So how many major studios do you feel are appropriate? Once again, despite the opinions of HN, the definition of a monopoly is not “a company does something I don’t like”.
As I said previously, there is nothing stopping anyone from distributing content via a multitude of channels.
The definition of "monopoly" doesn't matter that much though. What matters is whether new players can realistically enter a market and compete on merit. That's what creates incentives for innovation and low prices.
I agree with you that the film industry itself doesn't currently have a monopoly or oligopoly problem, especially not internationally. But the fact that there are huge problems in related areas of digital content distribution and discovery (app stores, search, social networks, network operators specifically in the US) is cause for alarm in my view.
The problem is spreading rapidly and it wouldn't be a surprise if the film industry was one of the next victims.
Digital content distribution - as far as movies, music, and books anyone can put up a website, provision some servers and sell content in standardized formats that can be consumed anywhere.
Search - nothing is stopping anyone from going to other search engines. It’s not like Bing is backed by one or two people with no financial backing.
Social networking - the social networks pre- Facebook failed because people chose a better experience.
On none of those cases are corporations forcing people to do anything nor or any of them essential services for which there is no alternative.
And the “definition” does matter. Once people in power can make up their own definitions it leads to government overreach.
So now we want to pass a regulation that any company that has a market of more than 5% should be broken up? Then how do you define a market? It amazes me how many people trust the government and want more government power.