Roku is increasingly _not_ just a pipe. This whole debacle (and the HBO one before) is indicative of that. They could just let you install whatever HBO or Google offered -- that's what they did for a long time. But they want to ensure that things are "integrated", that they can show ads, and that their own content (on the "Roku Channel") doesn't get downprioritized.

I would argue that, in this case, getting mad at Roku would be like getting mad at my ISP if they blocked Netflix because Netflix didn't pay them extra money. That's a world I hope we never come to (but the ISPs would love it.)

Don’t they already do that with peering agreements?

Yeah, specifically Free used to have poor bandwidth with YouTube and then Netflix. AFAIK they have found an arrangement since then.

I'm not smart enough to know how that works. But I do know that my ISP has not (yet) blocked Youtube or Netflix or whatever.

>it's all up to the content owner to decide where to distribute it. //

Maybe this is wrong.

Perhaps we, the demos should be demanding a sort of "least favoured nation" [do I mean 'most'?] deal where content owners have to make works available to all streamers at the same rate. Disney sell to Disney Streaming Channel? They also have to sell to $streamingChannel at the same rate, then people can watch copyright content without channels manipulating the market by restricting access.

Then, if they don't want to follow that rule we should say 'fine, no copyright for you'.

Seems fair to me. I'm already so over every streaming channel monopolising content.

This is entirely my personal opinion.

While there are a lot of problems with this growth in digital walled gardens, one flipside is that it heavily incentivizes the development of killer content, much like how Console makers have extensive lineups of first party games that are often better funded and given more support then 3rd party titles.

Roku is not just a pipe. They charge 20% of your income to have your streaming channel on Roku devices.

Big hitters like Netflix presumably negotiate custom contracts, but 20% is the standard rate.

It's like getting mad at Spotify when an album isn't available when they don't pay the artist/record label OR if the label is making unreasonable demands.

It might be up to the content owner to decide where to distribute it, but the content owners may feel like some platforms are especially burdensome to distribute on.