top | item 39137602

(no title)

noptd | 2 years ago

Yeah, this is gatekeeping nonsense.

By your logic, streaming services should be paying TV manufacturers for using their "IP" when displaying video to customers. Hogwash.

discuss

order

dwaite|2 years ago

Streaming services ARE paying TV manufactures for using their IP. Thats why all the TVs are becoming smart TVs - because someone signing up for Max (or Apple TV+) nets them a fairly profitable commission when you see how slim margins are for the bulk of television sales.

This is why smart TVs are becoming increasingly more annoying, because additional revenue streams are so highly desired. Display more in-interface ads, offer first party 'streaming' for the opportunity to display more ads, put movie purchases/rentals ever more prominently in your UI, always start in your menus rather than the last selected HDMI input, take metrics on what people are watching by default - I am surprised we don't have an Uber Eats button on the remote yet.

Interestingly, a TV manufacturer can't do anything to require a streaming service to provide _their_ IP. Netflix seems to have a policy of not allowing their app to run on projectors, keeping them out of the allow-list for downloads and for execution of the android app. Some projector manufacturers will ship a separate Chromecast dongle or the like so that they can say they support Netflix on the box.

turquoisevar|2 years ago

By my logic, TV manufacturers can also charge TV app developers for the use of their IP if they so desire, yes.

I don’t see how that’s nonsense or hogwash. It’s a very basic concept since the dawn of men. You want to use or own something I own or made, then I can ask you to pay for it.

In this instance it’s the frameworks and SDKs that were made and that others want to use.

In a similar fashion, they already extract payment in exchange for them featuring whatever app has decided to pay for that privilege. Don’t see how that’s somehow morally better, nor do I see a legal hurdle.