• LadyLikesSpiders@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    131
    ·
    1 year ago

    Theoretically, having multiple streaming platforms should be good, as it prevents a monopoly. Problem is, they all have monopolies, on specific shows. Choosing the streaming services you want isn’t about choosing the better product, but on which shows you have. All streaming shows should have all shows available. That’s the only way to properly decide which service is worth paying for

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      78
      ·
      1 year ago

      But then they’d have to compete on features and usability, and no company wants that. They prefer to set up roadblocks and extract tolls.

    • LazaroFilm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      70
      ·
      1 year ago

      Back in the days there was a law that movie studios couldn’t also have movie theaters to avoid this specific issue. Now they found the loophole.

      • Grimpen@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly right! Maybe the EU will save us all. It seems somehow monopolistic that Disney+ is the exclusive official streaming service for so much. I guess this is why Netflix put so much into Netflix originals.

        I’d like to at least see some requirements for open licensing of shows, such as maybe a sunset period or something.

        • LazaroFilm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes. They could have the equivalent of theatrical release exclusive and when it would normally go to DVD get a global streaming license.

      • LadyLikesSpiders@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was gonna include that in my original comment, but decided to just end it there for the sake of brevity, but yes, exactly this

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think we should make publisher/distributer combos illegal, that’ll solve the problem real quick.

      Want to run a streaming platform? Great, you just can’t be a publisher too

      Want to make/publish content? Great, you just can’t run your own streaming platform

      It’s how it used to work for the longest time until Comcrap bought TW (Or was it TW buying Comcrap?)

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Cool, Netflix streaming and Natflix publishing are now subsidiaries of Notflix inc. Soon to launch their new 18+ streaming service, Nutflix…”

        • cm0002@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well a well written law would be able to deal with that, but even if my idea had a chance of becoming law, its final text probably would be loopholed to death unfortunately

      • LadyLikesSpiders@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is rooted in the early days of cinema, in which theaters were also owned by the studios, and so would only show the stuff the studio produced. Was gonna go into it in my comment, but decided against it to keep it short. Another commenter also mentioned it, and that’s pretty much what I’m proposing. I’m suggesting specifically that they have to show everything in order to also avoid exclusivity deals. Part of that, though, would also be to just not let Netflix produce its own content, but if it didn’t, you’d be able to watch it on amazon anyway

      • LadyLikesSpiders@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Then they better step up their game. Compete with each other by improving their services, or lowering the prices to draw in customers

    • spiritedpause
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      isn’t about choosing the better product, but on which shows you have.

      But you can argue that part of what makes a streaming service a good product, is the literal product they produce, their content.

        • spiritedpause
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          They’re a publisher whose content is hosted on their own streaming service. It’s classic vertical integration.

          I think the current model is better actually, because then the streaming services have to compete with each other on content, user experience, and price.

          This way, you only need to subscribe to the streaming services that have the shows you’re currently watching, and can cancel whenever you’re done with those shows, until the next one comes along.

          If a streaming service bundles multiple studios shows together, then you’re paying for a ton of content you may not even care about, just like how cable is.

          At the end of the day, unless someone is watching hours and hours of tv a day, it’s unlikely they need to simultaneously subscribe to 7 streaming services.

      • LadyLikesSpiders@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        A streaming service’s product is the service of streaming stuff to you. It’s not a studio. Studios make those products. The streaming services give you a platform to watch them. Their product is their website