Comments on: 20th Century Fox Gives Redbox The Smackdown

By: Jane

Jane — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:23:16 +0000

Meanwhile you can get the same movies for free and get to keep them longer at the library, all, guess what, legally. Being just a bit vigilant in reserving them means you’ll never have to pay (except for the taxes the library runs on) for a movie again, even the newest releases.

By: David Chavez

David Chavez — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 08:51:45 +0000

One main reason we are having problems with the economy is that we have prostituted value to volume. In response to labor unions pressing manufacturers, our moron government leaders passed NAFTA and GATT, parasites starting with Wal-mart have used these to export our value in the way of manufacturing in the USA to China for volume. Which in turn narrows the playing field for small businesses to make a buck, and allows companies like Wal-Mart to make all the money. When only a select few make all the money, the economy ultimately callapses, because it takes everybody making money on a fair playing field to have a strong economy. Now we have a new parasite called “redbox” who wish to prostitute value for volume. Which will ultimately narrow the playing field to small businesses (except BlockBuster) to make a buck, or turn to the internet, and further corrode the value of movies. Then again, why should these actors make so much money, it’s against the socialist way.

By: Studios To Separate DVD Purchase and Rental Release Dates? - Screen Rant

Studios To Separate DVD Purchase and Rental Release Dates? - Screen Rant — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:17:38 +0000

[...] the reason that studios 20th Century Fox, Universal Pictures and Warner Bros. all attempted to keep RedBox from having access to their DVDs until well after the initial release. The popular rental giant only charges $1 per night, per [...]

By: John

John — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:54:10 +0000

Paul, a company can state whatever terms they like in an agreement with another company. The studios have probably set terms in their agreements with the distributors/wholesalers that state that rental companies like Redbox are not allowed to purchase the DVDs for a set amount of time after they hit retail shelves. If the distributors do not agree with the studios’ terms, they are well within their rights to not do business with them. The studios will just find another distributor that WILL agree to these terms. This is how free markets work, providing services at the cheapest prices with agreeable terms will always win. Redbox currently IS suing the studios for being unfair, but that is a civil suit, not a matter of legality and breaking the law. There are no current laws, to my knowledge, preventing the studios from doing this. However, if a judge decides that the situation applies to antitrust laws or something else then the situation will change.

As far as your comments about racial prejudice, of course there are laws against racial, gender, and disability prejudices, but unless it is obvious the studios are doing this to Redbox out of prejudice, there is no basis for that argument. Again I don’t agree with what the studios are doing, but they are within their rights to do so, until the time comes that a court of law finds otherwise.

By: Paul Young

Paul Young — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 18:08:23 +0000

So if the studios were to go their wholesalers and tell them “Don’t sell to Compnay X becasue they are run by a black man”, that would be ok? I mean, according to your statement John and Russ that is what I take it to mean. The studios have every right to sell or not sell if they are acting as their own distributor. They are not in this case, they are using a middle man and they should not be allowed to tell that middle man who they can and can not sell to.

By: Russ Burlingame

Russ Burlingame — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:26:27 +0000

John knows what he’s talking about here. Fox isn’t telling them they can’t go to BJ’s, buy them for the same price as everyone else, and then rent those copies like the brick-and-mortar video store I used to work at did. You’re right–what’s done with your private property, as long as it’s legal, isn’t the business of the intellectual property owner. Fox is simply saying, to the people with whom they have a business relationship, “Don’t make this available at wholesale to a company with whom we haven’t been able to come to an agreement.” That seems completely within their rights to me, if a little petty and ill-advised. They’re not telling Redbox to charge more money, only saying that given their druthers they wouldn’t want their stuff out there at the current price point. But if the deal they made with Redbox was good enough I guarantee that wouldn’t be an issue. Corporate pride can be bought easily, just not cheaply.

By: Keith Thomas

Keith Thomas — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 05:32:19 +0000

First: I DIDN’T watch the pirated Wolverine movie. Didn’t see the real one ’til it had been out 3 weeks. Second: I didn’t care that it got pirated, and still don’t. I don’t view the theft of their movies as any worse than the thousands of misleading trailers or disappointing movies studios have tricked us into seeing. Whether it’s through concerted media conglomerate campaigns (studios owning magazines and talk shows and ramming their contract actor of the moment [Cooper, Aniston, etc.] down our throats), nothing about how they operate is ethical, irregardless of its legality. This is just like American cell phone companies “locking” their phones: eliminate consumer choices, and they’ll have no choice but to buy what you are willing to sell them, at whatever price you wish to sell it. That isn’t how free markets are supposed to work. And 3rd: f~€|< FOX. They’re the most rat-bastardized of all the studios.

By: john

john — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 17:51:02 +0000

Your last paragraph has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Fox and Universal are not trying to tell Redbox what they can and can’t do with their own property. I am not trying to say the studios are not being greedy, but they are definitely within their rights to limit who purchases their product and when. Using your Rice Krispies example, if Kelloggs believed that Rice Kripies was a $5/box brand of cereal and was trying to create that image, they can definitely control who they sell to. Businesses have a right to control their brand and image. Now that doesn’t mean anyone will buy their $5 boxes of cereal, but hey, its what they want. Same with the studios. If they think their movies are worth more than anyone elses, then so be it. Redbox should just counter and say, fine we just won’t carry any of your movies ever. Remember that revenue sharing thing? Yea, its gone now Fox. I know many people that rent SOLELY through Redbox. If Redbox didn’t carry Fox movies, then they just wouldn’t rent those movies, instead selecting something else in the Redbox machine.

Again, Fox isn’t overstepping any bounds or illegally pressuring others, but they are being really, really stupid in the alienation of their customers.

By: Ken J

Ken J — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 23:49:14 +0000

Fox has given us a lot of great movies as well as a lot of bad movies, they are a business out to make money. They’re just not shy about reminding us about that, lol. Again, those bastards… I do hope they don’t read my comment and get any funny ideas about netflix too because I might sign up for an account…

By: ericrules007

ericrules007 — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 23:23:13 +0000

i agree this is ludicrous how greedy can 1 company be and still think that the people understand. Its funny when a company comes out actually trying to help the average family with a great deal. A big company like fox wants to make that extra billion and screw the consumer yet again. GO REDBOX fox sucks anyway, the WB is the obvious power house in movies and i dont hear them bitching.So fox might be doing me a favor in making sure i never rent a bad movie from redbox again.

By: Ken J

Ken J — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 22:30:17 +0000

Quality schmaulity, they just want more money, those bastards, lol. Get netflix people, unless Fox doesn’t like their movies being rented out free on a monthly membership basis, lol.

By: 790

790 — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 21:07:31 +0000

This is standard operating procedure for FOX. Manipulation and control is they’re bottom line.

I’m curious as to how much FOX wants Redbox to charge? That seems to be they’re main problem yet they don’t mention a proposal.

(IMO) The Wolverine copy wasn’t a very unfortunate leak, it was a planned event and it worked out in FOX’s favor. If it was a random leak, who leaked it. To this day we still have no suspects.

Maybe it was Bin Laden who leaked it ???

By: nowhereman

nowhereman — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:38:35 +0000

I quote Robert Loggia In “Scarface”…

“Never undersetimate the OTHER GUY’S GREEEEEEED!”