• lemmylommy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    If they had more content on offer than the big legal streaming services combined, should that not tell us something about the quality of legal offers?

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      What’s there to learn that isn’t already widely known? Existing (copyright) laws are asinine and all corporations eventually become consumed by greed. That’s America in a nutshell.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        It’s not even copyright laws, it’s everyone insisting on exclusive contracts. There’s no reason a piece of content couldn’t be on Netflix and Disney+ at the same time. It would be a lot better for consumers if streamers could compete on price and service instead of which content they managed to create/licence.

        • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          Music streaming has proven this for years now, all the major brands have massive collections that make its super easy to pay and listen to just about anything.

          Early Netflix proved this when everything was readily available for an affordable pricre.

          • jonne@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Yep, you choose between Spotify, Tidal, etc based on price and how well the app works, not because one service has the band you like while the other one doesn’t (not that music streaming isn’t its own shitshow for other reasons, of course).