For the rest, like sports and some other live stuff that is stuck in the past, I simply ignore.
I would not go after legislation to prevent mergers to prevent locked down devices or restrictions on how you can watch. We already had that without the mergers, so why would that address the situation?
If the point is to keep the content flowing far and wide, then that should be addressed directly.
The root issue here is excessive copyright terms. Those are the source of the monopoly. We already solved the distribution problem with the internet, now it’s a political issue of reducing copyright lengths. Any other solution will be used by politicians as an excuse to show they did something, or that nothing more needs to be done.
Who cares who buys what once the content is in the public domain. It is a cleaner, resilient, and quicker solution.
Also, it seems unfair that government would be able to dictate what Amazon can and cannot do with its content, but not others, so that is another political fight that can waste time and energy.
Not really. That's an issue, certainly. But the consolidation of media ownership into companies that control the entire process from production to the hardware video is played on has very little to do with how long back catalogues retain copyright protection.
> from their proprietary devices, and I did not get to watch it whenever, and however I wanted.
That's still quite possible in the future. If providers lock down the hardware you can use to watch then maybe you won't be able to watch on your phone if they don't feel like letting you.