3 ms·
> Granted, such exclusivity deals are rare (because generally publishers want to maximize their revenue rather than artificially constrain it), Well, also ther
by toast0 2y ago
> Granted, such exclusivity deals are rare (because generally publishers want to maximize their revenue rather than artificially constrain it),
Well, also there was US v. Paramount Pictures [1], which prohibited film production companies from showing their films exclusively at their owned theaters. And follow-on rulings like Bigelow vs RKO Radio Pictures [2], that more or less established that distributing films preferentially is also unacceptable.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures%2C_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pic....
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_v._RKO_Radio_Pictures,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_v._RKO_Radio_Pictures,....
- jfengel 2y agoThe consent decree from US v Paramount actually expired a couple of years ago. Not sure how that affects the other rulings.