• lemmylommy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    If they had more content on offer than the big legal streaming services combined, should that not tell us something about the quality of legal offers?

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      What’s there to learn that isn’t already widely known? Existing (copyright) laws are asinine and all corporations eventually become consumed by greed. That’s America in a nutshell.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s not even copyright laws, it’s everyone insisting on exclusive contracts. There’s no reason a piece of content couldn’t be on Netflix and Disney+ at the same time. It would be a lot better for consumers if streamers could compete on price and service instead of which content they managed to create/licence.

        • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          6 months ago

          Music streaming has proven this for years now, all the major brands have massive collections that make its super easy to pay and listen to just about anything.

          Early Netflix proved this when everything was readily available for an affordable pricre.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          6 months ago

          Exactly. I like Netflix’s service, but Disney’s content. Why can’t I just pay for a Disney bundle on Netflix? Likewise with Max, Peacock, etc.

          Lawyers are why we can’t have nice things.