more costly to you guys than just streaming the content to Puerto Rican's.

Eitherway I appreciate you took time to answer my questions and give me a better perspective on how Netflix operates in terms of what they choose to offer to the US, its states, territories and the Disctric of Columbia (although there was no explanation why DC gets it or not).

Although I also understand that the streaming services are delivered \"as is\" meaning its not a service you guarantee to your customers to have.

Badr
-
With this I conclude my investigation on Netflix vs. Puerto Rico. My conclusion on this is that as the Netflix End User Agreement clearly states that Netflix is not obligued to offer their streaming service to anyone regardless they are on the 50 states or the exclusive District of Columbia because the \"streaming service\" is not a part of their services. Its a \"free\" ad-on for their paying customers, but if it doesnt work in your area of residence, its basically not their fault.
As you saw, Netflix is not giving away the specific reasons, as why they can offer streaming in the Nation's capital (Washington DC, which is confirmed by Netflix that it is not a State) but not on the US Territories like Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. I keep thinking that my assumption, that if the President of the United States doesnt receive his streaming into his TV, then Netflix would not exist. What Puerto Rico has to do is show the President of the United States, how much cheaper it would be for them to relocate the White House to Puerto Rico and this will solve ALL of the problems in the Island plus save a couple of billions to the US Government.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 11, 2009 9:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Puerto Rico is NOT a state or a US federal district (like D.C.). Puerto Rico is NOT incorporated into the US. It is a semi-independent country with an ambiguous association (colonial relationship?) with the US.That is why Puerto Rico has it's own national team that competes against US, their own national flag and their own national identity. They are not part of the US (ONLY ASSOCIATED AS A COMMONWEALTH, call that a protectorate or possesion but they are not part of the US) ! got it?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 13, 2009 4:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Today I called Nextflix to request the argentinian movie Martin H. I took advantage of the opportunity to deal with this issue. I asked for their policy against puertorricans in Puerto Rico in writing. Ms. Ambar 87599 (I felt I was talking with the robot in the Jetsons but this lady does no cleaning or cooking) who told me she couldnt give me her last name but her employee number, told me that they did not have any document. That they were working with the movie studios but it was them the ones who did not want to include us and that I would have to deal with them to help them with this. I was appalled. They were already trying to convince them. ALL THE MOVIE STUDIOS HAVE A POLICY AGAINST PUERTORICANS IN PUERTO RICO, you could conclude from the argument of AMBAR 87599. Not even her supervisorwould talk to me. I asked for the CEO address and she said she could not give me that. When I questioned how they had allowed that discriminatory policy and told her that if they gave it to US citizens in the mainland we had to get it too, she gave me the scripted answer again. I pressed the issue until I got tired to hearing her say the same. I had already read that the company does not have a complaint area and it is true. They are discriminatory and mischievious too. Can we complain to the communications regulatory commission? or something? Because this issue bothers me and is discriminatory. thanks for any advice.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
peteyale
June 18, 2009 5:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

It would make more sense to charge more shipping (more distance) and allow online viewing (because it is part of the US)

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
mkt3000
June 28, 2009 2:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@peteyale:

It doesn't. Puerto Rico is barely 1,000 miles off the mainland. There are longer distances within the mainland that don't get charged more.

Reply
","");