←back to thread

Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

(about.netflix.com)
1741 points meetpateltech | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
afavour ◴[] No.46161166[source]
Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers. But at least it wasn’t bought by Larry Ellison, as was considered very likely (assuming this merger gets approved, in the current administration you never know).

From a Hacker News perspective, I wonder what this means for engineers working on HBO Max. Netflix says they’re keeping the company separate but surely you’d be looking to move them to Netflix backend infrastructure at the very least.

replies(39): >>46161208 #>>46161211 #>>46161233 #>>46161598 #>>46161709 #>>46161768 #>>46161918 #>>46161987 #>>46162033 #>>46162120 #>>46162122 #>>46162242 #>>46162259 #>>46162332 #>>46162337 #>>46162364 #>>46162517 #>>46162528 #>>46163100 #>>46163137 #>>46163249 #>>46163287 #>>46163475 #>>46164174 #>>46164714 #>>46164966 #>>46165146 #>>46165652 #>>46166144 #>>46167441 #>>46167818 #>>46168334 #>>46168910 #>>46169128 #>>46169882 #>>46170527 #>>46171224 #>>46174509 #>>46177199 #
nonethewiser ◴[] No.46161918[source]
> Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers

This is a very common narrative to this news. But coming into this news, I think the most common narrative against streaming was essentially "There is not enough consolidation." People were happy when Netflix was the streaming service, but then everyone pulled their content and have their own (Disney, Paramount, etc.)

replies(34): >>46162094 #>>46162155 #>>46162278 #>>46162306 #>>46162312 #>>46162439 #>>46162652 #>>46162752 #>>46162827 #>>46162904 #>>46163452 #>>46163723 #>>46163760 #>>46164111 #>>46164560 #>>46164577 #>>46164755 #>>46164915 #>>46164990 #>>46166601 #>>46167565 #>>46167890 #>>46168079 #>>46168905 #>>46169122 #>>46169452 #>>46169928 #>>46170715 #>>46173687 #>>46174526 #>>46175063 #>>46175804 #>>46180309 #>>46181752 #
dangus ◴[] No.46164915[source]
This idea doesn’t mean those people are correct.

Netflix was great when it was the only streaming service because all the legacy media companies licensed shows for cheap. They basically considered it bonus income like syndicated television.

Most of Netflix’s content at that time was very popular but was basically just reruns. The Office, etc. It was a time when you’d be hard pressed to find any movie resembling a blockbuster, just bargain DVD bin type of stuff.

If all the streaming services consolidate there will be less reason than ever to put effort into content. As long as most people stay subscribed the less they spend on content the better.

With an à la carte landscape that we have now, streaming services all have to fight it out in open competition to keep their service on your monthly bill.

It might be less convenient but it is better for content than having a market with just one, two, or three players.

replies(1): >>46167312 #
1. roguecoder ◴[] No.46167312[source]
We could get back to that world with anti-trust enforcement and mandatory licensing, while still keeping whatever positive effects competition has had on content production (which I think are debatable at best: it seems like no one outside of low-budget stuff like Dropout is making anything interesting in the US right now.)
replies(2): >>46168116 #>>46169236 #
2. dangus ◴[] No.46168116[source]
I think a great copyright compromise to the insanely long copyright periods would be if certain types of content had standardized licensing costs that kicked in after a certain amount of time.

It would be a very interesting concept if after 10/20 years, anyone could grab any copyrighted content and redistribute it as long as they paid the copyright owner a license fee determined by copyright law.

3. raw_anon_1111 ◴[] No.46169236[source]
So should Disney be forced to license Avengers at the same price I license my cat videos? Should every content creator be forced to license everything? Why stop at video? What about books? Software?
replies(1): >>46193468 #
4. dangus ◴[] No.46193468[source]
Maybe the answer is yes, after a certain amount of time has passed.

It would be a great compromise to our insane copyright periods that currently exist if you ask me.

The industry can keep it insanely long copyright lengths but maybe after 20 years the whole world should be free to distribute Seinfeld and Friends and just pay a standard royalty rate so that content rights holders don’t become consolidated empires that are too big to compete against realistically, becoming inevitable monopoly players.

replies(1): >>46196702 #
5. raw_anon_1111 ◴[] No.46196702{3}[source]
Wolverine and Deadpool cost $430 million to make. My hypothetical cat video was free to make. How is it fair that Disney has to license their movie for the same as mine?