Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood. • Hacker News Board

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#81

Post by sbt » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:35 PM UTC

armandososa wrote: post #5

I hope whatever kills hollywood also kills distribution by regions. In the third world we are people too.

The regional distribution is definitely something that needs to die fast. I live outside the US, where TV networks buy American tv-series and broadcasts them a year after they are released in the US. No one I know under 30 actually waits for that. They see their friends in other countries talking about the new episode on Facebook and eventually they just end up downloading it. Which is sad, because if they could actually buy it on iTunes (without a US account), they probably would if the price was right.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#82

Post by re_format » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:36 PM UTC

Give me the programmers, UI geeks, the money to pay them to do as they are told, and I will build it. I have the idea, and it's actually a proven winner, among a smaller segment of users. Like most other internet phenomena, it's something that was once only done amongst computer nerds only to be later done by the general public as if it was just another usual day-to-day practice. And it actually involves more friends and family and ideally less mass market products.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#83

Post by marquis » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:36 PM UTC

skb_ wrote: post #58

pg wrote: post #9

Incidentally, Paul Buchheit deserves all the credit for this idea. The YC partners were having lunch yesterday and he suggested posting this RFS. Whereupon we all turned to Jessica, who is usually the one who talks us out of doing crazy things. I was kind of surprised she didn't try to talk us out of it.

Did you guys consider video games? I think that's already a viable alternative form of entertainment. I would argue video games already killed Hollywood, they just never pulled the sword out. $50 for 100+ hours of content vs $10 for roughly 2 hours? No contest.

If movies disappeared (which I don't believe they will as the barrier to entry has lowered so much) I would probably just read books and go out more. Games are great and I fully support them but it's not a form of entertainment for everyone.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#84

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:36 PM UTC

pg wrote: post #9

Incidentally, Paul Buchheit deserves all the credit for this idea. The YC partners were having lunch yesterday and he suggested posting this RFS. Whereupon we all turned to Jessica, who is usually the one who talks us out of doing crazy things. I was kind of surprised she didn't try to talk us out of it.

[deleted]

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#85

Post by staunch » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:37 PM UTC

dexen wrote: post #36

armandososa wrote: post #5

I hope whatever kills hollywood also kills distribution by regions. In the third world we are people too.

Don't hold your breath just yet. If the new thing gets funded chiefly by ad revenue -- and that's the popular way of funding freemium now -- it will remain regionalized. Ad sponsors prefer certain demographics and third world countries aren't high on their lists.

That's not necessarily a problem. Facebook isn't restricted to high-ad-revenue countries. Their costs are so low that they don't mind making much less money in some places than others. The same is true of YouTube.

The reason so much content is region restricted is traditional Hollywood licensing deals. Just another example of their outmoded business methods.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#86

Post by oldstrangers » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:37 PM UTC

johngalt wrote: post #77

oldstrangers wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't you issue a call for people to bring down Monsanto then? You can't feign do-gooder interest just because there's a financial interest. I guess my issue is with consistency. Reading this call to arms just sounds hypocritical. I believe you even called me dumb for voicing my displeasure in the original Cloudant thread. Nothing disingenuous about that.

So if he doesn't fight for your cause by exactly your standards, then any good YC is doing is worthless? You've set standards in a way that only you could possibly meet them. You should start a business of your own, and you can refuse to do business with everyone you disagree with.

Of course not.

But it does sound hypocritical (not sure how many times I can use that word) when you're supposedly fighting for "civil liberties and the world economy" when you have a financial interest in a company benefiting from the likes of Monsanto.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#87

Post by billswift » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:37 PM UTC

sounds wrote: post #26

cstross wrote: post #7

Hollywood and the MPAA isn't about making movies. Rather, it's about maintaining a distribution chokehold on mass produced popular entertainment. This in turn means controlling what goes into the pipeline, and how the output from the pipeline is delivered to the consumers, and how the MPPE is marketed -- for example, the whole star system, Oscars night hype, and so on. What is needed is a better distribution channel,…

By implication then is the next big distribution channel already technically feasible? I think history makes it pretty clear someone will jump on it. It sounds like that someone will not be in the US or US-similar copyright regimes. So what kind of business can capitalize on the new distribution model -- without running afoul of the DMCA etc.? It would probably be helpful to megaupload's successor (that assumes megau…

The "next big distribution channel" already exists. Why do you think the MPAA and RIAA keep trying to choke off the internet. Fortunately, they got a late start, so there is a chance to keep ahead of their lawyers.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#88

Post by nkassis » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:38 PM UTC

skb_ wrote: post #58

pg wrote: post #9

Incidentally, Paul Buchheit deserves all the credit for this idea. The YC partners were having lunch yesterday and he suggested posting this RFS. Whereupon we all turned to Jessica, who is usually the one who talks us out of doing crazy things. I was kind of surprised she didn't try to talk us out of it.

Did you guys consider video games? I think that's already a viable alternative form of entertainment. I would argue video games already killed Hollywood, they just never pulled the sword out. $50 for 100+ hours of content vs $10 for roughly 2 hours? No contest.

I think video games is one of the reasons Hollywood is dying in the first place. What other thing in the last 30 years has really been a direct competition to Hollywood. The Internet is definitively on the list too.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#89

Post by natesm » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:38 PM UTC

pearle wrote: post #80

skb_ wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you guys consider video games? I think that's already a viable alternative form of entertainment. I would argue video games already killed Hollywood, they just never pulled the sword out. $50 for 100+ hours of content vs $10 for roughly 2 hours? No contest.

I understand your point but, multi-player aside, how many $60 games (that's the standard pricing these days for AAA titles) provide 100+ hours? They are very rare. Skyrim is the only recent qualifying game that jumps to mind.

Why put aside multiplayer? I think I've paid $0.50/hour for my copy of Battlefield 3.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#90

Post by marquis » Fri, Jan 20, 2012, 11:38 PM UTC

malkia wrote: post #35

Here is what Francis Ford Coppola has to say on the matter: http://the99percent.com/articles/6973/Francis-Ford-Coppola-O... "We have to be very clever about those things. You have to remember that it’s only a few hundred years, if that much, that artists are working with money. Artists never got money. Artists had a patron, either the leader of the state or the duke of Weimar or somewhere, or the church, the pope. Or…

While I agree in part, the issue is that good art, really really good art, is a full-time job that can take years and years of practice. Much like writing good software. Saying art should be free is saying all software should be free - the same amount of work and risk goes into it. There is a balance to be had here and in many countries it is solved with artist grants, recognizing the value to be had from a rich culture.

Composers for example may receive some income from the wealthy or, from the 20th century, grants, but are generally teachers (Vivaldi, Beethoven, Schoenberg, most modern-day composers not working in the film/tv industry) or held posts at the local entertainment theatre: the church (Bach, Handel..).