With streaming providers frequently raising prices, subscribers often feel like they’re paying more for the same service—or a lesser version, depending on what’s available to watch that month. In a unique move, Disney is introducing a small, potential financial benefit to Disney+ and Hulu subscribers in the form of some third-party discounts, freebies, trials, and contests.
As of today, Disney+ subscribers can log into Disney’s Disney+ Perks website with their streaming credentials to get access to a revolving selection of discounts and freebies. When I logged in today, I was met with options for several free trials, including a six-month one to DoorDash’s premium subscription offering, a three-month trial to Clear+, and a two-month trial to Duolingo’s premium subscription.
Disney+ subscribers can also get discounts, including to Adidas’ online marketplaces and “select” Disney Resorts Collection hotels (if you stay at least two nights, with most availability occurring between June 29 and July 31). There are also some free virtual rewards for Disney-owned games and the ability to enter sweepstakes, like for going to the premiere of the movie Freakier Friday.
Disney, which announced in November 2023 that it would take full control of Hulu from Comcast, said that Hulu-only subscribers will also get a perks program, starting on June 2. Those perks will differ from those of Disney+ and initially include chances to win tickets to Lollapalooza, San Diego Comic-Con, and Jimmy Kimmel Live, unspecified “perks” from Microsoft, LG, and others, and chances “to win items from and inspired by Hulu” originals, like The Handmaid’s Tale.
For voice actors who previously portrayed Darth Vader in video games, the Fortnite feature starkly illustrates how AI voice synthesis could reshape their profession. While James Earl Jones created the iconic voice for films, at least 54 voice actors have performed as Vader in various media games over the years when Jones wasn’t available—work that could vanish if AI replicas become the industry standard.
The union strikes back
SAG-AFTRA’s labor complaint (which can be read online here) doesn’t focus on the AI feature’s technical problems or on permission from the Jones estate, which explicitly authorized the use of a synthesized version of his voice for the character in Fortnite. The late actor, who died in 2024, had signed over his Darth Vader voice rights before his death.
Instead, the union’s grievance centers on labor rights and collective bargaining. In the NLRB filing, SAG-AFTRA alleges that Llama Productions “failed and refused to bargain in good faith with the union by making unilateral changes to terms and conditions of employment, without providing notice to the union or the opportunity to bargain, by utilizing AI-generated voices to replace bargaining unit work on the Interactive Program Fortnite.”
The action comes amid SAG-AFTRA’s ongoing interactive media strike, which began in July 2024 after negotiations with video game producers stalled primarily over AI protections. The strike continues, with more than 100 games signing interim agreements, while others, including those from major publishers like Epic, remain in dispute.
In that sense, the vulgar Vader situation creates a touchy dilemma for Epic Games and Disney, which likely invested substantially in this high-profile collaboration. While Epic acted swiftly in response, maintaining the feature while preventing further Jedi mind tricks from players presents ongoing technical challenges for interactive AI speech of any kind.
An AI language model like the one used for constructing responses for Vader (Google’s Gemini 2.0 Flash in this case, according to Epic) are fairly easy to trick with exploits like prompt injections and jailbreaks, and that has limited their usefulness in some applications. Imagine a truly ChatGPT-like Siri or Alexa, for example, that could be tricked into saying racist things on behalf of Apple or Amazon.
David Prowse as Darth Vader and Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia filming the original Star Wars. Credit: Sunset Boulevard/Corbis via Getty Images
Beyond language models, the AI voice technology behind the AI Darth Vader voice in Fortnite comes from ElevenLabs’ Flash v2.5 model, trained on examples of speech from James Earl Jones so it can synthesize new speech in the same style.
Previously, Lucasfilm worked with a Ukrainian startup we covered in 2022 on Obi-Wan Kenobi to recreate Darth Vader’s voice performance using a different AI voice model called Respeecher, which isn’t used in Fortnite.
According to Variety, Jones’ family supported the new Fortnite collaboration, stating: “James Earl felt that the voice of Darth Vader was inseparable from the story of Star Wars, and he always wanted fans of all ages to continue to experience it. We hope that this collaboration with Fortnite will allow both longtime fans of Darth Vader and newer generations to share in the enjoyment of this iconic character.”
This article was updated on May 16, 2025 at 4: 25 PM to include information about an email sent out from Epic Games to parents. This Article was updated again on May 17, 2025 at 10: 10 AM to correctly attribute ElevenLabs Flash v2.5 as the source of the Darth Vader audio model in Fortnite. The article previously incorrectly stated that Respeecher had been used for the game.
Although Fubo’s lawsuit against the JV appears to be settled, other rivals in sports television seemed intent on continuing to fight Venu.
In a January 9 letter (PDF) to US District Judge Margaret M. Garnett of the Southern District in New York, who granted Fubo’s premliminary injunction against Venu, Michael Hartman, general counsel and chief external affairs officer for DirectTV, wrote that Fubo’s settlement “does nothing to resolve the underlying antitrust violations at issue.” Hartman asked the court to maintain the preliminary injunction against the app’s launch.
“The preliminary injunction has protected consumers and distributors alike from the JV Defendant’s scheme to ‘capture demand,’ ‘suppress’ potentially competitive sports bundles, and impose consumer price hikes,” the letter says, adding that DirectTV would continue to explore its options regarding the JV “and other anticompetitive harms.”
Similarly, Pantelis Michalopoulos, counsel for EchoStar Corporation, which owns Dish, penned a letter (PDF) to Garnett on January 7, claiming the members of the JV “purchased their way out of their antitrust violation.” Michalopoulos added that the JV defendants “should not be able to pay their way into erasing the Court’s carefully reasoned decision” to temporarily block Venu’s launch.
In addition to Fubo, DirecTV, and Dish, ACA Connects (a trade association for small- to medium-sized telecommunication service providers) publicly expressed concerns about Venu. NFL was also reported to be worried about the implications of the venture.
Now, the three giants behind Venu are throwing in the towel and abandoning an app that could have garnered a lot of subscribers tired of hopping around apps, channels, and subscriptions to watch all the sports content they wanted. But they’re also avoiding a lot of litigation and potential backlash in the process.
Fubo’s merger with Disney represents a shocking about-face for the sports-streaming provider, which previously had raised alarms (citing Citi research) about Disney’s ownership of 54 percent of the US sports rights market—ESPN (26.8 percent), Fox (17.3 percent), and WBD (9.9 percent). Fubo successfully got a preliminary injunction against Venu in August, and a trial was scheduled for October 2025.
Fubo CEO David Gandler said in February that Disney, Fox, and WBD “are erecting insurmountable barriers that will effectively block any new competitors.
“Each of these companies has consistently engaged in anticompetitive practices that aim to monopolize the market, stifle any form of competition, create higher pricing for subscribers, and cheat consumers from deserved choice,” Gandler also said at the time.
Now, set to be a Disney company, Fubo is singing a new tune, with its announcement claiming that the merger “will enhance consumer choice by making available a broad set of programming offerings.”
In a statement today, Gandler added that the merger will allow Fubo to “provide consumers with greater choice and flexibility” and “to scale effectively,” while adding that the deal “strengthens Fubo’s balance sheet” and sets Fubo up for “positive cash flow.”
Ars Technica reached out to Fubo about its previously publicized antitrust and anticompetitive concerns, whether or not those concerns had been addressed, and new concerns that it has settled its lawsuit in favor of its own business needs rather than over a resolution of customer choice problems. Jennifer Press, Fubo SVP of communications, responded to our questions with a statement, saying in part:
We filed an antitrust suit against the Venu Sports partners last year because that product was intended to be exclusive. As its partners announced last year, consumers would only have access to the Venu content package from Venu, which would limit choice and competitive pricing.
The definitive agreement that Fubo signed with Disney today will actually bring more choice to the market. As part of the deal, Fubo extended carriage agreements with Disney and also Fox, enabling Fubo to create a new Sports and Broadcast service and other genre-based content packages. Additionally, as the antitrust litigation has been settled, the Venu Sports partners can choose to launch that product if they wish. The launch of these bundles will enhance consumer choice by making available a broad set of programming offerings.
“… a total deception”
Some remain skeptical about Disney buying out a company that was suing it over antitrust concerns.
It’s January, and for people in the US, that means the same thing it’s meant every January since 2019: a new batch of previously copyrighted works have entered the public domain. People can publish, modify, and adapt these works and their characters without needing to clear rights or pay royalties.
This year’s introductions cover books, plays, movies, art, and musical compositions from 1929, plus sound recordings from 1924. Most works released from 1923 onward are protected for 95 years after their release under the terms of 1998’s Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act. This law prevented new works from entering the public domain for two decades.
As it does every year, the Duke University Center for the Study of the Public Domain has a rundown of the most significant works entering the public domain this year.
Significant novels include Ernest Hemingway’s Farewell to Arms, the first English translation of Erich Maria Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front, Agatha Christie’s The Seven Dials Mystery, Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own, and William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury.
Many of the films on the list showcase the then-new addition of sound to movies, including the first all-color feature-length film with sound throughout (Warner Bros.’ On With the Show!) and the first films with sound from directors like Cecil B. DeMille and Alfred Hitchcock. Buster Keaton’s final silent film, Spite Marriage, is also on the list. Musical compositions include notables like Singin’ in the Rain and Tiptoe Through the Tulips.
On the Disney front, we get the Silly Symphony short The Skeleton Dance, as well as a dozen more Mickey Mouse shorts. These include the first films to depict Mickey wearing white gloves and the first to show him talking—as we covered last year, it’s only the 1920s-era versions of these characters who have entered the public domain, so each new version is significant for people looking to use these characters without drawing the ire of Disney and other copyright holders.
Enlarge/ A shot from Agatha All Along, an upcoming Disney+ exclusive.
Marvel Studios/Disney+
A leak of data from Disney points to the Disney+ streaming service making about $2.4 billion in revenue in its fiscal quarter ending on March 30. Disney doesn’t normally share how much revenue its individual streaming services generate, making this figure particularly interesting.
Leaked data
In August, Disney confirmed that it was investigating the leak of “over a terabyte of data from one of the communication systems” it uses. In a report this week, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) said it looked over files leaked by a hacking group called Nullbulge that include “a range of financial and strategy information,” apparent login credentials for parts of Disney’s cloud infrastructure, and more. The leak includes over “44 million messages from Disney’s Slack workplace communications tool, upward of 18,800 spreadsheets, and at least 13,000 PDFs,” WSJ said.
“We decline to comment on unverified information The Wall Street Journal has purportedly obtained as a result of a bad actor’s illegal activity,” a Disney spokesperson told WSJ.
$2.4 billion
According to WSJ, financial information came via “documents shared by staffers that detail company operations,” adding, “It isn’t official data of the sort Disney discloses to Wall Street and might not reflect final financial performance for a given period.” That means we should take these figures with a grain of salt.
“Internal spreadsheets suggest that Disney+ generated more than $2.4 billion in revenue in the March quarter,” WSJ reported, referencing Disney’s fiscal Q2 2024. “It underscores how significant a revenue contributor Hulu is, particularly as Disney seeks to buy out Comcast’s stake in that streaming service, and as the two sides spar over its value.”
The publication noted that the $2.4 billion figure represents “about 43 percent”—42.5 percent to be more precise—of the direct-to-consumer (DTC) revenue that Disney reported that quarter, which totaled $5,642,000,000 [PDF]. In its Q2 report, Disney put Disney+, Hulu, and Disney+ Hotstar under its DTC umbrella. DTC revenue in Q2 represented a 13 percent increase compared to the same quarter in the prior fiscal year.
Further, subscriber counts for Disney+ and Hulu increased year over year in Q2. The leaks didn’t specify how much revenue Disney’s streaming businesses made in Q3, but Disney reported that DTC revenue increased to $5.8 billion [PDF].
Right before announcing its Q3 numbers, though, Disney announced price hikes across Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN+ by as much as 25 percent. As we wrote at the time, the price hike seemed like an attempt to push people toward bundle packages offering a combination of Disney+, Hulu, and/or ESPN+ (bundles are supposed to make subscriber churn less likely). Disney CFO Hugh Johnston tried convincing us that Disney’s streaming catalog meant that it had “earned” the streaming price hikes.
But the recently leaked numbers shed a little more light on the situation.
Disney-owned channels have been blacked out on DirecTV for the past two days because of a contract dispute, with both companies claiming publicly that they aren’t willing to budge much from their negotiating positions. Until it’s resolved, DirecTV subscribers won’t have access to ABC, ESPN, and other Disney channels.
While there have been many contentious contract negotiations between TV providers and programmers, this one is “not a run-of-the-mill dispute,” DirecTV CFO Ray Carpenter said today in a call with reporters and analysts, according to The Hollywood Reporter. “This is not the kind of dispute where we’re haggling over percentage points on a rate. This is really about changing the model in a way that gives everyone confidence that this industry can survive.”
Carpenter was quoted as saying that DirecTV will fight Disney “as long as it needs to” and accused Disney of timing the blackout before big sporting events “to put the most pain and disruption on our customers.” Carpenter also said DirecTV doesn’t “have any dates drawn in the sand” and is “not playing a short-term game,” according to Variety.
On Sunday, Disney issued a statement attributed to three executives at Disney Entertainment and ESPN. “DirecTV chose to deny millions of subscribers access to our content just as we head into the final week of the US Open and gear up for college football and the opening of the NFL season,” the Disney statement said. “While we’re open to offering DirecTV flexibility and terms which we’ve extended to other distributors, we will not enter into an agreement that undervalues our portfolio of television channels and programs.”
DirecTV users must apply for $20 credits
DirecTV is offering $20 credits to affected customers, but the TV firm is not applying those credits automatically. Customers need to go to this webpage to request a bill credit.
AT&T owns 70 percent of DirecTV after spinning it off into a new entity in 2021. AT&T explored options for selling its 70 percent stake almost a year ago. Private equity firm TPG owns the other 30 percent.
Based on previous TV carriage fights, a DirecTV/Disney agreement could be reached within days. A similar dispute between Disney and Charter Communications happened almost exactly a year ago and was resolved after eight days.
Carpenter said today that DirecTV wants to sell smaller channel packages and that Disney’s proposed terms conflict with that goal. Variety summarized his comments:
At the heart of the dispute, says Carpenter, is a desire by DirecTV to sell “skinnied down” packages of programming tailored to various subscriber interests, rather than forcing customers to take channels they may not want or watch very often. The company believes such a model would help retain subscribers, even if they were paying less. There is also interest in helping customers find other content, even if it’s not sold directly on the service, Carpenter says.
Streaming add-ons and “skinny” bundles
Last year’s agreement between Disney and Charter included access to the Disney+ and ESPN+ streaming services for Charter’s Spectrum cable customers. Carpenter was quoted by the Hollywood Reporter as saying there is “value” in that kind of deal, “but what’s important is that it’s not a replica of the model that got us here in the first place, where it has to be distributed and paid for by 100 percent or a large percentage of the customers.”
A lobby group that represents DirecTV and other TV providers, the American Television Alliance, blasted Disney for “seek[ing] to raise rates and force distributors to carry an unwieldy ‘one-size fits all’ bundle of more than a dozen channels to the vast majority of their subscribers.” The group said Disney’s proposed terms would require TV companies to sell “fat bundles” that “force consumers to pay for programming they don’t watch.”
Disney’s statement on Sunday claimed that DirecTV rejected its offer of “a fair, marketplace-based agreement.”
“DirecTV continues to push a narrative that they want to explore more flexible, ‘skinnier’ bundles and that Disney refuses to engage,” Disney said. “This is blatantly false. Disney has been negotiating with them in good faith for weeks and has proposed a variety of flexible options, in addition to innovative ways to work together in making Disney’s direct-to-consumer streaming services available to DirecTV’s customers.”
We contacted both companies today and will update this article if there are any major developments.
Disclosure: The Advance/Newhouse Partnership, which owns 12.4 percent of Charter, is part of Advance Publications, which also owns Ars Technica parent Condé Nast.
Enlarge/ Raglan Road Irish Pub at Disney Springs in Orlando, Florida, USA.
After a woman, Kanokporn Tangsuan, with severe nut allergies died from anaphylaxis due to a Disney Springs restaurant neglecting to honor requests for allergen-free food, her husband, Jeffrey Piccolo, sued on behalf of her estate.
In May, Disney tried to argue that the wrongful death suit should be dismissed because Piccolo subscribed to a one-month free trial of Disney+ four years before Tangsuan’s shocking death. Fighting back this month, a lawyer representing Tangsuan’s estate, Brian Denney, warned that Disney was “explicitly seeking to bar its 150 million Disney+ subscribers from ever prosecuting a wrongful death case against it in front of a jury even if the case facts have nothing to with Disney+.”
According to Disney, by agreeing to the Disney+ terms, Piccolo also agreed to other Disney terms vaguely hyperlinked in the Disney+ agreement that required private arbitration for “all disputes” against “The Walt Disney Company or its affiliates” arising “in contract, tort, warranty, statute, regulation, or other legal or equitable basis.”
However, Denney argued that “there is simply no reading of the Disney+ Subscriber Agreement, the only Agreement Mr. Piccolo allegedly assented to in creating his Disney+ account, which would support the notion that he was agreeing on behalf of his wife or her estate, to arbitrate injuries sustained by his wife at a restaurant located on premises owned by a Disney theme park or resort from which she died.”
“Frankly, any such suggestion borders on the absurd,” Denney said.
Denney argued that Disney’s motion to compel arbitration was “so outrageously unreasonable and unfair as to shock the judicial conscience.”
It’s particularly shocking, Denney argued, because of a “glaring ambiguity” that Disney “ignores”—that Piccolo more recently agreed to other Disney terms that “directly conflict” with the terms that Disney prefers to reference in its motion.
Denney argued that Disney is “desperately” clinging to “Piccolo’s purported consent to the Disney Terms of Use in November of 2019, because the My Disney Experience Terms and Conditions he allegedly consented to in 2023″—when purchasing tickets on Disney’s website to Epcot that went unused—”do not contain an arbitration provision.”
Those terms instead “rather expressly contemplate that the parties may file lawsuits and requires those suits to be filed in Orange County Florida and to be governed by Florida law,” Denney said. They also specify that the My Disney Experience terms prevail amid any conflict with other terms.
This renders “the arbitration provision in the Disney Terms of Use unenforceable,” Denney argued, requesting Disney’s motion be denied and suggesting that Disney is attempting “to deprive the Estate of Kanokporn Tangsuan of its right to a jury trial.”
He also reminded the court that in nursing home cases, Florida courts have “repeatedly held that a resident’s estate will not be bound by an arbitration agreement signed by a spouse or other family member in their individual capacity.”
Disney is hoping that its Disney+ terms argument will push the litigation out of the court and behind closed doors of arbitration, arguing that “Piccolo’s remaining claims against Great Irish Pubs”—which does business as Raglan Road Irish Pub—”should be stayed as well.” That would be proper, Disney argued, because Piccolo’s claims against Disney “are based entirely on Great Irish Pubs’ alleged misconduct” and “it would be problematic for this litigation to continue since each tribunal may decide the issues differently.”
Disney also noted that the litigation should also be stayed if Great Irish Pubs joined the arbitration, which Disney “would not oppose.”
Denney argued that Disney’s motion to compel arbitration was “fatally flawed for numerous independent reasons.”
“There is not a single authority in Florida that would support such an inane argument,” Denney argued. It’s “preposterous,” he said, that Disney is arguing that “when Jeffrey Piccolo, individually, allegedly signed himself up for a free trial of Disney+ back in 2019 or bought Epcot tickets in 2023, he somehow bound the non-existent Estate of Kanokporn Tangsuan (his wife, who was alive at both times) to an arbitration agreement buried within certain terms and conditions.”
Enlarge/ A scene from the new season of Doctor Who, which is streaming on Disney+.
Disney+
Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN+ will get more expensive as of October 17, whether users have a subscription with or without ads. After most recently jacking up streaming prices in October 2023, The Walt Disney Company is raising subscription fees by as much as 25 percent, depending on the streaming service and plan.
Here’s how pricing will look in October compared to now:
Now
As of October 17
Disney+ with ads
$8/month
$10/month
Disney+ without ads
$14/month $140/year
$16/month $160/year
Hulu with ads
$8/year $80/year
$10/month $100/year
Hulu without ads
$18/month
$19/month
Hulu and Live TV with ads
$77/month
$83/month
Hulu and Live TV without ads
$90/month
$96/month
Disney+ and Hulu with ads
$10/month
$11/month
Disney+ and Hulu without ads
$20/month
No change
ESPN+
$11/month $110/year
$12/month $120/year
Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN+ with ads
$15
No change
Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN+ without ads
$25
No change
Disney didn’t announce any pricing changes for the bundle that contains Disney+, sister streaming service Hulu, and Warner Bros. Discovery’s rival streaming platform, Max.
Based on the updated pricing, Disney is seemingly trying to coax people to sign up for one of its streaming bundles, which combine multiple services for a lower price than if the services were each subscribed to individually. Streaming companies have been trying to use bundles to deter people from frequently canceling their streaming subscriptions. But as we’ve written before, streaming bundles don’t address subscribers’ complaints around incessant price hikes, content quality, confusing packages, or features.
Another price hike
One of the biggest problems that streaming subscribers, especially long-term ones, are facing is ever-rising prices. Disney already increased prices in October 2023, meaning Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN+ are facing their second price hikes in about a year.
Early reactions online, including on forums like Reddit, show people dissatisfied with streaming price hikes that don’t seem to align with the quality of content available. For example, Reddit user Montysucker wrote: “easy[,] cancel now,” adding:
“The enshittification of media in the last few years is insane and it’s wild how seemingly no one cares anymore about making something that is actually enjoyable to watch and not their egotistic[al] pipe dream.”
Of course, many expressed being overwhelmed with continuing to see streaming prices rise, as Slow_Investment_2211 wrote:
On October 12, 2023, as Variety summarized, Disney+ without ads went up by 27 percent, from $11 to $14 per month. Hulu without ads went up 20 percent ($15 to $18/month). Hulu with Live packages each also increased by $7 at the time, while ESPN+ pricing increased by $1.
Disney paired the price hike announcement with the revealing of new upcoming features for Disney+. However, the new linear channels are little comfort for people who don’t use Disney+.
The new channels will be ABC News Live, which Disney+ users can access on September 4, and channels “focused on preschool content, featuring TV series and shorts available on Disney+.” Disney+ will also get four more channels (or as Disney’s calling them, playlists) that show: 1) “Seasonal Content” from Disney+; 2) “Epic Stories” from big franchises like Marvel and Star Wars; 3) “Throwbacks” with “nostalgic pop culture”; and 4) “Real Life” documentaries.
It’s possible that Disney will introduce more channels to appeal to more users. But with all the price hikes that streaming subscribers have endured over the past few years, many would prefer avoiding price bumps that are partially for extra channels that they may never watch. Charging for unwanted content in media packages that are already priced questionably is reminiscent of cable, something that streaming was initially supposed to replace, not replicate.
Subscribers to Disney’s trio of streaming services will be unlikely to be alone in facing price hikes for long; analysts suspect Netflix pricing will also increase this year.
Enlarge / Disney+ promotional art for The Fable, an anime series that triggered Animeflix takedown notices.
Disney+
Thousands of anime fans were shocked Thursday when the popular piracy site Animeflix voluntarily shut down without explaining why, TorrentFreak reported.
“It is with a heavy heart that we announce the closure of Animeflix,” the site’s operators told users in a Discord with 35,000 members. “After careful consideration, we have decided to shut down our service effective immediately. We deeply appreciate your support and enthusiasm over the years.”
Prior to its shutdown, Animeflix attracted millions of monthly visits, TorrentFreak reported. It was preferred by some anime fans for its clean interface, with one fan on Reddit describing Animeflix as the “Netflix of anime.”
“Deadass this site was clean,” one Reddit user wrote. “The best I’ve ever seen. Sad to see it go.”
Although Animeflix operators did not connect the dots for users, TorrentFreak suggested that the piracy site chose to shut down after facing “considerable legal pressure in recent months.”
Back in December, an anti-piracy group, Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), sought to shut down Animeflix. Then in mid-May, rightsholders—including Netflix, Disney, Universal, Paramount, and Warner Bros.—won an injunction through the High Court of India against several piracy sites, including Animeflix. This briefly caused Animeflix to be unavailable until Animeflix simply switched to another domain and continued serving users, TorrentFreak reported.
Although Animeflix is not telling users why it’s choosing to shut down now, TorrentFreak—which, as its name suggests, focuses much of its coverage on copyright issues impacting file sharing online—noted that “when a pirate site shuts down, voluntarily or not, copyright issues typically play a role.”
For anime fans, the abrupt closure was disappointing because of difficulty accessing the hottest new anime titles and delays as studios work to offer translations to various regions. The delays are so bad that some studios are considering combating piracy by using AI to push out translated versions more quickly. But fans fear this will only result in low-quality subtitles, CBR reported.
On Reddit, some fans also complained after relying exclusively on Animeflix to keep track of where they left off on anime shows that often span hundreds of episodes.
Others begged to be turned onto other anime piracy sites, while some speculated whether Animeflix might eventually pop up at a new domain. TorrentFreak noted that Animeflix shut down once previously several years ago but ultimately came back. One Redditor wrote, “another hero has passed away but the will, will be passed.” On another Reddit thread asking “will Animeflix be gone forever or maybe create a new site,” one commenter commiserated, writing, “We don’t know for sure. Only time will tell.”
It’s also possible that someone else may pick up the torch and operate a new piracy site under the same name. According to TorrentFreak, this is “likely.”
Animeflix did not reassure users that it may be back, instead urging them to find other sources for their favorite shows and movies.
“We hope the joy and excitement of anime continue to brighten your days through other wonderful platforms,” Animeflix’s Discord message said.
ACE did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment.
Enlarge / Morfydd Clark is Galadriel in The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power.
Amazon Studios
Subscribers lodged thousands of complaints related to inaccuracies in Amazon’s Prime Video catalog, including incorrect content and missing episodes, according to a Business Insider report this week. While Prime Video users aren’t the only streaming users dealing with these problems, Insider’s examination of leaked “internal documents” brings more perspective into the impact of mislabeling and similar errors on streaming platforms.
Insider didn’t publish the documents but said they show that “60 percent of all content-related customer-experience complaints for Prime Video last year were about catalogue errors,” such as movies or shows labeled with wrong or missing titles.
Specific examples reportedly named in the document include Season 1, Episode 2 of The Rings of Power being available before Season 1, Episode 1; character names being mistranslated; Continuum displaying the wrong age rating; and the Spanish-audio version of Die Hard With a Vengeance missing a chunk of audio.
The documents reportedly pointed to problems with content localization, noting the “poor linguistic quality of assets” related to a “lack of in-house expertise” of some languages. Prime Video pages with these problems suffered from 20 percent more engagement drop-offs, BI said, citing one of the documents.
Following Insider’s report, however, Quartz reported that an unnamed source it described as “familiar with the matter” said the documents were out of date, despite Insider claiming that the leaked reports included data from 2023. Quartz’s source also claimed that customer engagement was not affected,
Ars Technica reached out to Amazon for comment but didn’t hear back in time for publication. The company told Insider that “catalogue quality is an ongoing priority” and that Amazon takes “it seriously and work[s] relentlessly alongside our global partners and dedicated internal teams to continuously improve the overall customer experience.”
Other streaming services have errors, too
Insider’s report focuses on leaked documents regarding Prime Video, but rival streaming services make blunders, too. It’s unclear how widespread the problem is on Prime Video or across the industry. There are examples of people reporting Prime Video inaccuracies online, like on Amazon’s forum or on Reddit. But with some platforms not offering online forums and it being impossible to know how frequently users actually report spotted problems, we can’t do any apples-to-apples comparisons. We also don’t know if these problems are more prevalent for subscribers living outside of the US.
Beyond Prime Video, users have underscored similar inaccuracies within the past year on rival services, like Disney+, Hulu, and Netflix. A former White Collar executive producer pointed out that the show’s episodes were mislabeled and out of order on Netflix earlier this month. Inaccurate content catalogs appear more widespread if you go back two years or more. Some video streamers (like (Disney and Netflix) have pages explaining how to report such problems.
Streaming services have only gotten more expensive and competitive, making such mistakes feel out of place for the flagship video platform of a conglomerate in 2024.
And despite content errors affecting more than just Prime Video, Insider’s report provides a unique look at the problem and efforts to fix it.
