[Godel_unicode]

The cost of the input is irrelevant.

Sell things for money generalized pretty well in basically every other field. It actually generalized pretty well in video too. This is just adding "remove the DRM". It'll be fine once all the old studio execs retire...

[Arainach]

The cost of the input affects the cost of the output, which makes all the difference in the world.

Let's start with the most obvious: "sell things for money" hasn't worked out that well in music. Streaming services (with DRM) are 83% of revenue in the music industry now: https://www.businessofbusiness.com/articles/vinyl-record-sal...

The price of music is dramatically lower. Its consumption model is entirely different - a song may be played dozens of times on a radio station or a streaming platform, each performance for pennies. Video, on the other hand, is predominately a single-shot mechanism. There's enough new content that almost no customers will watch the same piece of video multiple times. You have to make back all of your revenue in that initial purchase. Combined with higher production costs, you need higher prices. You also need a guarantee people will have to pay those prices to justify the investment and even begin the process. DRM is such a guarantee.

[Godel_unicode]

First, streaming services charge people money and sell them a thing: access to music. Not liking it won't make that different than movie tickets.

Second, the price is identical. Streaming providers charge $10/month (or very close to it) regardless of what the content is. Also, albums when new are $10-$20, and movies new are $10-$20.