epedx saidyes! then it would burn out... and it really wouldn't be anyone's fault... and then they could replace it with a compact florescent bulb.
In the video they state that it puts out "4 watts of light". I'm not sure if that means that it draws 4 watts of power, or if the amount of illumination is equivalent to that of a modern incandescent light drawing 4 watts of power.
Either way, I don't see any advantage in replacing it with a CFL. Presumably the light generated by the present incandescent bulb is adequate for the intended purpose. Hence a new 4W incandescent bulb should be adequate as well. The smallest CFL that I've found available with a matching base is also 4W (the typical CFL sold in stores is 11-13W). So there would not be any power saving by changing to a CFL [note however, that a 3W decorative "torchlight" shape CFL bulb in a different base is available if one is willing to change the base and decorative type].
On the other hand, the average CFL contains 5 mg of Hg and the typical rated lifetime is 8000 hours (11 months). Since the purpose of the light is to provide illumination 24 hours a day, the average CFL will fail after 11 months. Hence the quantity of Hg to be safely disposed is about 5.5 mg/yr.
So it would appear to me that there would be no significant benefit in changing to a CFL--and there would be some environmental drawbacks in doing so. Hence inspite of the substantially greater initial cost, the ideal replacement would seem to me to be a modern LED light with its substantially lower power consumption for the equivalent illumination and no disposal problem comparable to that with a CFL.