Sky faces competition probe over film rights The Competition Commission will investigate whether Sky is using a stranglehold on film rights to harm its competitors in the pay-TV market. The communications regulator Ofcom today formally asked for the probe, expressing concerns that because of the way film rights are sold, Sky has "the incentive and ability to distort …
There's a simple answer to this nonsense: Abolish exclusivity in broadcast rights. Across the board: films, sporting events, everything.
Just because company A paid for the right to broadcast something, shouldn't prevent company B from also broadcasting it, if they can come up with the readies. If company A want exclusivity, they can produce their own programmes and not be obliged to sell them to anyone else.
Oh, but that would create an actual free market, where players would have to compete on their own merits on a level playing field. Cue howls of protest from Big Corporations .....
Australia and Canada seemed to have produced media giants only Murdoch is worse than any of them.
Since Murdoch is there, the competition - HBO, Max, etc - should be allowed in to give him a real run for his money and, if necessary, using legislation to balance the field.
"Australia and Canada seemed to have produced media giants only Murdoch is worse than any of them."
Canada has several cable TV companies so if you don't like your current cable company you are free to switch to a different one... Since they play nice with each other and NEVER over lap their service your going to have to move but that should not be a problem right?
How is Sky's movie service a monopoly? There are many ways to rent a movie and Sky's service is just one of them. It's also only available to Sky subscribers who choose to bother with it - and even they have the choice of renting from somewhere else whenever they want.
As for distorting the market - LOL! They have a lousy selection, often broadcast with poor bit rates and are over priced.
The only thing wrong with Sky's service is that it's crap.
I reckon this is just another round of Sky-bashing by the government because they have the cheek and temerity to operate a TV service that makes a healthy profit. Just for once it'd be nice if people in this country could praise a business that is run efficiently and that continues to grow and enhance its product line. But no. They are doing well so of course they have to be taken down a peg.
1. Sky have the money to get first-run films before other operators
2. Sky's film channels are cheaper with Sky than with Virgin (£16pcm vs £20-30pcm)
3. Consumers that want early access to the latest films are forced to get Sky or pay up to double the price
4. Sky profits increase due to non-free-market forces (step 3)
5. Go to step 1, lather, rinse, repeat.
Ofcom will consider ways to mitigate either step 1, or step 2.
Prices taken from:
http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/tv/sky-movies-channels.html
http://www.sky.com/shop/tv/movies/
I subscribe to movies now and again. Will get 6 months at half price, then leave it a few months, then get another offer. Or will switch from Sky to Cable etc
In the past 8 years I've switched to and fro from Sky and Virgin, don't think I've ever paid anything like full price for my packages.
May well be wrong but didn't the Competition Commission do an excellent job the last time they got involved with Sky programming? Instead of paying one fee to Sky to see all broadcasted Premier League games you now have to subscribe to ESPN at an extra cost. Fantastic result. Consumer choice, righto.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
