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

Using Generative AI in Content Production

partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 155 posts

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#11

Post by hexage1814 »

>GenAI is not used to replace or generate new talent performances

This is 100% a lie.

Studios will use this to replace humans. In fact, the idea is for the technology – AI in general – to be so good you don't need humans anywhere in the pipeline. Like, the best thing a human could produce would only be as good as the average output of their model, except the model would be far cheaper and faster.

And... that's okay, honestly. I mean, it's a capitalism problem. I believe with all my strength that this automation is fundamentally different from the ones from back in the day. There won't be new jobs.

But the solution was never to ban technology

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#12

Post by barbazoo »

hxseven wrote: post #10
barbazoo wrote: post #3

> Using unowned training data (e.g., celebrity faces, copyrighted art) How would one ever know that the GenAI output is not influenced or based on copyrighted content.

Netflix could also use or provide their own TV/movie productions as training data.

Maybe now all that product placement is finally coming back to haunt them.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#13

Post by yorwba »

simonw wrote: post #5
roughly wrote: post #2

Shouldn’t be particularly surprising Netflix is leaning in here - they’ve been pretty open about viewing themselves as “second screen”/background content for people doing other things. Their primary need these days is for a large volume of somewhat passable content, especially content they can get for cheap. Spotify’s in a similar boat and has been filling the recommended playlists up with low-royalty elevator music.

"Generated material is temporary and not part of the final deliverables" sounds like they are not looking to generative AI for content that they will air to the public. Later on they do have a note suggesting that the following might be OK if you use judgement and get their approval: "Using GenAI to generate background elements (e.g., signage, posters) that appear on camera"

"If you can confidently say "yes" to all the above, socializing the intended use with your Netflix contact may be sufficient. If you answer “no” or “unsure” to any of these principles, escalate to your Netflix contact for more guidance before proceeding, as written approval may be required."

They do want to save money by cheaply generating content, but it's only cheap if no expensive lawsuits result. Hence the need for clear boundaries and legal review of uses that may be risky from a copyright perspective.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#15

Post by yorwba »

hexage1814 wrote: post #11

>GenAI is not used to replace or generate new talent performances This is 100% a lie. Studios will use this to replace humans. In fact, the idea is for the technology – AI in general – to be so good you don't need humans anywhere in the pipeline. Like, the best thing a human could produce would only be as good as the average output of their model, except the model would be far cheaper and faster. And... that's okay,…

The part you quote is part of the list of conditions for an if-statement, so how could it be a lie?

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#16

Post by OldGreenYodaGPT »

Netflix is basically strangling the creative potential of GenAI before it can even breathe. Their new “guidelines” read like a corporate legal panic document, not a policy for innovation. Every use case needs escalation, approval, or a lawyer’s blessing. That’s not how creativity works.

The irony is rich they built their empire on disrupting old Hollywood gatekeeping, and now they’re recreating it in AI form. Instead of letting creators experiment freely with these tools, Netflix wants control over every brushstroke of ai creativity

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#17

Post by simonw »

yorwba wrote: post #13
simonw wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Generated material is temporary and not part of the final deliverables" sounds like they are not looking to generative AI for content that they will air to the public. Later on they do have a note suggesting that the following might be OK if you use judgement and get their approval: "Using GenAI to generate background elements (e.g., signage, posters) that appear on camera"

"If you can confidently say "yes" to all the above, socializing the intended use with your Netflix contact may be sufficient. If you answer “no” or “unsure” to any of these principles, escalate to your Netflix contact for more guidance before proceeding, as written approval may be required." They do want to save money by cheaply generating content, but it's only cheap if no expensive lawsuits result. Hence the need f…

Yeah, that's a fair assessment. The specific mention of "union-covered work" plays to that interpretation as well:

> GenAI is not used to replace or generate new talent performances or union-covered work without consent.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#18

Post by AnthonyMouse »

BadCookie wrote: post #7
barbazoo wrote: post #3

> Using unowned training data (e.g., celebrity faces, copyrighted art) How would one ever know that the GenAI output is not influenced or based on copyrighted content.

Getty and Adobe offer models that were trained only on images that they have the rights to. Those models might meet Netflix’s standards?

I kind of wonder if that even works.

If you take a model trained on Getty and ask it for Indiana Jones or Harry Potter, what does it give you? These things are popular enough that it's likely to be present in any large set of training data, either erroneously or because some specific works incorporated them in a way that was licensed or fair use for those particular works even if it isn't in general.

And then when it conjures something like that by description rather than by name, how are you any better off than something trained from random social media? It's not like you get to make unlicensed AI India Jones derivatives just because Getty has a photo of Harrison Ford.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#19

Post by hexage1814 »

yorwba wrote: post #15
hexage1814 wrote: post #11

>GenAI is not used to replace or generate new talent performances This is 100% a lie. Studios will use this to replace humans. In fact, the idea is for the technology – AI in general – to be so good you don't need humans anywhere in the pipeline. Like, the best thing a human could produce would only be as good as the average output of their model, except the model would be far cheaper and faster. And... that's okay,…

The part you quote is part of the list of conditions for an if-statement, so how could it be a lie?

The issue wasn't if they said that thing or not; companies say a lot of things which are fundamentally a lie, things to keep up appearances – which are oftentimes not enforced. It's like companies arguing they believe in fair pay while using Chinese sweatshops or whatever.

In this case, for instance, Netflix still has a relation with their partners that they don't want to damage at this moment, and we are not at the point of AI being able to generate a whole feature length film indistinguishable from a traditional one . Also, they might be apprehensive regarding legal risks and the copyrightability at this exact moment; big companies' lawyers are usually pretty conservative regarding taking any "risks," so they probably want to wait for the dust to settle down as far as legal precedents and the like.

Anyway, the issue here is:

"Does that statement actually reflect what Netflix truly think and that they actually believe GenAI shouldn't be used to replace or generate new talent performances?"

Because they believe in the sanctity of human authorship or whatever? And the answer is: no, no, hell no, absolutely no. That is a lie.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#20

Post by lawlessone »

eric-burel wrote: post #4

I am thinking of building an association of AI consumers so we can organize to praise or boycott whatever we collectevily find acceptable or not. I'll spend some time reading this in details later on, but whatever it states or imply, positive or negative, it's not for businesses to set the rules as if they owned the place. Consumer associations are powerful and can't be fired when striking, since the customer is alwa…

>I am thinking of building an association of AI consumers

The Gooner Association?

Post reply on HN