Live data from Hacker News

New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

wired.com

61–70 of 135 posts

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be lovely, however that probably won't happen. Seeing google might get sued for that.

Why? They are a private company, they can do whatever they want on their site (also known as the iOS censorship apologist argument)

Why is this modded down? Apple fans don't like swipes at Apple?

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#62

I'm actually wondering how illegal this is? This is trying to influence the stock market and attacking 1 company without "legal" jurification. They are trying to hurt Google's through stock, this IS actually the same as stealing/taking away a billion $ (stockvalue) ... (that should be illegal, isn't it?) They obviously failed before execution, but that shouldn't matter... Does anyone know if Google can use this infor…

>this IS actually the same as stealing/taking away a billion $ (stockvalue)

Although it will probably go precisely nowhere, this is an interesting point. This sort of attack goes beyond a "character" attack on the company. Indeed, Google isn't directly affected by a drop in stock price; but as a Google shareholder, I am.

How is that fair or remotely acceptable? I suppose that's the purpose, and it's despicable. Once the political support for the MPAA ends, they'll have nothing left.

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#63
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Within a few years, video games will be generating photo-realistic feature films on demand, with unique scripts and characters and worlds adapted to the viewer's tastes and mood. You're vastly underestimating the work that goes into an authentic hollywood movie. Also, vastly overestimating the quality of video game 3d engines, the performance requirements, the potential plot quality resulting from player-driven sto…

The best Games are already higher quality than toy story one (1995). Both in terms of graphics and plot ex Witcher III. Game studios already make more money than Hollywood so long term Hollywood is in a death spiral.

I disagree on both counts.

Even looking at The Witcher 3 running at its highest settings, the human characters are not photo-realistic. The game itself doesn't look like something that was captured on a camera; the output includes blur filters that look impressive but unrealistic (Toy Story isn't a good measuring stick, since it's not trying to be photo-realistic; something like the 2007 Beowulf movie would be a better comparison against live-action).

The biggest games aren't as profitable as movies today. Right now, there's about 35MM consoles capable of playing The Witcher 3 (PS4 and X1). Avengers: Age of Ultron passed $1 billion this summer. For TW3 to match its sales numbers, they'd have to sell roughly 16.7MM copies at $60. Almost half the number of console owners would have to buy this game at full-price for it's revenue number to be the same (yes, the PC market will have an impact, but that's harder to measure, but that market tends to be smaller than the consoles).

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#64
post #52

Hollywood is slowly decaying into irrelevance. This is a sign that they know their days are numbered. People are not going stop pirating, hell the whining and draconian measures to get people to stop pirating their movies makes me want to pirate the shit out of it even more. Plenty of video services like netflix, amazon prime are producing their own quality tv shows that exceed most of the crap movies we get. Everyth…

The threat to Hollywood goes deeper than piracy. Within a few years, video games will be generating photo-realistic feature films on demand, with unique scripts and characters and worlds adapted to the viewer's tastes and mood. Game/movie publishers won't have to worry as much about piracy because they will be selling the service, not the content. (But upload your personalized movie to YouTube and they can monetize t…

I may possibly be the best person in the world to comment on this particular statement. Given that: no, this isn't going to happen in the near future.

"Films on demand" - some aspects of this are near-future plausible given existing script, mocap and voice acting. Simple programmatic cinematography is just about possible, and AI editing is getting better. 5 years away, maybe, for sitcom / soap-opera equivalent lighting and cinematography. A LOT longer before you're replacing Roger Deakins, though.

"Photo-realistic" - photorealistic CGI films have been just around the corner for 15 years now and continue to be so. Proof-of-concept 15 second renders are doable, feature-length films with non-humans are doable (albeit with a LOT of human intervention), but 90 minutes of CGI humans is a lot harder.

"Characters" - moulding their appearance is almost doable now. Motion is a lot harder - we've got semi-programmatic facial animation but it's a bit rubbish. Programmatic body animation is getting there. Programmatic voice acting is a Really Hard Problem and I'm not aware of anyone making any significant moves forward in that area.

"Unique scripts" - no-one has demonstrated anything close to an AI scriptwriter at this point. It may well be that's a problem which requires strong AI to solve.

We might be looking at Hollywood being replaced completely at some point, but I doubt it'll happen in the next 20 years.

However, what IS a huge threat to Hollywood is the increased power of indie filmmakers with technological assists. I write about that sort of thing over on my blog at http://www.strangecompany.org/blog/

One filmmaker today can do things that would have required a crew of 20 back in 1993. The cost of filmmaking is plummeting. And that certainly is a threat to Hollywood.

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#65

I'm actually wondering how illegal this is? This is trying to influence the stock market and attacking 1 company without "legal" jurification. They are trying to hurt Google's through stock, this IS actually the same as stealing/taking away a billion $ (stockvalue) ... (that should be illegal, isn't it?) They obviously failed before execution, but that shouldn't matter... Does anyone know if Google can use this infor…

It is probably covered by defamation of character law (it would be in the UK at least) or by malicious litigation law.

Despite Tony Blair pushing through changes to allow corporate bodies to use defamation laws, it's still pretty rare and an uphill struggle. The McLibel case showed how dangerous it is for a company to resort to that sort of litigation.

They spent millions, had an array of hilarious 'mom & apple pie' witnesses flown in from the US and managed to lose on many points (but not all) and were left with a useless judgment which they can never collect on as they were stupid enough to sue two people with no assets or any prospect of having any.

They did however, become a laughing stock in the legal world and have an array of TV programs and plays, mocking them mercilessly. Plus some of the, till then, unproven, claims of disgusting practice ended up being proven and therefore repeatable without risk - which was not the case beforehand.

Defamation actions are never a good way to go. Even winning one does not generally help you much.

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#66
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The threat to Hollywood goes deeper than piracy. Within a few years, video games will be generating photo-realistic feature films on demand, with unique scripts and characters and worlds adapted to the viewer's tastes and mood. Game/movie publishers won't have to worry as much about piracy because they will be selling the service, not the content. (But upload your personalized movie to YouTube and they can monetize t…

I may possibly be the best person in the world to comment on this particular statement. Given that: no, this isn't going to happen in the near future. "Films on demand" - some aspects of this are near-future plausible given existing script, mocap and voice acting. Simple programmatic cinematography is just about possible, and AI editing is getting better. 5 years away, maybe, for sitcom / soap-opera equivalent lighti…

what are your thought on building a business model around that trend ?

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may possibly be the best person in the world to comment on this particular statement. Given that: no, this isn't going to happen in the near future. "Films on demand" - some aspects of this are near-future plausible given existing script, mocap and voice acting. Simple programmatic cinematography is just about possible, and AI editing is getting better. 5 years away, maybe, for sitcom / soap-opera equivalent lighti…

what are your thought on building a business model around that trend ?

If you can find a way to monetise the enormous amount of new content that's being produced right now - in excess of 10,000 feature films a year - then you have the potential to make a vast amount of money.

Discoverability and marketplaces are the key problems for film at the moment. There are other groups working on that problem, but so far it remains unresolved.

I wrote a bit about this on Charles Stross's blog a while ago - http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2015/06/hugh-han...

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#68
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best Games are already higher quality than toy story one (1995). Both in terms of graphics and plot ex Witcher III. Game studios already make more money than Hollywood so long term Hollywood is in a death spiral.

I disagree on both counts. Even looking at The Witcher 3 running at its highest settings, the human characters are not photo-realistic. The game itself doesn't look like something that was captured on a camera; the output includes blur filters that look impressive but unrealistic (Toy Story isn't a good measuring stick, since it's not trying to be photo-realistic; something like the 2007 Beowulf movie would be a bett…

Wow has made over 10 Billion which is far more than any one movie. Grand Theft Auto V made 1 billion in 3 days.

Moving up the timeline is meaningless toy story was 20 years old so the point is game year x ~= movie x - y. Means games in y = in ~20 years top games = today's movies assuming steady exponential growth. Which probably does not hold long term, but if today’s movies are ‘acceptable’ then that’s all you need.

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#69
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree on both counts. Even looking at The Witcher 3 running at its highest settings, the human characters are not photo-realistic. The game itself doesn't look like something that was captured on a camera; the output includes blur filters that look impressive but unrealistic (Toy Story isn't a good measuring stick, since it's not trying to be photo-realistic; something like the 2007 Beowulf movie would be a bett…

Wow has made over 10 Billion which is far more than any one movie. Grand Theft Auto V made 1 billion in 3 days . Moving up the timeline is meaningless toy story was 20 years old so the point is game year x ~= movie x - y. Means games in y = in ~20 years top games = today's movies assuming steady exponential growth. Which probably does not hold long term, but if today’s movies are ‘acceptable’ then that’s all you need…

Wow is more like a franchise than a single movie, but it beats even the strongest franchisees if you look only at box office and not other revenue sources. Though Marvel Cinematic Universe isn't far behind.

Re: New Court Evidence Reveals Hollywood’s Plan to Smear Google

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By Hollywood, people here mean the big studios/distributors, that is, the companies who provide the cash, not the production companies that film the stuff.

So, iow, Hollywood. People forget or don't know that Hollywood is the Silicon Valley of films. You need a special effect? There's a guy down the street who can do that. You need a special lens or lighting? You can rent that, today, for a hundred bucks at the shop around the corner. That's why films, and the people who make them, congregate in Hollywood.

The guy down the street is not a big studio/distributor providing the cash. As I said, people aren't talking about Hollywood-the-place. It's a metonym, like "Wall Street" and "Fleet Street", and in this case it's specifically about a few companies (mainly the MPAA members).
Post reply on HN