Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Sunday October 23 2016, @11:49AM   Printer-friendly
from the too-big-to-care-about-the-customer dept.

AT&T is expected to announce on Saturday evening that it will purchase Time Warner Inc. for over $80 billion:

AT&T Inc. has reached an agreement to buy Time Warner Inc. for $86 billion, according to a person familiar with the plans, in a deal that would transform the phone company into a media giant. The wireless carrier agreed to pay $107.50 a share, the person said. The deal is half cash and half stock, according to people familiar with the transaction.

[...] For Time Warner, the deal represents a victory for [Chief Executive Mr. Jeff Bewkes], 64, who took some heat from investors for rebuffing a takeover bid two years ago from 21st Century Fox at $85 a share. [...] A merger of the companies would be the most ambitious marriage of content and distribution in the media and telecom industries since Comcast Corp.'s purchase of NBCUniversal and would create a behemoth to rival that cable giant. A rigorous regulatory review is expected and the acquisition of Time Warner likely wouldn't close until late 2017, people close to the process said.

Donald Trump has said that he would block the proposed merger and other media company mergers.

Also at Washington Post, NYT, CNN, and Reuters.

Update: Confirmed by AT&T.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 23 2016, @03:30PM

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Sunday October 23 2016, @03:30PM (#417866) Homepage Journal

    Any and every time content ownership overlaps with modes to provide that content, you have an inherent and irreconcilable conflict of interest.

    That's a big deal for broad-reaching services like Internet access, not so much for entertainment providers. I have a huge problem with Internet providers merging and removing competition but I have no problem whatsoever with say Netflix producing their own shows. As always, it's entirely about competition.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by physicsmajor on Sunday October 23 2016, @08:50PM

    by physicsmajor (1471) on Sunday October 23 2016, @08:50PM (#417953)

    That's a fair point. I think my wording just wasn't as good as it could have been.

    The intent of this is to entirely separate anyone producing content from DELIVERY. Netflix produces their own content - no problem. They deliver it through ISPs or the postal service, though, so I have no problem with that.

    The problem arises when corporate non-entities have an arsenal of content they purportedly "own", locked permanently away from the public domain against the letter and spirit of the Constitution. Thanks to rent-seeking on that arsenal, they end up with far too much money and begin consolidating "ownership" into larger arsenals so they can demand more rent. Repeat a few times and you have Disney owning all of Marvel, buying Pixar, owning half of the cable channels you didn't even realize along with ESPN.

    Now, all of that is bad enough. But these increasingly few corporate non-entities aren't satisfied with that. They want to own the pipe, too, as evidenced by deals like this one and that's where we need to make our stand. The real battle needs to be fought, initially, over the last mile. After that's won, we dismantle the abomination that is current Copyright which exists in baldfaced, repugnant opposition to the Constitution.