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

Disney Open Source

disney.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 126 posts

Re: Disney Open Source

#61

Post by berkut »

ykl wrote: post #60
shredwheat wrote: post #9

This is a showcase of larger open source projects used in the visual effects and animation industry. Several of them are contributed to by Disney engineers, but most people would not consider these Disney projects. Disney has open sourced and released some impressive open source projects over the years, and it's exciting to see their endorsement on these others.

Project: Originating and maintaining organization USD: Pixar OpenSubdiv: Pixar jss-api-gem: Pixar Munki: WDAS Reposado: WDAS SeExpr: WDAS Ptex: WDAS Partio: WDAS Dynamica: WDAS BRDF Explorer: WDAS OpenEXR: ILM Alembic: ILM and Sony Imageworks So which one of these is not a Disney project, considering they all originated from and are maintained by Disney engineers?

Alembic was originally Sony's thing, which ILM started using in their early Katana days because their own file format wasn't good enough for use with Katana (random access and lazy loading).

Sony gave it to ILM to start using, and then open-sourced it.

I'd quibble that while ILM and Pixar employees are technically now Disney employees, it's not as if they work for Walt Disney Animation Studios directly, so it's not as clear cut as you make out.

Re: Disney Open Source

#62

Post by guelo »

gkoberger wrote: post #22
alexkavon wrote: post #5

Can't wait for the Mickey Mouse repo in 2024.

Why? Disney has invested countless dollars into Mickey Mouse over the past 89 years. It's not like the Happy Birthday song, being hoarded without innovation purely for profit; they're actively expanding/investing/improving and making billions of people happy. Why should random companies get to legally print knockoff Mickey t-shirts just because enough time has passed?

Because it does not benefit society in any way to grant them a monopoly on Mickey t-shirts. Society as a whole is better off when there is market competition. Monopoly is only granted to encourage the initial creativity. There is also significant public cost in protecting the Mickey monopoly, such as courts and police.

Re: Disney Open Source

#63

Post by wangchow »

viraptor wrote: post #38
ncannon wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All those you mention do have licenses. OpenEXR - https://github.com/openexr/openexr/blob/develop/OpenEXR/LICE... Ptex - http://ptex.us/documentation.html Partio - https://github.com/wdas/partio/blob/master/src/doc/license.t...

I don't think it changes yazaddaruvala's point. What happens when ptex website goes away and disney lawyers decide there was no proof?

Copy the license into your fork of the codebase.

Re: Disney Open Source

#64

Post by taneq »

s-phi-nl wrote: post #37
gkoberger wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Disney has invested countless dollars into Mickey Mouse over the past 89 years. It's not like the Happy Birthday song, being hoarded without innovation purely for profit; they're actively expanding/investing/improving and making billions of people happy. Why should random companies get to legally print knockoff Mickey t-shirts just because enough time has passed?

Because that's what the US Constitution requires [1]: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" (Emphasis added) [1] https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/United_States...

Micky Mouse always has been protected for a limited time by copyright. Micky Mouse always will be protected for a limited time by copyright.

Re: Disney Open Source

#65

Post by wangchow »

bluejekyll wrote: post #48
Narkov wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should the same happen to your family home?

No, the better question is; Should someone else be able to build a knock-off of your home? IP is not the same as physical property. Disney isn't forced to give away they artwork they've made internally. Mickey Mouse as IP, i.e. as a concept, is currently not allowed to be reproduced. If we're going to debate property rights, it's important to have the context and the property properly defined. Many people can rightfu…

The moment Mickey's copyright expires I'm creating a series called Mickey Mouse. There won't be any women though because it's about IT consultants and their daily goings-on.

Re: Disney Open Source

#66

Post by beardicus »

wangchow wrote: post #65
bluejekyll wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the better question is; Should someone else be able to build a knock-off of your home? IP is not the same as physical property. Disney isn't forced to give away they artwork they've made internally. Mickey Mouse as IP, i.e. as a concept, is currently not allowed to be reproduced. If we're going to debate property rights, it's important to have the context and the property properly defined. Many people can rightfu…

The moment Mickey's copyright expires I'm creating a series called Mickey Mouse. There won't be any women though because it's about IT consultants and their daily goings-on.

Well, you'll probably want to read up on trademark law before proceeding.

Re: Disney Open Source

#67

Post by jtsylve »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #39
lima wrote: post #8

OpenSubdiv is a game changer in FOSS 3d software. Blender is already using it: https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Ref/Release_Notes/2.7... Demo: https://youtu.be/dzIl_S-qHIQ?t=115

Like the entire game has changed, rules, board, pieces and everything? Or like the game has been somewhat improved?

I'd say a 1-2 order of magnitude speedup is very significant.

Re: Disney Open Source

#69

Post by serge2k »

matt4077 wrote: post #59
gkoberger wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Disney has invested countless dollars into Mickey Mouse over the past 89 years. It's not like the Happy Birthday song, being hoarded without innovation purely for profit; they're actively expanding/investing/improving and making billions of people happy. Why should random companies get to legally print knockoff Mickey t-shirts just because enough time has passed?

The purpose of copyright law is only to "promote the arts and sciences". Note that it doesn't say anything about the individual creator. There are two factors determining how much value a society can derive from the body of art created within: the amount and the distribution. (ignoring "quality" because it's unaffected by the following). The quantity created and the distribution it gets are somewhat conflicting goals…

Death should be the limit, and 70 years for corporate owned assets.

You shouldn't get to make money just because your mom or dad was creative. I know that sucks if you die early and your kids are young.

Re: Disney Open Source

#70

Post by serge2k »

wangchow wrote: post #65
bluejekyll wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the better question is; Should someone else be able to build a knock-off of your home? IP is not the same as physical property. Disney isn't forced to give away they artwork they've made internally. Mickey Mouse as IP, i.e. as a concept, is currently not allowed to be reproduced. If we're going to debate property rights, it's important to have the context and the property properly defined. Many people can rightfu…

The moment Mickey's copyright expires I'm creating a series called Mickey Mouse. There won't be any women though because it's about IT consultants and their daily goings-on.

Then you will get sued by Disney because they still own a trademark.
Post reply on HN