Many lawyers disagree with you (see the section headed "But is faking a U.S. IP address illegal?")

Specifically:
"Prof. Fewer said he doubts that the use of a VPN qualified as the breaking of a digital lock on a device designed to prohibit unauthorized copying, since it merely cloaks a user’s IP address."

If I buy a pair of jeans there is no way someone can stop me from taking them to another country.

You have heard of tarriffs, have you not?

The issue I have here is that due to free trade between the US & Canada, It is perfectly legal to go to the US, fill up my trunk with cheap US-made DVD's and bring them across the border duty free.

Apparently if I bring those exact same bits across the border via Netflix, I am an shameful, immoral thief.

No, the argument was: When you pirate a game (specifically in the sense of acquiring the game without paying the developers for it), you deprive the developers of compensation for their work. (emphasis mine)

This has two parts:
1) You acquire something
2) The developers are deprived of something.

In case (1) Game is loaned to you, the developer is deprived of nothing. The developer received compensation for the original sale.
In case (2) Buying the game used, the developer is deprived of nothing. The developer received compensation for the original sale.
In case (3) Not getting the game, you acquire nothing

I disagree that it is stealing, but for different reasons. If one accepts the definition that stealing is the acquisition of something without providing adequate compensation to the original owner, they piracy is indeed stealing.

The argument with piracy is that when you pirate a game (specifically in the sense of acquiring the game without paying the developers for it), you deprive the developers of compensation for their work, therefore it is stealing.

Agreed! But in this case, Canadians have paid Netflix, who has (presumably) compensated the content creators.

So is it "stealing" to deprive a middleman (Bell) compensation for their work, when I receive nothing from Bell?

In that case, NSA [extremetech.com], Google [quora.com], Facebook [pcworld.com] et al. collecting our data aren't "stealing" anything either.

They aren't "stealing" anything. How can one "steal" information? That's like stealing the number 4 or the color blue.

Distinction without difference. The infringer gets something for nothing — like a thief. The copyright holder loses something — like a theft-victim.

There's an obvious difference. The "infringer" gains something different than the copyright holder loses.

If I steal your car, I gain a car and you lose it.

In this case, I gain access to view a piece of content. The copyright holder only "loses" the ability to sell that content to me through a different channel.

If you can download a song against its owner's wishes, why can't you move into my home while I'm away and change the locks [credit.com]? It is (or ought to be) just as socially (un)acceptable...

That's just silly. How exactly does downloading a song "change the locks" on the song?

I agree there should be copyright terms. These promote the health and innovation of the arts. I disagree that terms should be unnecessarily restrictive.

In this case, the distinction that "you are permitted to view this content from this specific pile of dirt, but not from that pile of dirt over there" seems unnecessarily restrictive.

you are obtaining content that you have not paid for

But the Canadians are obtaining content that they have paid for. They paid Netflix for content.

If that same Canadian takes their laptop to the US, and watches Netflix they receive US Netflix. I think it is a fallacy to think that most of society would consider accessing a service at one geographic location legal and at another "stealing"

Netflix could differentiate accounts so that Canadian customers could never access things they don't have a license to sell in Canada no matter what address they come in from.

Which is exactly why I do not consider the behavior "stealing". Netflix could cut down on 99% of this simply by tying Netflix.ca accounts to Canadian Netflix.

They choose not to. I fail to see how this becomes the moral responsibility of the Canadian populace.

then you're probably doing something wrong.

I fail to see the immorality of my actions due to the fact that I circumvent a licensing agreement that I was not party to.

Great, so Bell paid for an "exclusive" license for NBC content in Canada. Why should their agreement have anything to do with what sites I access? Last time I checked, Bell Media is not the governing body of Canada.

For the end user this is neither a copyright violation nor a licensing violation. It may violate Netflix terms of service, but I do not believe that violating a websites terms of service is necessarily immoral.

And this is the problem with industry thinking. It is NOT stealing

No, the problem in this case is not only is it NOT stealing, it is not actually illegal.

Accessing US Netflix outside of the US may break terms of use (which Netflix would have a VERY hard time winning a lawsuit over), but does not currently break any Canadian laws. No more than using a VPN to access any other website.

This whole thing is bloody retarded. In this case, Canadians:
- Pay for the content
- Pay for the VPN to access the content

At least if nothing else, this has convinced me to NEVER sign up for any Bell services.

Is it 'stealing' when a Canadian drives across the border and buys something in the US?

If they are evading the duty tax, the government might think so.

No, the government would consider that tax evasion. Not the same thing at all.

Yeah you'd think these media giants would come out with their own streaming services instead of trying to fight the tide

Uhhh...they have. That's the whole point. She's trying to paint US Netflix with the "it's illegal and immoral" brush so people sign up for Bell Media's streaming service.

Problem is she's wrong on both counts (it being neither illegal nor immoral).

Of course not! You're scared of things you don't understand. You were taught to be scared by your TV set. Freedom is scary... to some people

I don't have a TV set. I read books. Books have taught me to be scared of idiots.

You scare me.

The best option? Tear down ALL the borders. Everybody has a right to move and live where they want.

here won't be a 'home country'. Home is where you live. Better to make the social programs global. There's plenty of money locked up in the financial industry to do it.

I certainly hope you are trolling, cause otherwise you are an idiot.

Your "solution" that makes a cute sound bite but is obviously unworkable on any number of levels. Who would "tear down the borders? Which social programs would be provided? Which government would be in charge? How would you resolve the vast social, cultural, religious and historical differences among the populace?

Even if we magically managed to resolve the above, there would still be huge issues of disparity between resource rich and resource poor areas. i.e. this would cause all sorts of new problems and not solve any of the existing ones.

BTW, the US financial sector was worth about $6.2 trillion in 2014. The US spends about $3.8 trillion on healthcare annually. There is not "plenty of money locked up in the financial system to pay for it"

Hell, Canada spent $214.9 billion on health care in 2014.

As a Canadian I think of my height in imperial, but distances in (kilo)metres (and speed in km/h); my weight in pounds, but general volumetric stuff in litres.

Yep, exactly the same here. Similarly I think of temperatures in Celsius, but use feet / inches when building stuff.

But Celsius makes much more sense in Canada. Here, the range of habitable temperatures are basically -30 to +30.

Outside that it's either too damn cold or too damn hot.

I would also argue that the trivial benefits the imperial system has in being "good for some things in day to day life" are far outweighed by the inconvenience of every other country on the planet using a different measurement system.

It's more likely that it was a PITA to certify / support drivers for a device they decided was only used by a very small fraction of their users.

Presumably manufacturers will still provide drivers, just Microsoft is saying they won't certify / provide them by default anymore.

This makes total sense for fringe devices.