« Amazon Rolls Out Xbox 360 App with Watchlist; Amazon & LoveFilm Add More Titles | Main | Netflix Ready for IPv6 Launch on June 8th, 2012 »

Comments

ClydesMP

Don't know how much they paid for Atlas shrugged, or how it fits into the distribution deal. Whatever they paid though, it was too damn much.

RJM

It says Netflix paid Relativity.

Relativity is just broke & hasnt paid Atlas.

Why didnt Netflix just pay Atlas ?

Probably because they were told to pay Relativity.

Btoy

Netflix paid $1.5 million for streaming rights to this movie, Relativity onh made one of the $750,000 payments. I don't see where Netflix did anything wrong.

Jared K

Oh the irony...

mrmanmac

@Btoy, There would be no story if Netflix wasn't somehow tied to it. It also makes Netflix appear as if they did something wrong in the Headline even if it clearly states they did nothing wrong at the end of the story. The is how big media or stock manipulators, both of whom have something to gain, continue to beat this dog while it is down.

HUMAN NAME, NOT ALIEN

1.5 million for that stealing pile of objectivist crapola?

Netflix, please spend your money more wisely.

GeeEmm

Yep, RJM. Relativity/RML was given express permission to sub-license/redistribute Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 to Netflix (for 30 months?), so NF had a distribution deal with RML, not directly with Atlas. Looks like Atlas is trying to recoup losses incurred from its sour deal with Relativity/RML by going after NF, even though NF seems to have already fulfilled its contractual obligations. (Just skimmed the document, so I may be missing something.) Don't see how this can be copyright infringement if NF legally obtained - and paid for - the rights to offer the film to its subscribers.

CordCutter

Jared - you're right. This is hilarious. Ayn would be rolling over in her grave, if the chain smoking lung cancer Social Security/Medicare recipient wasn't a hypocrite.

RJM

Somewhat off topic, while I liked Atlas Shrugged, I watched it when it first came out on DVD.

Seems awfully expensive to pay $1.5 million for streaming rights.

I guess I underestimate the cost of content.

Oakley frogskins

This blog is provide lots of good idea and your blog are very usefull for me.Thanks a lot.

Shiva Norera

so that is how the money increase was used, when not blowing it on expanding netflix into other countries, they waste it on silly movies that no one liked the first time around!

vente lunettes de soleil

Don't see how this can be copyright infringement if NF legally obtained - and paid for - the rights to offer the film to its subscribers.

Groggie

"they waste it on silly movies that no one liked the first time around!"

Someone must have liked it (although I'm not one of them), since it has a 3.6 average star rating and many reviews with 5 stars.

justin bieber shoes

Experts predict that the coastline of Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii will see some pretty nasty debris wash ashore; California will have some, but less, as most of it will be caught in a current that will carry it to the pacific islands.

Darren

Groggie, movies like this tend to attract the doctrinaires, who inflate the reviews... just like how you tend to see a bunch of five star reviews for an Ann Coulter or Michael Moore book. Any objective (but maybe not objectivist! ha!) person would have to acknowledge this was a bad movie. It had the production value of an Asylum mockbuster. As a political conservative, I tried to brave it out, but could not make it more than 25 minutes or so. Netflix grossly overpaid if they paid 1.5 million for rights to this stinker.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Sponsors

Third-Party Netflix Sites