Hacker News Reader

Nothing in your post has anything to do with free markets... markets maybe, but copyright is not a "free market".... it is by definition a monopoly

a free market in content would be requiring the copyright holder to following something like FRAND for patents, and disallow them from making "exclusive" deals with one provider, this would then mean the market would be on price, speed, other competitive factors not on content library

View on HN

Jup, gp was talking about unregulated markets. Those surprisingly often have winner take it all outcomes. I don't want to go back to company towns.

BTW back to the current situation with streaming services, we nearly would have had the same with movie theaters. But United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. shut that down, thankfully. Wouldn't expect such a ruling these days, though :(

It isn't an unregulated market. Copyright is a regulation.

There are no unregulated markets. Property rights are a regulation.

> If we don't regulate streaming services to have exactly one really good service that I prefer, then we will go back to company towns.

What are you talking about?

A free market for content provider essentially means that they can do whatever they want with their content and rights to it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com