Let's tie it to the length of copyright law. If it's still protected and under copyright then the obligation to keep it available exists. So if they want to keep extending copyright, well, it will go both ways.
Demanding for ensuring another way for accessing the work in the same or similar way is fair enough. You lose nothing, they gain nothing, fairly balanced.
This is about ensuring it stays available from the streaming distributor, and how much time remains on the copyright doesn't really have anything to do with them. And even if the copyright expires next year, I still want to make sure I can keep streaming it for the next 10 or 15 years or whatever, if I buy it today.
What I expect as a part of deal was, to have access to that content without worrying about backups or storage spaces.
If they can't provide that, it have to be communicated upfront.
Just because a copyright expires doesn't mean somebody has given you free access.
Plenty of copyrighted works have simply been lost to the ages.
And they'll choose the crappiest provider they possibly can whose website (no app, presumably) only works in some ancient browser and is "down for maintenance" 50% of the time because that provider has the lowest costs and is thus willing to charge the least for it...
Not if you change the law to say so :)
When the company go bankrupt, somebody should represent the customer and get a fair share in what's left..
I like that restrictions abe decisions (such as law making) also come with consequences and responsibilities.