[rcxdude]

It's not a case for centralization, it's a case against exclusives: there's no reason why a TV show should only be available on one streaming platform. Ideally you could get everything from any number of streaming or pay-to-download sources. The issue is the incentives in the current system are not set up for this, and they are somewhat self-reinforcing (basically, a streaming service will get more value from licensing a show exclusively, even if they are paying much more for the sake of it. Show producers are therefore also incentivised to license exclusively as opposed to more generally, doubly so if they own their own streaming platform, at which point they will cease to license to third parties at all)

[Sander_Marechal]

The answer is compulsory licensing. People have been doing that for decades. It's a solved problem. Look at e.g. radio. There's a compulsory licensing scheme for radio stations. They pay into a pool that is divvied up to rights holders based on some kind of keys and metrics. Radio stations can play whatever music they want, no additional licensing required.

We should have that for streaming music and video. Any streaming platform could offer any content they'd want to host, and they pay into a pool for rights holders. Streaming platforms would have to compete on quality, features, price, availability, etc. But not on holding content hostage.