I don't see how Hollywood could legitimately treat all other rental companies one way and treat Redbox another. That just reeks of anti-trust concerns. Either you sell to rental companies or not. You don't get to punish a company just because they run a more efficient operation than their competitors and you are afraid everyone else migth have to compete as well.
I'd love it if Engadget HD could do a little investigating into the inner workings of movie rentals. It used to be that Blockbuster simply paid a higher price for their discs than the consumer which gave them the right to rent it as much as they wanted, with the understanding that there was a physical limitation to how many times a disc could be rented before it needed replacing.
But is this this still true? Or do rental places give hollywood a cut of each rental they make now similar to record stations? And I would assume that digital rentals have some sort of revenue sharing agreement. I doubt Hollywood would let Netflix pay a set price off a movie and then make unlimited money off of it by streaming a single copy to millions of households.
For those looking for a device strictly for reading, the new Kobo is a nice little option. It's small enough to slip into a pocket, can do more with a PDF than the competition, and at $129, it's $10 cheaper than both the Nook and Kindle WiFi.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I don't see how Hollywood could legitimately treat all other rental companies one way and treat Redbox another. That just reeks of anti-trust concerns. Either you sell to rental companies or not. You don't get to punish a company just because they run a more efficient operation than their competitors and you are afraid everyone else migth have to compete as well.
I'd love it if Engadget HD could do a little investigating into the inner workings of movie rentals. It used to be that Blockbuster simply paid a higher price for their discs than the consumer which gave them the right to rent it as much as they wanted, with the understanding that there was a physical limitation to how many times a disc could be rented before it needed replacing.
But is this this still true? Or do rental places give hollywood a cut of each rental they make now similar to record stations? And I would assume that digital rentals have some sort of revenue sharing agreement. I doubt Hollywood would let Netflix pay a set price off a movie and then make unlimited money off of it by streaming a single copy to millions of households.