Picture this: Once-feuding titans of television and online video are now locking arms in groundbreaking alliances that could redefine entertainment forever. It's a dramatic shift from courtroom battles to collaborative ventures, and it's happening right before our eyes. But here's where it gets really intriguing – are these partnerships a win-win for everyone, or could they stir up fresh controversies in the industry?
Reflecting on the $1 billion lawsuit that Paramount (formerly Viacom) launched against YouTube back in 2007, it's clear that era marked a time when traditional broadcasters and digital platforms couldn't stand each other, let alone coexist peacefully. Paramount claimed YouTube was unlawfully distributing its programming, leading to a grueling seven-year legal saga with hefty costs before they finally settled. Open conversations between American studios and tech behemoths grew more polite afterward, yet underlying tensions simmered. Privately, TV executives grumbled about the unchecked dominance of streaming services, viewing them as unruly upstarts, while insiders at Netflix, YouTube, Prime Video, and similar platforms dismissed their linear rivals as outdated relics on the brink of irrelevance.
Over time, these chilly relations began to warm. Streaming services started appearing in bundles via cable providers and gained visibility on TV interfaces, yet the alliance remained fraught with challenges for numerous reasons.
Fast forward to 2024, and with advertising revenue from traditional TV plummeting and streaming platforms hitting subscriber limits and stagnant growth, both camps seem to have set aside their differences, gearing up for a united path ahead. By 2025, high-ranking leaders from each side are sealing deals that once seemed unthinkable. As Guy Bisson, research director and co-founder of the U.K.'s Ampere Analysis, puts it, 'You can be at the center of it, or beholden to others.'
The momentum kicked off with a historic agreement between Netflix and France's TF1 at the Cannes Lions festival this year. Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters described it as a 'new kind of partnership,' essentially comparable to NBC or ABC entrusting their entire lineup—including live feeds and sports—to a streaming platform.
Set to debut in mid-2026, this represents one of the most ambitious experiments in content delivery in recent memory. It's unclear yet whether the motivation stems from Netflix's foray into advertising, strengthening its regional presence, subscriber retention, or a blend of all three factors.
Following that June reveal, a wave of analogous pacts emerged, such as Prime Video teaming up with France Télévisions domestically. This arrangement brings five key channels from the public broadcaster plus around 20,000 hours of content from France.TV onto Amazon's platform. France Télévisions CEO Delphine Ernotte Cunci hailed it as a 'historic step forward in boosting France.TV’s public service visibility, allowing all viewers to revisit and uncover the distinctive treasures of France.TV in novel settings.'
Now, France.TV appears as a dedicated section on Prime Video's French homepage, offering a glimpse of what's to come. And this is the part most people miss – what does this entail for France's content creators and rights owners? It's an open-ended question with real implications.
Exploring Variations on the Theme
These massive French collaborations aren't isolated incidents. Across the board, broadcasters and streamers are forging new ties. For instance, Netflix has inked a bundling deal with MBC, a powerhouse in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, mirroring its U.S. and U.K. arrangements. The logic here? MBC's aggregator MBCNOW is rapidly becoming a top contender and direct competitor to Netflix. So, the saying goes: if you can't outshine them, team up with them.
Meanwhile, Disney+ has entered branding and content-sharing accords with the U.K.'s ITV, Germany's ZDF Studios, and Spain's Atresmedia. The Walt Disney Company is merging Hulu into Disney+ globally and pairing its sports streamer ESPN with rival Fox One in the U.S. Expect more surprising collaborations to surface soon.
Though the specifics and business drivers vary, these moves align with what Ampere calls 'diagonal integration.' In simple terms, broadcasters, grappling with a dying TV ad market, tap into streamers' vast audiences. In return, global streamers gain access to the programming know-how of their linear partners, cutting down on costs for localized originals and enabling distribution of regional news. Amid looming regulatory battles, this strategy offers advantages, like sidestepping content quotas and other rules that European nations aim to impose.
Industry observers sense a new era dawning. 'We are right on the cusp of the gates opening towards more of these deals,' Bisson notes from Ampere.
Not a One-Sided Affair
Shifts like these bring uncertainty, sparking lively debates, especially around the Netflix-TF1 partnership at recent festivals and summits. Key questions include: Are creators of the programs now on extra platforms getting fair pay? Could this hurt linear TV viewership? Who's footing the bills, and how? Experts are weighing in.
'Broadcasters utilizing Netflix's local reach for distribution is spot-on,' Bisson explains. 'And it's equally smart for Netflix – it's not a one-way street. They get high-quality local material that, despite their massive budgets, they couldn't produce themselves. This could serve as a blueprint.'
He points out Ampere's data showing streamers commissioning at '75% peak TV' levels – a cap that's unlikely to rise. Thus, aligning with major local players is an efficient content boost. 'Streamers are still 25% short on originals,' he adds. 'We're not rebounding, but these partnerships make their own productions less critical.'
On the regulatory front for Netflix, there's potential upside too. Global streamers typically avoid local news, leaving that to traditional and public outlets. Some argue it's fair for them to contribute to a fund supporting news resources. Yet, Netflix users in France can already tune into TF1's news, and Prime Video viewers access France Info, aiding streamers in regulatory discussions. Even a small streaming audience for news could be a 'strong point' against restrictions, per Tom Harrington of Enders Analysis. 'If they show young viewers engaging with news they'd otherwise skip, it's beneficial,' he says.
Netflix and TF1 are keeping details under wraps, with TF1 not commenting and Netflix offering: 'Our distribution partnership with TF1 starts in summer 2026, and we'll share more as launch nears.' They've collaborated before on series like Les Combattantes and L’Agence, plus Netflix's inaugural French daily drama, Tout Pour La Lumière.
The year-long delay stems from Netflix processing over 30,000 hours of TF1 content and integrating five live channels. A knowledgeable source indicates it's about aligning video quality and user experiences. 'Netflix isn't dependent on TF1 here,' they state.
U.S. analyst Dan Rayburn notes Netflix leaders emphasize the pact as 'experimental,' not a floodgate for similar deals soon. 'People assumed Netflix was diving into live linear TV and striking pacts everywhere,' he says. 'They clarified it's to experiment, chosen for France due to its demand and size. They managed expectations well. In three years, maybe another like it.'
Other insiders view the Netflix-TF1 deal as 'opportunistic,' fueled by TF1 CEO Rodolphe Belmer's ties to Netflix's leadership. Belmer served on Netflix's board from 2018-2022 while heading Canal+, and has stayed close to Reed Hastings, Ted Sarandos, and Greg Peters.
Overall, streamers portray these as value-creating partnerships for local markets, building on past licensing. Broadcasters see them as fresh avenues to reach elusive audiences.
Disney's three European pacts with major free-to-air networks signal optimism.
'We're proud of our enduring partnerships with free-to-air allies in Europe for licensing and acquiring TV and films,' a Disney rep shares. 'These latest agreements expand access to top local stories on streaming, sustaining local production investment and benefiting the entire ecosystem.'
Disney's deals vary from select titles to extensive libraries, proving diagonal integration isn't one-size-fits-all. Enders' Harrington labels the ITV deal – featuring 'Taste of'-branded sections – as 'a very limited marketing move.' Essentially, ITV viewers can enjoy shows like Andor, Only Murders in the Building, and The Kardashians on ITVX rails, while ITVX content like Mr Bates vs the Post Office appears on Disney+. They'll review and rotate titles every eight weeks.
Disney+ EMEA General Manager Karl Holmes remarked in July: 'We believe in mutual benefits and reaching larger free-to-air markets.' ITV's Kevin Lygo called it a 'mutually beneficial alliance,' with Holmes noting 'various models will achieve similar goals' ahead of ZDF Studios and Atresmedia announcements.
Navigating Complicated Rights
As MIPCOM approaches – the hub for TV rights trades – compensation issues from these deals are bubbling up, likely to dominate discussions at the Palais and late-night talks at Brown Sugar.
When TF1 and France Télévisions deals broke, French international distributors reacted with concern. They saw it as broadcasters surrendering content to streamers, erasing domestic second-window opportunities. This might diminish content's long-term value and disrupt funding if second-window deals were part of the budget. Interestingly, global streamers often buy those windows to enhance local libraries.
A major distributor source warns: 'If deficit funding relies on second windows, and a streamer covers that, you won't get another premium buyer for a TF1 show on Netflix.'
Anonymous sellers stress their investments hinge on controlled rights. If terms change, reimbursement is expected. 'Compensation must come from somewhere,' one says.
Another notes: 'This reflects ongoing consolidation. While AVOD genres rise as a secondary tier, losing those connections is hard, knowing buyer preferences.'
Though a source calls them 'uniquely complicated,' most anticipate fair resolutions, possibly with existing participation rights. Long-term partners update contracts, and if equitable, disputes fade. One suggests streamer deals could simplify second-window sales, easing financial planning for new series.
Some pacts are straightforward, like Disney+'s German tie with ZDF Studios, ZDF's production/sales arm. 'Our license with Disney+ is standard distribution for ZDF films and series in Germany, Austria, Switzerland,' a spokesperson states. 'Rights holders get proper pay; no others impacted.' Streamers claim proceeds will sustain or boost broadcaster SVOD content.
Looking Ahead
This evolving dynamic is fundamentally about securing the future. Netflix aims for the living room; terrestrials seek stability and digital growth. These alliances emerge in a post-peak TV world of declining linear TV and rising mergers. Paramount, newly owned by Skydance, is rumored to pursue HBO Max's Warner Bros. Discovery. Canal+ is finalizing a $2 billion MultiChoice takeover in Africa, and DAZN's Foxtel acquisition exemplifies diagonal integration. Who might be next?
In Europe, MediaForEurope (MFE), under the Berlusconi family, has secured ProSiebenSat.1 Media in Germany, aiming to build a Netflix-rival giant. Post-acquisition, Enders' François Godard called it a 'welcome jolt,' positioning MFE to negotiate better with streamers following summer deals.
Peering further, colleague Tom Harrington asserts: 'Real power belongs to those controlling viewing, payment, and interaction.' This involves uncertainties like AI search, Google roles, 'super aggregator' apps, and unforeseen tech. Many foresee this direction.
The industry faces turbulent times, but for now, streamers and networks enjoy unprecedented harmony. It might be simplistic, but lawsuits like Viacom's are unlikely soon.
But here's where it gets controversial: Are these partnerships truly fair, or do they favor big players at the expense of smaller creators and regional broadcasters? Critics argue they could homogenize content, reducing diversity, while proponents say they democratize access and boost innovation. What do you think – is this the dawn of a collaborative golden age, or a stealthy power grab? Share your thoughts in the comments below; I'd love to hear agreements, disagreements, or fresh perspectives!
