Given that the RIAA tried to sue a grandmother once, This wasn't too far-fetched.
Given that the RIAA tried to sue a grandmother once, This wasn't too far-fetched.
https://pitchfork.com/news/ascap-hit-multiple-us-bars-with-c...
It doesn’t cost Netflix any more money whether one person or 10 people are watching a particular subscription.
I’d say the major appeal of the drive-in is the venue and all the accessories (big screen, sound, etc) - otherwise you’d just pay for Netflix yourself and watch it at home.
Yes, that's the point: if not for the drive-in, you'd pay for Netflix.
A more interesting question is: why can't one create that drive-in, as long as only Netflix subscribers can enter? If "it's a license, not a product" like these companies shout, trying to prevent legitimate ownership rights, the license should work anywhere.
In my opinion the law should be changed that content you pay for can be used as you wish except copying (otherwise you'd just copy it and resell). It'll drive up the prices of the "source" content, but the market will quickly fill the gap by offering affordable access to broadcasted versions of such content.
This is only for the big guys tho. Little guys get screwed harder than before.