>Sometimes something won't be available for rental anymore, but remains in the list as a purchasable (ha) item. This is just straight-up rent-seeking bullshit
Wouldn't that be the exact opposite of rent-seeking? They explicitly don't want rent.
(Yes, I know the economic definition, I'm just punning)
That depends on who the "they" is. Movie distribution companies want to maximize the value of their product, and that means marketing and advertising, exclusivity periods, product tie-ins and collaborations with different streaming providers. They know that they can get the audience numbers from anywhere, but the question is how much a particular streaming provider will pay over a competitor.
So movie distribution companies are certainly engaging in rent-seeking behavior–only you're not the customer. The streaming providers are.
I guess it really depends whether you consider a DRM-protected digital asset to be something which is possible to own vs rent. The button might say "purchase", but it's really still a rental.
(Yes, I say this from the point of view of someone who has "purchased" dozens of videogames on PSN and Steam, fully aware that any of them could have the plug pulled on them at any time...)
Wouldn't that be the exact opposite of rent-seeking? They explicitly don't want rent.
(Yes, I know the economic definition, I'm just punning)