Redbox Lawsuit Threatens DVD/Blu Ray Future Viability - Page 2  

Michael, all I was saying is that Redbox is clearly in the wrong and it will be proven in court that Redbox has no basis for the lawsuit. The only remaining argument they are allowed to present is the antitrust argument and even that argument is flawed.

Redbox, simply put, isn't being denied access to DVD's. If Universal or any other studio doesn't want it's distributors selling their DVD's to Redbox, then they are completely within that right. Redbox is simply refusing to play ball with these studios and refusing to sign agreements with these studios to share a percentage of their profits from these DVD rentals. It's no different than the agreement with many DVD rental stores like Blockbuster and Family Video.

The studios expressed the fact that they wanted Redbox to agree to a revenue sharing agreement and that they would allow their distributors to sell their DVD's to Redbox. Redbox refused to deal with the studios and this is going to have a backlash against Redbox.

If Redbox wins, these studios could just end up changing the way they distribute their DVD's by having each retailer or vendor order directly from Universal, which would give Universal the ability to refuse to do business at all with Redbox.

What I'll also say is that these studios aren't violating antitrust laws. They are simply trying to get fair compensation for the product that they create and sell. Redbox just doesn't want to fairly compensate these studios for the rental of these DVD's. To make matters worse, these studios have a right to file a lawsuit against Redbox itself since they are also in violation of said laws for attempting to drive down the prices of retail DVD's and rental DVD's by undercutting prices.

Technically speaking, Universal has the right not to do business with any retailer/business entity it doesn't want to. That is the whole beauty of business in the United States. Businesses routinely ban customers from their properties. There's nothing that can be done to prevent this.

Universal simply told its distributors, who distribute its merchandise, not to sell its product to Redbox. There's nothing in violation of anti-trust law. Redbox is simply whining because they are forced to buy their DVD's at full retail. Redbox doesn't want to pay full retail and are demanding from the courts that they be allowed to buy the DVD's at wholesale.

Sounds to me like it's not an antitrust issue but rather a two year stomping their feet because they're not getting their way.

Universal is not preventing Redbox from buying its DVD's. It's simply refusing to allow their distributors to sell them the DVD's at wholesale. Redbox is allowed to buy the DVD's at full retail at video stores.

Also, these studios have expressed that they want Redbox to sign a revenue sharing agreement. It sounds fishy that Redbox signed agreements with other studios such as Sony but refuse to sign agreements with Universal, Warner Brothers or Fox. Not only that, but the studios want Redbox to increase their rental fees to at least $2-3. Redbox flatly refused to deal with the studios and have adamantly refused any cooperation with said studios.

Just sounds to me that Redbox has decided not to share any of its revenue for the other studio DVD's with these studios. I just think that if Redbox ends up winning their suit against the studios that you might be shift with these studios distributing their own DVD's and new policy agreements with retailers who are acquiring DVD's from them for either sale or rental.

It's also nice to see that HTF is allowing members to personally insult other members.