While I see your point, that's never been how media is served up - you're not given license to shows, you're gaining access to what they want you to have from their license. Your cable bill was never reduced because the same show was playing on two channels at once.
A cable bill is a bit like insurance. They dont expect 100% of customers to watch ESPN, 100% of customers pay Disney for access to ESPN, but they pay less than the full cost each. People not watching cover the costs of people watching.
Theres two models of TV. Live and On Demand. In the On Demand world its much more "am I licensed to start this stream" vs "can I tune into this broadcast in progress." Especially if the broadcast is adding any value, like tv hosts interjecting fun making of movie facts at commercial breaks.
Shouldn’t it be the way that media is served up though? The status quo serves the interests of copyright conglomerates, not consumers. Surely there must be a more efficient way to channel money from consumers to producers, without forcing them to pay, sometimes more than once, for shit they don’t want. Why hasn’t the market achieved that outcome?
