Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Popcorn Time is back

popcorntimewar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 141 posts

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#71

Post by VikingCoder »

espadrine wrote: post #26
jtreanor wrote: post #18

Popcorn Time previously just showed open domain films in the screen shots. The new one has pictures Game of Thrones and company. It looks like they have stopped pretending this is not for piracy. edit: clarification

Now, for morality to be on their side, they need to publicly advocate and work on a better way to remunerate the content creators. Of course, they could go rogue and act exclusively out of spite for big media, arguing parasitically that how the content creators make money is none of their business. But I really hope they don't.

> work on a better way to remunerate the content creators.

No one gets rewarded for this. The content creators have the exclusive right to establish their pricing terms. Other entities can make offers, of course, but copyright law gives them the exclusive right to establish pricing and distribution.

And they don't want to talk about it. They don't think they have a problem.

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#72

Post by rwallace »

espadrine wrote: post #26
jtreanor wrote: post #18

Popcorn Time previously just showed open domain films in the screen shots. The new one has pictures Game of Thrones and company. It looks like they have stopped pretending this is not for piracy. edit: clarification

Now, for morality to be on their side, they need to publicly advocate and work on a better way to remunerate the content creators. Of course, they could go rogue and act exclusively out of spite for big media, arguing parasitically that how the content creators make money is none of their business. But I really hope they don't.

Or they could correctly argue that the existence of big media is a massive net negative for the welfare of humanity, and anything that diverts money away from the industry is good for the world. Not that piracy seems to put much of a dent in the revenues of Hollywood, unfortunately, but if it did, that would be more than adequate moral justification for supporting Popcorn Time.

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#73

Post by rat87 »

fit2rule wrote: post #34
mehwoot wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

Control of your audience, first and foremost: the mainstay of the movie business. If you can convince someone to sit still and watch your art for up to 2 hours at a time, you've got an audience. If you can't, you've lost the audience. Its an artistic thing - do you have access to, and can you know about, your audience? This has got to be better than not knowing and not having any control whatsoever - or worse, allowi…

Wow that seems like a really stupid idea.

First of all what does a "Popcorn Time" fork give Universal over putting their newer movies on Hulu. Nothing that I can see. They are going to have to put a decent amount of ads on it(especially if they offer recent releases like I guess popcorn time has) if they want to make any money on letting users view stuff for "free" (information on the audience is worth some things but mainly as targeting for ads(+theater and dvd sales to some extent) but this would help undercut dvd sales also how good is the quality of the information provided on the internet can be poor(for example see all the 90+ year olds on age gates)).

Also is there a way to prevent users from sharing in Popcorn Time? If not they would get massive lawsuits from other content providers for profiting for piracy. If yes then ads + limited content = why would people use their fork?

There is a lot of potential in the subscription model(ala netflix), I think there is a decent amount of untapped potential something like an expanded hulu free where newer just realeased stuff and older seasons or prime content is supported by a lot more ads, there is very little potential for giving stuff away for free without ads for most tv show/movie content.

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#74

Post by kyllo »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #57
DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At various times, books, e-books, and kindle fires. Amazon actually shifted the pricing on books and e-books by selling them at below what they were buying them at for prolonged periods of times, and drove rival book sellers out of business by doing so... and then didn't raise their prices.

Do we know if they still sell books at a loss? I'm guessing with their volume and many competitors killed off they have an insane control over their own buying cost and can force that price to now be profitable, but it'd be interesting to know either way.

Well, from their earnings reports, their gross revenue has grown dramatically but their profit margin remains near zero because they spend every additional dollar they make on growing the company.

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/future_tense/20...

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#75

Post by DennisP »

VikingCoder wrote: post #71
espadrine wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now, for morality to be on their side, they need to publicly advocate and work on a better way to remunerate the content creators. Of course, they could go rogue and act exclusively out of spite for big media, arguing parasitically that how the content creators make money is none of their business. But I really hope they don't.

> work on a better way to remunerate the content creators. No one gets rewarded for this. The content creators have the exclusive right to establish their pricing terms. Other entities can make offers, of course, but copyright law gives them the exclusive right to establish pricing and distribution. And they don't want to talk about it. They don't think they have a problem.

Yes, but you can provide an alternative for new content creators who yet aren't entrenched in the old system.

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#76

Post by sbarre »

JonLim wrote: post #67
mentos wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 100% agree with this approach but what does it imply for the TV/Movie industry? To me the problem is that they cannot control distribution. So one solution could be baking adverts into the tv/movie. Has the obvious flaw of poisoning art with advertising, but if done well might work? What does everyone else see as the pragmatic solution?

They've definitely been baking advertisements into movies and television shows for years now. My ideal pragmatic solution would be a platform (or two, or five) that acts like a dumb pipe for content providers to license their content to, and receive some form of compensation every time it is watched, prorated into the amount of the episode/movie is actually watched. However, given the difficult licensing issues found…

Also the content production ecosystem is currently reliant on big successes making up for failures and/or niche content.

That's why cable companies bundle channels together instead of letting you pick and choose the ones you want.

If it wasn't for this, the industry would become even more risk-averse, and we would see a lot less diversity of content, or risky unproven ventures.

In the end I believe this would be a net loss to everyone.

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#77

Post by belorn »

espadrine wrote: post #42
RobAley wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Morality" is self-defined. No doubt they have their interpretation of morality on their side.

Sure, but many share a similar definition of morality. More to the point, the economics are not relative to a point of view. Their project can only succeed, as it stands, if it is used marginally. If everyone used it instead of the competition, content creators would have to change the way they work drastically, and no new content would show up on PT.

> If everyone used it ... no new content would show up

This is to me a bit disturbing. When we say this, we are announcing to the world that culture has inherently no value what so ever. The only way to create value from culture is to prohibit poor people from participating, thus creating an artificial divide that benefits those who have over those who haven't.

Governments are the one who enforces this divide with copyright law, so in the end its government that dictate that this philosophy is the one and only truth. I just don't believe that in 2014, we can't find value in culture beyond prohibit people of private, non-conflicting usage.

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#78

Post by grabeh »

rwallace wrote: post #72
espadrine wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now, for morality to be on their side, they need to publicly advocate and work on a better way to remunerate the content creators. Of course, they could go rogue and act exclusively out of spite for big media, arguing parasitically that how the content creators make money is none of their business. But I really hope they don't.

Or they could correctly argue that the existence of big media is a massive net negative for the welfare of humanity, and anything that diverts money away from the industry is good for the world. Not that piracy seems to put much of a dent in the revenues of Hollywood, unfortunately, but if it did, that would be more than adequate moral justification for supporting Popcorn Time.

Could you elaborate on how big media is a 'massive net negative for the welfare of humanity'?

Re: Popcorn Time is back

#79

Post by Cakez0r »

espadrine wrote: post #26
jtreanor wrote: post #18

Popcorn Time previously just showed open domain films in the screen shots. The new one has pictures Game of Thrones and company. It looks like they have stopped pretending this is not for piracy. edit: clarification

Now, for morality to be on their side, they need to publicly advocate and work on a better way to remunerate the content creators. Of course, they could go rogue and act exclusively out of spite for big media, arguing parasitically that how the content creators make money is none of their business. But I really hope they don't.

Perhaps they are choosing not to concern themselves with morality.
Post reply on HN