Should We Boycott Weinstein Company Movies?

Fargus9 on Digg wonders if we should boycott Weinstein Company movies because of the exclusive they signed with Blockbuster. I'm worried that the rental business will become fragmented, and some movies will be exclusive to Apple, Amazon, Cinemanow, or even Netflix.

What do you think?

Comments

[corey3rd]

No need to boycott them. Although maybe a semi-protest of people sending unused Netflix envelopes to Harvey and Bob and let them know what people think they are being jerks.

[CThilk]

That's my biggest fear, actually, that we'll have to go twelve different places to get what we want because of deals like this. I like one-stop shopping. This is a big mistake on the part of the Weinstein Co. that will wind up hurting them and the industry, I think.

[Fred]

I also think a boycott is unnecessary. It's not the films themselves that have us upset.

If the Weinsteins really wants to shoot themselves in the foot like this, I'm happy to let them. I will say this, though: if I can only rent Weinstein Company films at Blockbuster, then I guess I won't be renting many Weinstein Company films.

[Hunter McDaniel]

Aren't we boycotting them already just by keeping our Netflix subscriptions?

[Molsby]

I think a limited-time (say, a month) would be fine, but the report I read said something like THREE years. That's just dumb. This deal won't stand, methinks. They'll realize how little this kind of exclusive deal does for them (and how much damage and confusion it causes the renting public).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Weinstein_Company

http://www.weinsteinco.com/

[Davis Freeberg]

For a long time the DVD has been an area where media neutrality has thrived. Even with the decision, Netflix could still purchase Weinstein films via retail and rent them. I think the bigger question is whether Netflix should boycott Weinstein or not.

Monopolistic agreements like this one are the exact reason why everything on demand isn't a reality today. Because the studios would rather sell off exclusive rights to channels like HBO and Starz, companies aren't able to offer them for download over the net. While I understand why Weinstein was tempted to take the money, this still represents a step backwards in my opinion.

[type-cast]

Like saying "should we boycott Costco?" They already exclude most potential customers via their crappy business practices. We can live without the products of a store or studio or production company. The Weinsteins won't be missed. I think it was Vincent Gallo or Troy Duffy who (accurately) described Harvey as a "fat, egotistical f@#$." A bloated wind bag. It's hard to say who's worse, Harvey or Troy or Vincent. They're all just worthless human beings, but Harvey is the most corrupt.

[Old Timer Too]

"...my biggest fear, actually, that we'll have to go twelve different places to get what we want because of deals like this."

It appears you are speaking of purchasing (on-line?). I am an avid Classical Music fan and recently started using Archiv.com as my source, since they list just about every title availabe... When I order from them, I get the titles shipped from all over the U.S., largely from companies other than Archiv. Archiv is still the single point of contact, should anything go wrong, but I don't have to go to dozens of different sites to find the recordings I want (Even Amazaon.com doesn't carry as much!).

On a similar vein, when I purchased my DLP projector from tigerdirect, the transaction was completed through that compnay, but was shipped from Amazon...

So, even exclusive deals aren't going to mean much if on-line companies work together to provide the merchandise. Find a good single point of contact (SPOC) and deal with them and let them chase down the problems (if any occurr - they haven't for me).

[hueristix]

Should I boycott THEM?

They are boycotting me, because I am a proud Netflix customer not leaving for the likes of them.

I went to college for Computer Science, but I know really Bad Business when I see it. Shooting themselves in the foot is right!

Worthless human beings? That seems overly harsh.

Costco having crappy business practices? LOL! I saw them credit a lady who brought back one slightly blackened banana!

[superfunhappy]

No boycott for me, if I want to see a movie, I will. After all, they will be available from Netflix no matter what Harvey says or thinks.

As for who is shooting themselves in the foot, I think Blockbuster is. They're going to be paying money (sometimes a lot) for non-exclusive titles.

[corey3rd]

forget the Netflix vs. Blockbuster argument in this whole crummy deal with Harvey and Bob. What about all the small chains that over the years carried Miramax titles - even those that might have been a bit too much for your clean BB to carry on the shelves? Harvey just backstabbed every indie video store in New York that tries to build and maintain an arthouse viewer.

I only hope that Harvey and Bob are out of business before this deal is set to expire.

[Becky]

Doesn't Netflix have exclusives?

[hawk5391]

I would love to boycott Weinstein movies because, like Chris said previously, I don't want to have to go to five different places to get my movies. Like Molsby said, a limited exclusive engagement would be reasonable, but this is a little too much.
What's next, will I have to buy a Sony DVD player and TV to watch them? Will I only be allowed to eat Orville Reddenbacher popcorn and drink Pepsi One while I watch?
This isn't quite the same as, say, a video game being offered "exclusively" on one console, since obviously the game is programmed specifically for that system's operating environment.
As consumers, our only vote is our dollar. Companies don't have to do the right thing, but they will generally respond to what affects their bottom line. By the way, this whole thing smells vaguely of Restraint of Trade and I hope the Justice Department looks into it.

[Lynn]

I'm confused -- why would we have to go somewhere else to get the movie? Despite the "exclusive" on the wholesale level, it seems to me there's absolutely nothing that can prevent Netflix from buying retail copies and renting them. Weinstein's private contract with Blockbuster doesn't change the law, it's just a contract.

Netflix may get fewer copies, because they cost more, and we might have to wait longer, but that's not the same as not getting them for three years.

Netflix's "exclusives" seem to me to be documentaries or films with limited/no distribution -- not major commercial titles you'd find in Target.

[zeggman]

"Even with the decision, Netflix could still purchase Weinstein films via retail and rent them."

"Despite the "exclusive" on the wholesale level, it seems to me there's absolutely nothing that can prevent Netflix from buying retail copies and renting them."

My understanding was that the "rental" DVDs cost places like Blockbuster and Netflix MORE than the retail DVDs, because they were sold to be rented. I'm pretty sure, at least, that that's the way it used to work for VHS tapes at Blockbuster, and I don't see any reason why that would have changed.

And I don't think they can just buy retail and rent them anyway. There's a big WARNING label on just about every one of them, specifying penalties for unauthorized distribution. In the absence of a contract authorizing them to offer the DVD for rent, I think they'd be exposed to legal penalties for doing so.

[junkfood]

While I think this is a horrible idea that will probably end badly for the Weinsteins anyway, I would support a boycott of their movies from Blockbuster.

We have way to much of a money-grab situation going on now. You can only rent my movies from here, you can download them only from there and then only a couple of them will I allow you to burn to DVD, etc.

I'm way past the point of being tired of companies dictating to me how, when and where I'll buy their product. I just want to give you my money. You don't want to take it, fine.