The irony, of course, is that Biden is now trying to argue the opposite side of the same argument - after all, he's ACTA's primary champion in the White House, and has anchored the Executive lead on the provisions it contains. As such, he's doing what he specifically argued against - on fundamental Constitutional grounds, no less.
How is this not double dipping? I mean, if it's a commercial performance (i.e. one made by a broadcaster and paid for using ad revenue) then doesn't that broadcaster have the right to reach as many people in a given territory that want to tune in?
If I'm hearing an ad, I've already paid for the performance with my attention - attention that has already been converted into cash by the media company that (a) counted me as part of its audience and (b) licensed the music they played accordingly.
The record companies are, in essence, subcontractors who are now stepping way out of line. Dealing with them is like dealing with a tire company attempting to bill you directly for the tires that already came on the new car you already bought.
Yes, that's exactly how the system works. And your percentages aren't that far off either.
It's not that they can't compete with home theater, it's that home theater divides their potential market into 'people who want to see the movie in the theater' and 'people who just want to see the movie now'. Even the best theater experience comes with costs (both cash and transactional) that can tip the balance in favor of home viewing.
If theaters didn't get so royally screwed in the opening weeks, they may be more amenable to erosion on the tail end of a release window. But what they're dealing with here is a ratchet from both ends.
Obviously, this ratchet works to the advantage of studios, as DVD retailers get a smaller percentage of sales than theater owners who are showing movies that are more then 12 weeks into release. But the studios don't feel any need to share this benefit with their theatrical partners. Which is why this particular partner is telling Disney to go hang. If other chains feeling the same pressure do the same thing, they can inflict serious damage on a (very expensive) film's prospects.
So consider this the opening shot in theater owners's fight to claw back a percentage of opening weekend grosses before release windows collapse for good, taking the theatrical business with them.
Exactly. And with YouTube effectively blocked, how do people get video?
That's right, through television.
And who made his billions in television?
That's right, the galacticly corrupt Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi.
Not coincidentally, Berlusconi has peen pushing for a law that requires state permission for every upload to YouTube.
The rational is that YouTube is a broadcast medium, that broadcasting requires licensing, that individuals posting videos online are - strictly speaking - broadcasters, and that they must follow the law designed to govern broadcasters.
He, of course, is Italy's biggest broadcaster. Also, the guy in charge of broadcast law enforcement. Oh, and famously hostile to competitors. Thanks to Google and YouTube, 'competitors' now means 'every Italian online'.
Now do you see how this works?