11–20 of 38 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
-- I can't imagine a worse actor in the IP space than Disney Why do you say that? Just curious.
I don't know if this is what GP means but for one, Disney is one of the driving forces behind extending copyright periods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
I truly hope that Netflix doesn't sell to Disney; I can't imagine a worse actor in the IP space than Disney. I'm not that worried though, I think that Netflix sees its future as something more than being bought out at this stage. Then again, money does speak its own powerful language.
I don't know. I think Netflix has a good idea of what they'd like their future to be, but no clear path to get there. Their subscriber growth is slowing, and their content library is shrinking (and was always pretty anaemic outside of a few core territories). Being owned by Disney would give them guaranteed access to a AAA content catalogue, and far more firepower in reciprocal licensing negotiations. And for their p…
I truly hope that Netflix doesn't sell to Disney; I can't imagine a worse actor in the IP space than Disney. I'm not that worried though, I think that Netflix sees its future as something more than being bought out at this stage. Then again, money does speak its own powerful language.
What is netflix's competitive advantage? They have some customers and some technology, but the customer's probably care more about the content. They don't own the content. Their own IP is limited. The Studios own Hulu so they are better off licensing their content to Hulu.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is netflix's competitive advantage? They have some customers and some technology, but the customer's probably care more about the content. They don't own the content. Their own IP is limited. The Studios own Hulu so they are better off licensing their content to Hulu.
They've shown a remarkable ability to rapidly iterate new shows which people like, revive old shows that people still want, and they've begun to enter the culture in the form of "Netflix and Chill" and the like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know if this is what GP means but for one, Disney is one of the driving forces behind extending copyright periods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
That's exactly what I'm thinking of, thanks.
The extension to life + 70, or 95 years after publication for corporate works, was in the 1998 Act. Disney did lobby for that, but the big argument for it was that was to match EU copyright terms, which went to life + 70 under the "Directive harmonising the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights" in 1993.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've shown a remarkable ability to rapidly iterate new shows which people like, revive old shows that people still want, and they've begun to enter the culture in the form of "Netflix and Chill" and the like.
The problem is they don't own the old shows. They are owned by AMC, Disney, Fox etc.
Please no. Disney is not the right company to be driving Netflix.
Star Wars distribution alone makes it worth it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's exactly what I'm thinking of, thanks.
I'm not sure "driving force" is really accurate. The main impetus for the 1976 Act, which changed the term from 28 years with the possibility of one 28 year renewal to life + 50 was to allow the United States to join the Berne Convention. Berne required a minimum of life + 50. The extension to life + 70, or 95 years after publication for corporate works, was in the 1998 Act. Disney did lobby for that, but the big arg…