Just wondering aloud, imdb is my goto point whenever i want to know something about a movie. Anybody who looks up a movie definitely has at least a slight intent to watch the movie. Why don't they get into selling movie (dvds) or a partnership with netflix to stream movies.
So why don't they?
Most amazing part of IMDB is that it predates http, and obviously, wikipedia. It started as a series of text files on usenet sent between various movie buffs, each adding their own contributions.<p>One of the IMDB contingents for sale to Amazon was keeping it quite autonomous, and open. The database is still being exported to the same formatting as when it was traded on usenet; which is why one still gets files specific for Amiga and OS/2. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/interfaces" rel="nofollow">http://www.imdb.com/interfaces</a><p>Kind regards
IMO, that's not the problem they are solving. They are usually 'the professional' database of movies, people and such. Streaming movies is not what they set out to do. Documenting about them is what they aim at. But they surely are an influence on some people's choices.<p>It's sort of asking - Why 'The New York Times' doesn't sell books. It does affect the choice but they don't set out to sell books. That is, sort of, what gives them authority. I might not trust the list as much if they were setting out to sell more and earn more.