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

Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 99 posts

Re: Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

#21

Post by sbov »

jgrahamc wrote: post #17
rglover wrote: post #15

Love the technology, but is anybody else just a little bit creeped out by this?

I'm less creeped out by the technology than by the implications in terms of copyright. What this may mean is that a copyright holder on the image of a person (such as Tupac) will be able to milk that image long after they are dead and potentially without having to pay anyone. When you see Snoop Dogg 'performing' with Tupac you have to wonder where the money is flowing. Tupac's gone, perhaps his family is getting some…

The hologram is extra creepy, but is it legally any different than a commercial or picture? By now I'm sure contracts already had clauses about what happens in the event of someone's death, and whether or not they're allowed to use the person's likeness.

Re: Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

#22

Post by jgrahamc »

endtime wrote: post #19
jgrahamc wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm less creeped out by the technology than by the implications in terms of copyright. What this may mean is that a copyright holder on the image of a person (such as Tupac) will be able to milk that image long after they are dead and potentially without having to pay anyone. When you see Snoop Dogg 'performing' with Tupac you have to wonder where the money is flowing. Tupac's gone, perhaps his family is getting some…

Sounds like you're creeped out by copyright in general, not by anything to do with this article.

That's not true. I rely on copyright as the foundation for lots of things (the code I write in my job and it underlies the OSS licenses that I use for code that I release freely). Copyright itself does not worry me.

But there are concerning moves to make copyright last essentially indefinitely and in the UK we've recently seen the Olympics be backed up by criminal rather than civil penalties for copyright-related offenses. Those things are worrying.

It is true that there's nothing in the original article about copyright or finance, but it is worth considering in the light of the fact that it's unlikely that the event or the other performers did this out of the goodness of their hearts. Follow the money.

Re: Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

#23

Post by furyofantares »

jgrahamc wrote: post #17
rglover wrote: post #15

Love the technology, but is anybody else just a little bit creeped out by this?

I'm less creeped out by the technology than by the implications in terms of copyright. What this may mean is that a copyright holder on the image of a person (such as Tupac) will be able to milk that image long after they are dead and potentially without having to pay anyone. When you see Snoop Dogg 'performing' with Tupac you have to wonder where the money is flowing. Tupac's gone, perhaps his family is getting some…

> But what happens when Tupac suddenly records a new song?

Somebody has to actually create that work and the performance -- presumably whoever does the work or commissions the work would inform themselves of any licensing issues before embarking on it.

I'm curious what you think the ideal scenario here would be?

Re: Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

#24

Post by lo_fye »

zdgman wrote: post #20

Great question that was asked today was, "would you pay to see a dead artist perform in holographic form"? Think about all the artists you could bring back and have perform for people when using this technology.

With the exception of Gorillaz, I probably wouldn't pay to see A holographic artist perform, but I would pay to see a bunch of them perform together. Elvis, Buddy Holly, Tupac, Ricky Valenz, Kurt Cobain, etc. Get DJ BC to create the mashup, and away we go.

Re: Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

#26

Post by endtime »

jgrahamc wrote: post #22
endtime wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you're creeped out by copyright in general, not by anything to do with this article.

That's not true. I rely on copyright as the foundation for lots of things (the code I write in my job and it underlies the OSS licenses that I use for code that I release freely). Copyright itself does not worry me. But there are concerning moves to make copyright last essentially indefinitely and in the UK we've recently seen the Olympics be backed up by criminal rather than civil penalties for copyright-related off…

Okay, but none of that is specific to this technology or its use at a concert. You just seem to be taking the opportunity to talk about something vaguely related that you have strong feelings about.

Re: Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

#27

Post by nextstep »

jgrahamc wrote: post #17
rglover wrote: post #15

Love the technology, but is anybody else just a little bit creeped out by this?

I'm less creeped out by the technology than by the implications in terms of copyright. What this may mean is that a copyright holder on the image of a person (such as Tupac) will be able to milk that image long after they are dead and potentially without having to pay anyone. When you see Snoop Dogg 'performing' with Tupac you have to wonder where the money is flowing. Tupac's gone, perhaps his family is getting some…

Plenty of albums have been released under Tupac's name since he died. Some of the work (the production, the lyrics, obviously the vocals) was material that Tupac had worked on but never released.

According to wikipedia, Suge Knight produced most of these posthumous albums[1]. I assume the royalty split was probably the usual percentages going to the label and distribution, and a much smaller fraction going to Tupac (or his estate in this case). So, all in all, probably no worse of a deal than most living artists can expect from major label contracts.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupac_Shakur_discography

Re: Tupac image performs at Coachella [video]

#30

Post by jgw »

rglover wrote: post #15

Love the technology, but is anybody else just a little bit creeped out by this?

Yes, and not just a little.

Our ability to distinguish between what's real and what's not is diminishing at an astonishing rate.

Simultaneously, our technology is grossly outpacing our ability as a society to develop social mores and appropriate legal frameworks around the new things we can do.

Some years ago, I read an article about how when the telephone was first publicly sold, it came with an etiquette guide on how to use it appropriately and with consideration for others. That seems like a fantastic idea - would that we had done the same with cell phones fifteen years ago, let alone how we use incredibly powerful technologies today.

Post reply on HN