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

91–100 of 155 posts

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#91

Post by danielbln »

exasperaited wrote: post #88
doctorpangloss wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. No. This document says, “our strategy is wait and see.” It’s the most disruptive media technology since the TV. And they’re like, “whatever.” That is not the move of a “smarter” creative company. Lawyers are really, really bad at running companies, even if you have strong opinions about the law.

Disruptive does not mean good, or useful, or important, or valuable. There is no reason to jump onto a thing early just because it is disruptive: Netflix exists in a different creative world than the tech industry, and its audiences are even more hostile to the idea that AI is being used to steal from the things and people they admire than the audiences of typical tech industry disruptions. People who care about art…

Nobody values slop, and not everything is slop, AI or otherwise. Also, stealing is not the same as copyright infringement, unless you subscribe to the RIAA definition of the word.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#92

Post by Luker88 »

I see a big one missing:

* fully-generated content is public domain and copyright can not be applied to it.

Make sure any AI content gets substantially changed by humans, so that the result can be copyrighted.

More importantly: don't brag and shut up about which parts are fully AI generated.

Otherwise: public domain.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#93

Post by Bombthecat »

bjt wrote: post #32
amelius wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> get that shit outta there because we can’t own something we stole from someone else How does anyone prove it though? You can say "does that matter?" but once everybody starts doing it, it becomes a different story.

It's partly about Netflix getting sued by someone claiming infringement, but also partly (maybe mostly) about Netflix maintaining their right to sue others for infringement. The scenario looks like this: * Be Netflix. Own some movie or series where the main elements (plot, characters, setting) were GenAI-created. * See someone else using your plot/characters/setting in their own for-profit works. * Try suing that som…

You need to say you improved on the work of AI and it's yours.

Now you can sue

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#94

Post by jaccola »

chemotaxis wrote: post #75
lawlessone wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens to the illustrators now?

They get to frolic on a farm upstate. I'm curious if the parent poster thinks this is unique to film production, because I think you can make the same argument for pretty much any trade. Software engineering is 1% brilliance and 99% grunt work. This doesn't make that software engineers are going to enjoy a world where 99% of their job goes away. Further, I'm not sure the customers will, because the fact that human la…

Should we be optimising for a world that makes software engineers (or animators) in particular happy? The seen is the lost jobs but the unseen is that everyone else gets software (and animated entertainment) cheaper.

As it happens, I don't think "AI" is close to replacing many SEs or animators but in a world where it could, we should celebrate this huge boon to society.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#95

Post by Havoc »

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?

Doesn’t seem likely that adobe has a owned collection of content big enough. Seems very likely that they just deemed the legal risk to be outweighed by commercial opportunity. They kinda had to - a product that generates stuff that gets you sued is not worth paying whatever they charge for their subscription

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#98

Post by aurareturn »

HardCodedBias wrote: post #22

I suspect that if GenAI starts to make content which can grab people's attention, and do it cheaply, then Netflix will become far more accommodating very quickly. They do not want to be disrupted.

They're already disrupted.

Just look at early 20s people. They don't watch shows/movies. They only watch short form videos. Short form videos will mostly be created using GenAI tools as early as 2026.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#99

Post by runeblaze »

kpw94 wrote: post #33
runeblaze wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in this space. In traditional diffusion-based regimes (paired image and text), one can absolutely check the text to remove all occurrences of Indiana Jones. Likewise, Adobe Stock has content moderation that ensures (up to human moderation limit) no dirty content. It is a world without Indiana Jones to the model

> one can absolutely check the text to remove all occurrences of Indiana Jones How do you handle this kind of prompt: “Generate an image of a daring, whip-wielding archaeologist and adventurer, wearing a fedora hat and leather jacket. Here's some back-story about him: With a sharp wit and a knack for languages, he travels the globe in search of ancient artifacts, often racing against rival treasure hunters and battli…

Emmmm sure, but throw this to a human artist who has not heard of Indiana Jones and see if they draw something alike.

Re: Using Generative AI in Content Production

#100

Post by runeblaze »

goatsi wrote: post #36
runeblaze wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in this space. In traditional diffusion-based regimes (paired image and text), one can absolutely check the text to remove all occurrences of Indiana Jones. Likewise, Adobe Stock has content moderation that ensures (up to human moderation limit) no dirty content. It is a world without Indiana Jones to the model

If you ask the Adobe stock image generation for "Adventurer with a whip and hat portrait view , Brown leather hat, jacket, close-up" It gives you an image of Harrison Ford dressed like Indiana Jones. https://stock.adobe.com/ca/images/adventurer-with-a-whip-and...

I don't know the data distribution, but are you sure that's generated by an Adobe model? I can only see that it is in Stock + it is tagged as AI generated (that is, was that image generated by some other model?)

Disclaimer: I used to work at Adobe GenAI. Opinions are of my own ofc.

Post reply on HN