XPost: rec.arts.tv, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   From: jimgysin@geemail.com   
      
   Frank Frank sent the following on 10/26/2009 12:47 AM:   
   > Jim Gysin wrote:   
   >> Frank Frank sent the following on 10/25/2009 7:03 AM:   
   >>> aemeijers wrote:   
   >>>> Frank Frank wrote:   
   >>>>> aemeijers wrote:   
   >>>>>> Frank Frank wrote:   
   >>>>>>> Jack Bohn wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> Frank Frank wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> SFTV_troy wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> Has Paramount put this show back in the vault?  It appears they   
   >>>>>>>>>> have,   
   >>>>>>>>>> and released TNG as a replacement.   
   >>>>>>>>> Can they do that? Stop someone airing Star Trek AFTER having   
   >>>>>>>>> sold the syndication rights to them?   
   >>>>>>>> Well, it's not so much "sold" as "rented."  The rights to air are   
   >>>>>>>> probably licensed for some time frame, and then the syndicator   
   >>>>>>>> offers a new license (or not) and the stations pick it up again   
   >>>>>>>> (or not).   
   >>>>>>> Why would they not, though? If you have a product to sell and   
   >>>>>>> there is demand. It would be as if Wal-Mart decided to close its   
   >>>>>>> shops from October until next March or something like that -- what   
   >>>>>>> possible kind of business sense could that make?   
   >>>>>> Ask Disney. They do the same thing with most of their 'classic'   
   >>>>>> animated films. Last thing they want is for people to get bored   
   >>>>>> with the product. (or in the case of videos, to be competing with   
   >>>>>> their own product selling for a buck at garage sales.) About a   
   >>>>>> seven-year cycle, which is the right interval for a fresh   
   >>>>>> generation of their target demographic of kids, as well as for   
   >>>>>> young parents to get past their snotty late-teenage and college   
   >>>>>> years, and be nostalgic about the films they saw 7 or 14 years ago.   
   >>>>>> TV cycle isn't that long, of course. There isn't enough product out   
   >>>>>> there for that.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Even the digital remastering and sweetened SFX for TOS were right   
   >>>>>> out of the Disney playbook. Last go-around for most of the 'name'   
   >>>>>> Disney Classics, they trumpeted how they were 'restored' from   
   >>>>>> original masters.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Old rule of show biz- always leave them wanting more.   
   >>>>> But it's artificial scarcity. It's evil. If someone wants it now   
   >>>>> they should be able to have it now if they have the money to cover   
   >>>>> the costs (parts + labour) for providing one more marginal unit.   
   >>>> Shrug. If they don't wanna sell, you have no right to buy.   
   >>> No thanks to their monopoly. If one business isn't willing to   
   >>> manufacture and sell wibbles, I should have the option of buying   
   >>> wibbles from another business, really.   
   >> Why?   
   >   
   > It's called "capitalism". If you don't get it, then feel free to move to   
   > China, Cuba, or North Korea.   
      
   The last time I looked, capitalism was a voluntary arrangement on *both*   
   sides.  You may want to re-take your high school economics course.   
   Unless you're still in grade school, in which case you may want to pay   
   attention when you grow up and take econ in high school.   
      
   --   
   Jim Gysin   
   Waukesha, WI   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)