But it would be brain dead for Netflix to not take the deal. If the base cost of everyone is going to be USD100M, then everyone's base cost is USD100M. The law would also require Amazon to give Netflix the same access to its networking platform that it gives its own divisions. (In fact, by my understanding of this whole "platform utility" thing, I'm pretty sure Amazon Prime would have to split from Amazon and buy access to the Amazon network services at the same market price as Netflix and everyone else.)

So any way this whole thing shakes out, Netflix wins. Because whatever it costs, it costs that much for everyone, and Netflix gets the same content catalog as everyone.

Netflix was the initial leader simply because they started earlier; now that other competitors appeared, they have a vertically integrated platform holding some extremely popular exclusive content (House of Cards, Stranger Things, Casa de Papel). And you're telling me they'd rather become an undifferentiated platform, competing only on the technical merits of their streaming tech (part of which runs on their competitor's machines!) and price?

I'm no business expert, but that doesn't sound likely at all to me. There's a reason why ISPs are always trying to vertically integrate with content production. Moving bits around is a low-margin business.

>(part of which runs on their competitor's machines!) and price?

Only the new law ensures that none of it will be running on their competitors machines. A stricture mandated by law for Natflix.

That's the brilliance of the law! (Well, for Netflix anyway.)

And if you think House of Cards and Stranger Things are as valuable as franchises as Star Wars, Star Trek, and the Disney Archive, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. As far as content swaps go, you happily make that trade every time.