#söderprasst

Yeah, It´s kinda fucked up since normally, competition is good for the customer. It´s a good thing to have different stores you can go to. It´s a cood thing to have different car or moobile phone brands to chose from.

With streaming though, I can´t really think of any real world situation where the customer actually is worse off with more variety to chose from.

You are aware that we are in a piracy group here, right? We don´t want our money back. Because we didn´t pay for it in the first place!

What does this have to do with laws though? I find it pretty reasonable for a film company to be able or allowed to run their own streaming platform and just not sell their shows to say netflix. If I create something that I want to sell my self, in my own store, there should be no law forcing me to also hand it over to that supermarket down the streat to sell it there. And if I want to charge a monthly fee for even being able to enter my own little store, that should also not be prohibited.

Imagine there would be a law that said, every studio would also have to sell their stuff to netflix. You think, Netflix wouldn´t immediately abuse this power to drive any competition out of business?

Don´t get me wrong, I HATE that to be able to watch all the stuff I might be interrested in, I´d have to subscribe to like 5 different services. I just don´t see how laws would be a good tool to deal with that.

That´s on my “want to read” list.

That´s so insane, right? I mean, they practically had us in the bag with netflix. People either had their own account or chipped in to use someone elses one BUT EITHER WAY, THEY PAID FOR IT! And then came one of the rare moments where more competition was actually bad.

What WAS their next cash grab though?

I´m sure the will be no false strikes at all. And even if, I´m sure they have a quick and easy appeal process in place, just like they have with copyright.

What’s aggressive routing? Like more prone to induce road rage?