Another point, streaming-only movies have already been shown in the past but they weren't a problem because they didn't threaten the big movie associations. Netflix completely bypasses them and that suddenly becomes a problem.
Can't imagine what a mess all this licensing etc is. Such a non-productive waste of time.
It seems strange to say, "Well, a film must be in a cinema" when that's not how most people watch them. (At least not the vast majority of films they watch in any of the countries I've been in.)
It's not that they banned all soulless corporations producing faux art, they just banned a change in watching habits to prop up an industry with poor value proposition.
Film as a medium is a valuable part of culture; theatres aren't necessarily.
Theatres must offer something over sitting on the couch -- and in the US they have, introducing things like bars and food services.
I especially liked the undertone in some pieces (not Slate) that Netflix is 'exploiting' Cannes to promote its movies, as if that was not the actual point of a festival.
David Sedaris goes on at length about moving to France and falling in love with the film culture there, where movies are shown in small theatres very cheaply. This was back in 2000, so things may have changed, but he was very clear on the differences between the American and French theater-going experience.
> Film as a medium is a valuable part of culture; theatres aren't necessarily.
You should probably stop calling it 'film', then. Most theatres can still show actual films; few homes can.