A few years back, a friend used to send me, at the end of the year, a forwarded, mass-e-mail listing people who had qualified for or were potential Darwin Awards winners. I subsequently followed up the first time by checking out the website, which is simply, “Darwin Awards.” The premise is that the award honors those who have had the foresight(?) to remove themselves from the gene pool, thus lessening the burden on the rest of us.

Reading about these folks was always good for a chuckle, although it’s been a while since I’ve checked the website, or checked out the books. But earlier today, I ran across this brief item online– this guy is definitely a candidate for inclusion in this year’s pack of Darwin Award nominees.

If you’re a man, like me, you’re definitely wincing right about now… This one goes under “Sex” although I’m wondering if I should create a new category: “General Stupidity.”

I love movies– I watch at least two a week, sometimes more depending on what’s going on in our lives. Like many others, I’m a faithful subscriber to Netflix. While they aren’t perfect (especially when they “throttle” customers), it’s been a pretty good deal so far. One thing I’ve always enjoyed is the vast variety of films available to rent, compared to the local Blockbuster.

Well, that may be changing, and very quickly. Blockbuster, in an apparent attempt to resuscitate its online business in order to compete with Netflix, has inked a deal with the Weinsteins– Harvey and Bob, the producers of “Mrs. Henderson Presents,” “The English Patient,” “Shakespeare In Love,” and the “Scary Movie” and “Scream” movies, among others.

Thus far we’ve all been able to rent them from wherever and whomever we want. But under this deal, starting in January, only Blockbuster will have the exclusive right to rent movies made by the Weinsteins.

This isn’t just for “x” number of years– it’s a four-year deal– that means other than buying the movie, anything released from the Weinsteins in the next four years (until 2011) can only be rented through Blockbuster– not Netflix, not Hollywood video, not your local, independent store. I’m all for a free market, bound by regulations, decency, and common sense– but this isn’t healthy competition– it’s a monopoly. Not only does this mean that we have to either frequent Blockbuster (which I stopped doing years ago), or buy the movie. If this deal succeeds, who knows what kind of agreements other rental businesses and distributors will attempt with studios and small companies? I’d really hate to see things become so balkanized. I’d also hate to have to pay multiple fees at different businesses.

I plan to register a complaint at both companies, but beyond that I’m not sure what to do. I’m really hoping there’s enough of a backlash that this kind of “business arrangement” doesn’t increase. Given Hollywood’s notorious whining about profits, I wouldn’t be surprised. It’s also possible if this works for Blockbuster and the Weinsteins, that it could spread to other industries, such as music, for example.

It’s always been about the almighty dollar, but there was always a sort of balance between profit and the customer– usually tilted towards the dollar, to be sure, but the customer remained in the picture. Now, I’m not so sure.

So come January, for a Weinstein picture, expect to see their ads read: “Coming to a Blockbuster near you.” My response may be, “This is one blockbuster I won’t see, sorry.”

To be continued…