|
|
|
|
|
|
by holgerschurig
871 days ago
|
|
|
Agreed. I actually don't think that Piracy was difficult to compete against. Actually there was a time when video streaming platforms competed against it --- and very successful. For normal people, it was cheap enough to make a contract, and much simpler than going the piracy route. No one talked anymore about pirating. But then things went wrong: * you paid a monthly fee and STILL suddenly got advertisements force-feds (you couldn't even skip them) * you wanted to watch some series, but it was taken out of the program (never heard of a public library that removes some author after some months) * many movies made it only into one specific video stream vendor, so they forced people to make 2 or 3 or even more subscriptions. And once the inconvenience from video stream vendors reached some threshold, piracy was re-birthed. As soon as it become more convenient again. |
|
|
Just require anything older than 25-30 years to be made available for a nominal fee to any platform that wants it, with no exclusivity agreements allowed. Suddenly, you have a ton of quality content on multiple platforms. And the platforms are incentivized to compete on quality new content.
Also, it shouldn't be allowed for the Film/Music industry want to have it both ways. First use "Hollywood accounting" [1] to avoid paying taxes and contributors because the film "had a loss". And then milk it off perpetually. If you declare a loss on something, it should be enforced to go on public domain in a much shorter timeframe (say 10 years vs. 25-30 for profitable productions).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting