Streaming platforms are an evolution of TV, not movies. And entities owning both the production and distribution in TV has been a thing for a long time (in that the networks have been making their own shows or having shows made specifically for them with total control resting in the networks virtually since the beginning and still do today)

Whats increasingly happening is that with natural gas being so cheap, coal fired power stations are replacing the coal going into their boilers with natural gas instead and using that as the source of heat to generate the steam.

Xerox is another good example, the people running the thing had vested interests in photocopiers and thought all the stuff Xerox PARC was doing was at best a distraction from the photocopier business or at worst a threat to it.

As nice as YouTube science content can be, shows like PBS Nova are still better because they had the budget to do better and the incentive to get it right.

I am rooting for Disney to win and set a precedent that training an AI on copyrighted content without permission from the copyright holder of that content is illegal. Bring down the whole "generative AI" house of cards (since basically all these AIs are trained on content without permission)

My point is, why does the HDMI licencing mob care if the implementation is open or closed given that they will.get there royalty (or penalties from a court for companies that don't pay) for every port anyway?

My understanding is that if you want to make a HDMI device you need to pay a license fee (covering patents and etc) and that the HDMI people can and will use you if you use HDMI without paying.

And if they control IP rights that allow them to force everyone to pay up, why would this stuff (which isn't even the full spec, just the bits bring done in the driver rather than the firmware or hardware) bring open cause a problem?

Time for the US to nationalise all things vehicle. Registration and taxes. Emissions and smog checks. Safety inspections. Dealership laws and regulations. Driver licensing (including for trucks, busses etc). Road rules. The lot.

The theater I go to has none of those problems. Tickets are cheap, munchies are also not obscenely priced, the picture and sound are great and the closest I have come to distractions and noise was when I went to see Moana 2 with a bunch of kids in the theater (and even then it wasn't distracting enough to be a problem)

And the experience of seeing a movie on the big screen is going to be far better than watching it on my 32" 1080i TV with inbuilt speakers or my 1080p computer monitor and somewhat basic Creative Labs speakers.

Unlike some of these other mergers, the Netflix-Warner merger (or a merger of Warner with any other major studio) would require approval from foreign regulators who (generally) can't just be bought off.

Allowing any existing studio (and with all the shows Netflix makes and has made, they are definitely a studio at this point) to merge with Warner Bros is anti-competitive.
Doesn't matter if its Paramount, Disney, Netflix, Sony, Universal, Amazon or anyone else, it should be blocked on competition grounds.

It still needs approval in other jurisdictions that might actually care about consolidation in the media industry.

Until such time as someone actually files a patent lawsuit over AV1 or names specific patents that AV1 infringes on, I am inclined to treat what the likes of Sisvel has to say as a load of BS.

I want the New York Times to win and set a precedent that feeding copyrighted works into an AI without permission is a copyright violation (regardless of what the AI does with it or what output it generates). Pop the generative AI (aka "slurp up a whole bunch of copyrighted content, mix it around and spit bits of it back out") bubble completely.

The Chinese-made cars being sold in Australia by brands like BTD and MG and GWMHaval are not "unreliable junk".