A long time ago, in a kingdom far, far away, there was a legal reason why movie studios (think Disney, Paramount, and so on) weren't legally able to own movie theaters.
Why? Because a US Supreme Court ruling in 1948 established a clear rule to prevent the studios from forming monopolies within the industry. Because who loses with movie theater monopolies? Regular people who just want to see a movie.
Think about it: If a movie studio (which makes the movies) also owns the theaters that show the movies, in addition to the film distribution channels, it can control pricing at every single level. And there's no competition to even theoretically rein in prices. They can charge whatever they want because they're the only game in town, and if you want to see the movie, you have no choice but to pay it.
That rule went by the wayside in 2020, after over 70 years in effect, and I bring it up as a way of explaining why the European Union's executive arm, the European Commission, just announced a formal investigation into Formula One owner Liberty Media's proposed acquisition deal for Dorna Sports. For anyone unfamiliar, Dorna Sports is the international rights-holder and promoter of MotoGP, as well as World Superbike, Moto2, Moto3, and more similar motorcycle racing series.
Similar to the 1948 US Supreme Court ruling about movie studios, the EC is concerned about a potential motorsports broadcast licensing monopoly situation brewing if Liberty Media is allowed to complete this acquisition. Right now, the EC says, Liberty Media is effectively a competitor with Dorna Sports in terms of motorsports broadcast licensing. The EC's argument is that "Formula One is the clear market leader in all European countries and MotoGP is most often its only competitor."
