Live data from Hacker News

Snowfallgate and Startups

madhatted.com

11–20 of 29 posts

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#11
post #6
post #4

I'll start out and say that the NYT's legal department was off the mark here...but they've been off-the-mark (i.e. heavy handed) in a lot of incidents...as far as I've seen, the journalists and developers who were part of Snow Fall didn't seem to give a shit, so maybe someone at NYT was like, "Well, someone do something". So while NYT legal may be a bunch of blowhards, it's hard to say that they're quixotic takedown…

I disagree. There is a set of great storytellers, and a set of great developers, but these rarely overlap; an individual who embodies both attributes is vanishingly rare, and only elite organisations (e.g. the NYT) can afford to employ teams containing a critical mass of both talents. As a result, there are going to be lots of great storytellers out there who are "technologically constrained"; the one thing preventin…

I don't want to get in to a discussion of scrollkit's technical merits, so I'll concede for their sake that their current product is a technical marvel beyond what I could ever conceive.

That said, here is the key problem that scrollkit runs into: Content management. I never saw the Snow-Fall-reproduction video, but I'm assuming it involved cutting-pasting wide swaths of the final product into its editor. For the sake of argument, let's pretend that scrollkit's replica was pixel perfect.

OK, but here's the part that scrollkit does not solve at all: how does their tool manage the actual story-creation-editing process? Most writers do their writing in a text editor (Microsoft Word), then paste it into their CMS (Wordpress for example). Multimedia developers, ultimately, do kind of the same thing...build their thing (video, JS graphic, whatever) in their dev environment, and place its representation into the CMS.

OK, that's easy enough...until the writer decides that they want to remove a paragraph, switch others around, etc. etc...In a system like scrollkit's, which as far as I can tell, is a single page template editor...the writer cannot simply just select-all-delete-copy-paste because, well, that would delete the multimedia artist's work.

That's just one logistical hurdle, and probably the most minor one. But when you try to edit this piece with several people, you are going to run into major, show-stopping, hair pulling issues. This is hard to explain to developers, because we have such things as Git, automated testing, IDE's etc....imagine working on a codebase without any of those things. That is the world of virtually most content producers...which is why we have CMS and templates in the first place.

This is all descending into pedantics...but that's precisely the issue. Content producers, if you give them a bespoke tool to create something "beautiful", will happily work 24/7 doing such things as manually kerning text, fixing paragraph widows, hand inserting links over and over, etc. etc....because they don't know of any better way to do things. They don't realize how much time of their time they're wasting into reinventing the wheel. And when a production involves multiple people with varying objectives, you will have a serious clusterfuck.

And we haven't even gotten to the part of how these bespoke feature creations are linked (not just hyperlinked) into the creator's site.

So that's my issue. scrollkit solves (if it works completely as advertised) one of the least important problems in the online publishing workflow. Which is not to say that it's useless, but the problem is that it, IMHO, is doing a massive disservice by telling people that this, the problem they focus on, is the real barrier to creating compelling journalistic features.

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#12

NY Times lawyer Samson's response clearly indicates a complete lack of understand of what scrollkit is/does. He thinks it's a toolkit for replicating content, when it's a toolkit that can be used to replicate technique . Scrollkit used bad phrasing. What they should have said -- "NY Times spent hundreds of hours building the groundbreaking Snow Fall article. With Scrollkit they could have completed it in only a few h…

I think the NYT is overboard in saying that scrollkit can't make any claims...but the takedown of the video seems legally justifiable.

Before you say "Fair use!" and "it's educational!"...consider this example: What if I were to release a "How-to-Draw-Awesome-Cartoons" which was composed completely of examples of me redrawing the most famous Calvin and Hobbes strips? I'm not even physically copying Bill Watterson's assets, I'm redrawing them and telling people, "Hey, this is how you do it!"

Would you argue that Bill Watterson (who, for a time, was pretty vigilant about protecting the C&H brand from any kind of merchandise, a la Garfield) has no claim? I would argue that he does, because the reason why my How-to-Draw book is remotely interesting is because it exploits the appeal that Watterson worked to create.

If I were to make this How-to_draw book using only characters I've conceived myself, I might still be successful...but only if those characters have the same appeal as Calvin and Hobbes...and, as you can agree, that would be far harder than the actual how-to-draw content.

So I can see why the NYT is peeved that scrollkit is showing off their service by exploiting the goodwill and excellence that the NYT poured its resources into. However, I don't think NYT legal has a right to say "Don't use our name or compare yourself to us in any way". Scrollkit can make its own false claims (but then, they may be sued by a different stakeholder)

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#13
The thing that confuses me more than anything is that the original pitch is so strange- "we made a replica in an hour!".

OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency? Of course not. The actual act of piecing together a creative is tiny compared to planning it. Anyone who works in the startup industry ought to get that- the coding is often the least of your problems.

So, Scrollkit never claimed that they made a Snow Fall, they claimed that they were able to throw together a copy of it in a short time. So what? Why would that make me want to use it?

(also, fun to see that the founder of ScrollKit is no stranger to lifting UI concepts other sites have pioneered: http://codybrown.name/timeline/)

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#14

The thing that confuses me more than anything is that the original pitch is so strange - "we made a replica in an hour!". OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency? Of course not. The actual act of piecing together a creative is tiny compared to planning it. Anyone…

OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency?

No, but if you just wrote Illustrator and there's nothing else like it on the market, I might want to buy a copy.

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#15

The thing that confuses me more than anything is that the original pitch is so strange - "we made a replica in an hour!". OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency? Of course not. The actual act of piecing together a creative is tiny compared to planning it. Anyone…

OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency? No, but if you just wrote Illustrator and there's nothing else like it on the market, I might want to buy a copy.

[deleted]

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#16

The thing that confuses me more than anything is that the original pitch is so strange - "we made a replica in an hour!". OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency? Of course not. The actual act of piecing together a creative is tiny compared to planning it. Anyone…

OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency? No, but if you just wrote Illustrator and there's nothing else like it on the market, I might want to buy a copy.

But then you've dramatically shifted from having advertising design done for you to buying a highly technical tool that allows you to create illustrations. If you are someone with no design or illustration experience, that isn't going to work out so great for you.

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#17
The story thats not being told is how those "hundreds of hours" spent building "snow fall" included direction, videography, 3d and 2d modelling and animation, photography, content-writing, design, coordination, and frontend development.

Scrollkit took just one aspect of that (frontend development) and stated "The NYT spent hundreds of hours hand-coding ‘Snow Fall.’ We made a replica in an hour."

Its outright dishonest, and devalues the great effort that others spent on it. I can understand why they are pissed.

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#18
This analysis is tragically incorrect. The Times legal department in no way represents the Times newsroom or the developers who made Snow Fall. Reporters and developers love tools that let them tell stories like Snow Fall more quickly and inexpensively. There is only one reason the NY Times hasn't made another story like Snow Fall in the last 5 months: It's too damn expensive and time-consuming to replicate in a one-off way.

I work with hundreds of newspapers and a dozen or so have contacted me to ask how they could use Scroll Kit's technology in the past few days. In fact, one of my larger top-100 newspaper clients signed up to use Scroll Kit this week. They won't be the only ones.

In case you haven't noticed, newspapers need to find new ways of making money. And they needed it yesterday. Folks trying to monetize newspapers aren't worried about someone copying their article to demonstrate a use case (hell, this event probably drove meaningful traffic to the original), they're worried that they're not going to be able to stay in business. If you were like any digital director around the country, you didn't give a shit about copyright infringement. You only salivated over all the cool things you could be making and monetizing. Since most newspapers have no way of creating a Snow Fall type of article themselves, they'll use Scroll Kit, they'll use it at scale, and they'll sell premium ad units to monetize these articles in a more effective way than normal content. From my viewpoint, that's a real positive for those of us trying to keep journalism alive. All the surrounding conversation about copyright infringement is just so completely missing the point that it might as well be arguing about the right way to polish the brass on the Titanic.

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#19

The story thats not being told is how those "hundreds of hours" spent building "snow fall" included direction, videography, 3d and 2d modelling and animation, photography, content-writing, design, coordination, and frontend development. Scrollkit took just one aspect of that (frontend development) and stated "The NYT spent hundreds of hours hand-coding ‘Snow Fall.’ We made a replica in an hour." Its outright dishones…

I know right. Is like saying, it took so and so this much time to compose this song but I was able to replicate it in a few hours.

Re: Snowfallgate and Startups

#20
post #6
post #4

I'll start out and say that the NYT's legal department was off the mark here...but they've been off-the-mark (i.e. heavy handed) in a lot of incidents...as far as I've seen, the journalists and developers who were part of Snow Fall didn't seem to give a shit, so maybe someone at NYT was like, "Well, someone do something". So while NYT legal may be a bunch of blowhards, it's hard to say that they're quixotic takedown…

I disagree. There is a set of great storytellers, and a set of great developers, but these rarely overlap; an individual who embodies both attributes is vanishingly rare, and only elite organisations (e.g. the NYT) can afford to employ teams containing a critical mass of both talents. As a result, there are going to be lots of great storytellers out there who are "technologically constrained"; the one thing preventin…

I first read Snowfall on my phone from the HN link. As a multimedia experience, it went completely off the bad end plopping me down into Youtube player ever time I changed pages. After reading it, I had no idea why it made HN's front page unless there just happened to be a preponderance of gung-ho skiers active that night. It was only the next day that I viewed it in all its glory.

What kept me engaged that first night was the quality of the writing and to a much lesser extent the quality of the still photography. The multimedia added nothing to my understanding of the story. It was just facts that a good editor would make any reporter junior enough to include them cut from their work.

It's not the technology that keeps other newspapers from producing the same level of quality that the Times did with Snowfall. It is the lack of top notch writers and editors. Scrollkit won't turn Phantom Menace into A New Hope, or Harry Potter into The Hobbit. Changing the medium changes the message. This, however, says nothing about message quality.

Post reply on HN