It’s odd that people are against monopolies, generally speaking, but for streaming services we would prefer if there were a few giant companies which owned it all.
I’m not disagreeing with the above, just thought it was curious.
Compare Movie/TV-show streaming to the Music streaming industry. Spotify/Tidal/Apple/Amazon all offer access to the same music (more or less). They compete on features/quality/apps/prices/etc. They don’t compete based on their exclusive libraries. Somehow the music industry can survive in that model. Video streaming needs to do the same. Stop the exclusivity. This way, monopolies are not needed in video streaming.
People aren’t clamoring for a monopoly, they are asking for interoperability. I didn’t need a single VHS rental store to be the only place I could get Ernest Scared Stupid, but I did need to be able to get Ernest Goes to Jail at every VHS rental store.
All we’d really need to do that is just make it a law that contracts aren’t exclusive.
If shows were sold to multiple streaming services legally, then those services would compete based on the actual service they offer, and not the content they have.
In other words, make streaming services the customers for shows, instead of individuals, and then let people be their customers.
As it is, a streaming service is pretty comparable to a car dealership.
That’s not all we’d need to do though. Too many cases of the content rights holders also owning a streaming service means they’d just not sign any contracts. Disney, paramount, NBC, hell even Netflix owns content. We need to also break up so that right holders can’t also control the means of distribution.
No, my problem is that we have this system where each piece of content is its own monopoly. That exclusivity means that people need to use a specific service to access that content.
The whole “I wish it was all on one platform” isn’t really wishing for only a single platform to exist, but wishing that one platform could host all of the content. Ideally, there would be multiple ones doing this and differentiating themselves from each other in some way and, well, competing on their platform itself rather than “I paid a bunch of money so that you have to come here if you want to see anything Marvel.”
I think two or three viable platforms was kind of the sweet spot. It’s not all dominated by one, but I also don’t have to shop around and subscribe to five different things if I want to get what I want legally. But you’re right that it’s a sticky issue that just doesn’t seem to have a good answer.
The solution is mandatory licensing at fixed rates for media that is no longer under production. Make it so the only way to have exclusive content is to commit to continuing that content.
It’s odd that people are against monopolies, generally speaking, but for streaming services we would prefer if there were a few giant companies which owned it all.
I’m not disagreeing with the above, just thought it was curious.
Compare Movie/TV-show streaming to the Music streaming industry. Spotify/Tidal/Apple/Amazon all offer access to the same music (more or less). They compete on features/quality/apps/prices/etc. They don’t compete based on their exclusive libraries. Somehow the music industry can survive in that model. Video streaming needs to do the same. Stop the exclusivity. This way, monopolies are not needed in video streaming.
People aren’t clamoring for a monopoly, they are asking for interoperability. I didn’t need a single VHS rental store to be the only place I could get Ernest Scared Stupid, but I did need to be able to get Ernest Goes to Jail at every VHS rental store.
I’m clamoring for more miak.
A mother’s love
All we’d really need to do that is just make it a law that contracts aren’t exclusive.
If shows were sold to multiple streaming services legally, then those services would compete based on the actual service they offer, and not the content they have.
In other words, make streaming services the customers for shows, instead of individuals, and then let people be their customers.
As it is, a streaming service is pretty comparable to a car dealership.
That’s not all we’d need to do though. Too many cases of the content rights holders also owning a streaming service means they’d just not sign any contracts. Disney, paramount, NBC, hell even Netflix owns content. We need to also break up so that right holders can’t also control the means of distribution.
No, my problem is that we have this system where each piece of content is its own monopoly. That exclusivity means that people need to use a specific service to access that content.
The whole “I wish it was all on one platform” isn’t really wishing for only a single platform to exist, but wishing that one platform could host all of the content. Ideally, there would be multiple ones doing this and differentiating themselves from each other in some way and, well, competing on their platform itself rather than “I paid a bunch of money so that you have to come here if you want to see anything Marvel.”
I think two or three viable platforms was kind of the sweet spot. It’s not all dominated by one, but I also don’t have to shop around and subscribe to five different things if I want to get what I want legally. But you’re right that it’s a sticky issue that just doesn’t seem to have a good answer.
The solution is mandatory licensing at fixed rates for media that is no longer under production. Make it so the only way to have exclusive content is to commit to continuing that content.