[HN Gopher] Australian Open resorts to animated caricatures to b...
___________________________________________________________________
Australian Open resorts to animated caricatures to bypass broadcast
restrictions
Author : defrost
Score : 230 points
Date : 2025-01-16 00:50 UTC (3 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.crikey.com.au)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.crikey.com.au)
| grajaganDev wrote:
| "the Australian Open's own channel has streamed select matches
| using cartoonish avatars of players instead of the actual
| broadcast."
|
| LOL - but why not? They need to do this for every sport.
| defrost wrote:
| There's a startup here for someone . . .
|
| Could even work for CSPAN, QuestionTime, and other political
| coverage ..
| inglor_cz wrote:
| Presidential debates... perhaps the viewers could even choose
| their favorite skin etc.
| bdangubic wrote:
| it is always two clowns debating so this would TOTALLY work
| :)
| Fuzzwah wrote:
| Monetize through hats and outfits...
| lostlogin wrote:
| Get the favoured candidate to say what the viewer wants,
| and have the other person say the opposite. Then the system
| would then be perfect.
| teractiveodular wrote:
| Then plug in another AI that maps the cartoons back to
| deepfakes of the original players, and the circle of life is
| complete.
| nxobject wrote:
| Instead of filling NFL game broadcasts with absurd amounts of
| graphics overlaid on camera footage, we could go the opposite
| direction and show minimalist renderings of live NFL games.
| Revolutionary.
| scripturial wrote:
| I assume eventually there will be an upsell product that
| allows you to watch with a 3D/VR courtside view. I'm kind of
| surprised it doesn't exist already. I think Apple would sell
| a few more headsets if they made this happen.
| YokoZar wrote:
| Somewhat halfway would be a slightly delayed version of the
| game using much better-in-hindsight decisions about which
| camera angles to show during a play.
| Philpax wrote:
| Apple are recording footage - there are immersive videos on
| the AVP for MLS and a few other things, and they're
| tremendous, but nobody is streaming them yet. It's a lot of
| data, which I assume hasn't been cracked yet.
|
| In addition, the real end-goal would be complete 3D
| reconstruction that lets you view the stadium from any
| angle, but I imagine that's a few years away still - lots
| of technical problems to solve to create a scene and stream
| it in real-time.
| crooked-v wrote:
| Yea, there have been a few events where the (very
| expensive) Apple custom 3D rig has appeared courtside
| with no details given. It still remains to be seen what
| they're going to actually put out using it, since the
| Apple 3D content so far is extremely limited.
| ascagnel_ wrote:
| They do, at least in the US, as viewership has dropped and
| leagues have struggled to attract younger viewers.
|
| - The NFL provided a SpongeBob-themed alt-cast for a game last
| weekend -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcHIfPERX0s
|
| - F1 has a similar graphics package+commentary for kids --
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xUBfP2-BEA
|
| - The NHL used their new-ish player position tracking tech to
| produce a real-time (or at least near-real-time) game themed to
| Big City Greens last year, and is set to do another in a few
| weeks -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCupuTnNmQ0
|
| - The NBA has similar position-tracking tech, and used to
| animate a game on Christmas, with Mickey Mouse watching --
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE68Q4oPcPs
| voidfunc wrote:
| Let's do this for baseball.. would probably make everything way
| more interesting
| oplav wrote:
| MLB does something similar called Gameday 3D.
| https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-gameday-3d-guide
|
| The main difference is that it's rendered client side so you
| can control the camera for yourself. You can watch in real time
| during the season, the latency is around 30 seconds behind live
| action.
| mopenstein wrote:
| At one point data for every MLB game was available from
| MLB.com. I started writing a RBI baseball simulator using said
| data and the graphics from the NES game. But then I realized
| I'm not that good at programming but I still think it would've
| been neat to watch game 3 of the 1970 world series as played
| out by 1985 video game graphics.
| airstrike wrote:
| this 100% sounds like a project I'd see at the top of the
| front page on a Saturday
| jitl wrote:
| You can ask Claude / Cursor to do most of it these days
| whartung wrote:
| MLB StarCast generates ~7TB of data per game. I assume the bulk
| of that is video from the high speed cameras.
| pedalpete wrote:
| Doesn't this harm the long-term value of AOs rights sales to the
| broadcasters?
|
| If I know AO is going to broadcast on youtube, why am I as a
| European broadcaster going to pay them the same amount as I did
| when they weren't trying to work against me?
| tsujamin wrote:
| I don't think long-term value is their guiding star, if their
| previous NFT forays are anything to go by
| yardstick wrote:
| Yeah it very much feels like a case of biting the hand that
| feeds. What's the long term goal of AO by doing this?
| zmgsabst wrote:
| Survival amid viewer shifts away from traditional broadcasts.
|
| The people who they sell the rights to are less valuable
| partners, so AO feels comfortable making them a less valuable
| offer while pursuing other audiences.
| tomhoward wrote:
| It's weird how invisible tennis is on television in Europe.
|
| I was traveling in Spain and Italy last year when Roland
| Garros was on, which included major highlights like Nadal's
| (likely) last ever match there and strong performances from
| European players like Alcaraz, Sinner, Tsitsipas and Zverev
| (indeed almost all of the current top ten men are European).
|
| But it was only on the pay channel EuroSport, which many
| homes (and thus Airbnbs) don't seem to have, and was only
| available for us in one upmarket hotel in Spain we stayed in
| for an indulgence for one night.
|
| So the tournament promoters may be making the calculation
| that if the current TV rights holders aren't ultimately
| getting many eyeballs watching their events, they need to do
| other things to build/maintain the profile of the sport with
| a view to one day offering it only via the internet
| (particularly if broadcast TV continues to decline and the
| networks can no longer afford large rights deals).
| Neonlicht wrote:
| In the Netherlands we have moved on from using tax payer
| money for live sports. Public broadcasting shouldn't piss
| away millions on TV rights when the free market can do it.
| tomhoward wrote:
| This seems quite an accusatory comment!
|
| Taxpayer-funded TV stations aren't showing major
| commercial sport in Australia or anywhere else, really.
|
| If it's not exclusive to pay television, it's on free-to-
| air commercial networks. These are fully private
| companies that pay a large license fee to use spectrum,
| and fund their purchase of the sports broadcasting rights
| by selling advertising (usually at peak rates as these
| events are very popular).
|
| In Australia, all four of the Grand Slam tennis
| tournaments are shown on free-to-air commercial TV. No
| taxpayer funding whatsoever but easily accessible to
| everyone.
| nxobject wrote:
| If you missed the best at the bottom, it turns out that Tennis
| Australia does VC investing too now:
|
| > Tennis Australia has funded several startups through its
| venture capital fund as it looks to push into the technology
| space, including a failed flirtation with non-fungible tokens
| (NFTs) that concluded last year.
|
| > The fund, AO Ventures, is worth US$30 million (A$41.8 million)
| and includes support from Tesla chair Robyn Denholm's Wollemi
| Capital Group (which also has investments in the NBL and the
| Sydney Kings), as well as Art Gallery of NSW chair Mark Nelson
| and Packer confidante Ashok Jacob.
| DidYaWipe wrote:
| Love it. I'm surprised they're allowed to use the audio, though.
| In the USA, the licensing notices specifically prohibit use of
| even "the descriptions" that appear in a broadcast.
|
| I suppose they'll close that loophole in other countries.
|
| The whole regime is a big F-U to fans, and to the taxpayers who
| subsidize these teams out the wazoo.
| randall wrote:
| you can't copyright facts. descriptions of the broadcast might
| be copyrighted, but stating facts of the individual events
| can't actually be copyrighted, regardless of what the nfl and
| olympics say in their disclaimer.
| stonesthrowaway wrote:
| > but stating facts of the individual events can't actually
| be copyrighted, regardless of what the nfl and olympics say
| in their disclaimer.
|
| That's interesting. Does that mean someone could go to an NFL
| game and broadcast the play by play of the game? Stating
| facts like: "It's 4th and goal, mahomes drops back and passed
| to kelce for a touchdown". You could legally broadcast that?
| NhanH wrote:
| The corporation certainly can kick you out of the stadium,
| but any law that can make such broadcast illegal is
| probably nigh unconstitutional in the US.
| jkaplowitz wrote:
| It's amazing how many constitutional rights are allowed
| to be restricted by contract in the US. First Amendment
| free speech rights are on that list.
| drysine wrote:
| >First Amendment free speech rights are on that list.
|
| Do you think NDAs should be prohibited?
| umanwizard wrote:
| Obviously rights can be limited by contract. That's what
| a contract is: two parties agreeing to things they're not
| legally forced to do.
| mattclarkdotnet wrote:
| Legally? As in do you have a right to? No. You accepted
| terms and conditions when you bought a ticket, and they
| will prohibit you from broadcasting. So it's a breach of
| contract if you do that.
|
| I do wonder what the intersection of that with viewing
| rights is. You can probably report what you saw on screen
| in real time because that's happening in your home. But who
| really knows...
| Y_Y wrote:
| But that's just a shitty contract of adhesion. There is
| no "meeting of the minds", terms are not negotiated. The
| enforcability depends more on the relative appetites of
| the contracting parties.
|
| The copyright situation is distinct, and may fall under
| "hot news", but isn't affected by a clickwrap on the site
| that sold you the ticket.
|
| (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_News_Se
| rvice_v._... )
| sandworm101 wrote:
| A ticket to a football game will never be considered a
| contract of adhesion. The terms are very much negotiated.
| Nobody has any need to go to a game. Nobody is being
| tricked or forced into anything. It is a one-time ticket
| to watch a show or shows, with an agreement not to
| rebroadcast that show.
| Y_Y wrote:
| Do we live in different realities? I've gone to lots of
| football games of lots of kinds of football and I've
| never negotiated the terms with the venue. I can't even
| remember bringing my lawyer!
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Your negotiation occurs by you deciding to buy or not to
| buy a ticket. You can go to a baseball game instead. Or
| go skiing. There is no power imbalance. Compare
| government-mandated car insurance, or water/sewage
| service to your home, situations where one does not have
| great choice in providers nor can one easily walk away.
| Y_Y wrote:
| Maybe it wasn't clear, but I'm using "contract of
| adhesion" and "negotiation" in their customary legal
| meanings. A negotiation here would be communication
| between the parties in order to decide on the terms of
| the contract. Since this doesn't occur (the venue has
| already written the contract and only offers it as-is)
| the contract is deemed to be one of "adhesion".
| (Definitions vary among jurisdictions, and I'm only
| familiar with some English speaking common law ones.)
| seanhunter wrote:
| Certainly in the US there doesn't need to be a
| negotiation for a contract of adhesion to be binding. Not
| sure where you got that from - I'd be really interested a
| reference that says that. I would have thought a lack of
| negotiation is the defining characteristic of an adhesion
| contract. You take it or leave it - there is no
| negotiation.
|
| A contract of adhesion is not binding in the US if it is
| "Unreasonably one-sided". I think you would really
| struggle to convince any US court that without a right to
| rebroadcast the ticket contract was unreasonable.
| https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/adhesion-
| contract.asp
| Y_Y wrote:
| > Certainly in the US there doesn't need to be a
| negotiation for a contract of adhesion to be binding. Not
| sure where you got that from...
|
| Not sure where you got _that_ from! The original question
| was about the legality of reporting the facts of an
| ongoing game by a spectator. I don 't think that
| contracts of adhesion are in general unenforceable, but
| only that they are not so obviously enforceable as
| standard contracts or copyright law.
|
| In fact I agree with everything you've said, except to
| say that I can imagine an unreasonable clause in a
| contract that prevents you from describing what you'd
| seen. I guess it would depend on the particulars though.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| > I think you would really struggle to convince any US
| court that without a right to rebroadcast the ticket
| contract was unreasonable.
|
| I don't know about that. Suppose something happens at the
| game that reflects poorly on the organizers. Could they
| then demand that all the fans who caught it on their
| phones are not allowed to distribute it? That seems about
| as reasonable as sticking a contract on the purchase of
| any other product that prohibits the customer from
| criticizing the product, i.e. not reasonable at all.
|
| You're also stating it backwards. It isn't that the
| ticket is failing to grant you a right to "rebroadcast"
| the game, it's that it's trying to take away your default
| right to relay things you've seen with your own eyes.
| Notice that it's the presence rather than the absence of
| a term which is causing the issue.
| dehrmann wrote:
| There are tall buildings near some baseball fields that
| can see onto the field, and some even have bleachers on
| the roof. There was no contract with MLB if you watch the
| game from there.
| foobar1962 wrote:
| Famously, again in Australia, the ABC lost the rights to
| broadcast football final games to a commercial station, so
| two ABC comedians (Roy and HG) did a radio show where they
| watched the game on tv live and added their own humorous
| commentary. Viewers would watch the commercial TV channel
| with the sound down and the ABC radio station sound
| instead.
| crooked-v wrote:
| This doesn't have anything to do with copyright. This is
| about contract restrictions, which would usually forbid
| reusing the same audio in a case like this.
| boredhedgehog wrote:
| The audio of a tennis match is so interchangeable, I bet it
| could be stitched together from some standard soundbites on the
| fly if necessary.
|
| * Racket Hit #12 * * Shoe Squeak #03 * * Audience Cheer #10 * *
| "What a great shot!" *
| netsharc wrote:
| That reminds me of the anecdote of UK radio coverage of a
| cricket match in Australia in the early 1900's, the
| broadcasters were reading a transcript (telegraphed?) and
| hitting the table with pencil to simulate the bat hitting the
| ball.
| gcanyon wrote:
| Ronald Reagan used to tell a story like this from his
| sportscasting days. In particular he mentioned one time the
| wire system was delayed, and the only way to keep the
| "game" going without possibly affecting the outcome wrongly
| was to have the batter continuously foul-tip the ball, and
| that time in particular "you've never heard of a player
| executing so many foul tips in a row"
| robertlutece wrote:
| I believe this[1] 99% Invisible podcast episode talks about
| foley during sporting events.
|
| [1] https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/the-sound-of-
| sports/
| n144q wrote:
| For once I think Google's NotebookLM could actually be useful
| for something that benefits humanity.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| I like watching random sports on YouTube so saw this yesterday. I
| could only manage a minute, it was just bizarre. It did make me
| wonder how I could watch the Australia Open, but I wasn't willing
| to subscribe to ESPN to see it.
|
| Not bad advertising really.
| Eridrus wrote:
| ESPN+ is $12 for a month via Hulu. Seems pretty reasonable to
| me.
|
| Finding this info is ridiculous though.
| ANewFormation wrote:
| Of your primary interests in life where would you rank ESPN+?
| Now multiply that by $12 to get an overall impact since
| presumably you would be willing to pay at least as much for
| things you value more highly.
|
| This is why "just" $x per month is, in general, not a
| sustainable model for most things for most people and why
| 'piracy' is booming again.
| apitman wrote:
| Is piracy booming again? Google trends show interest in
| Bittorrent has been flat since 2017.
| shakna wrote:
| Piracy is tending to happen via archive services now,
| rather than torrenting. The pirates are less
| sophisticated, so the distribution methods are "more
| familiar" to them.
| gosub100 wrote:
| This is not my experience, at least for major motion
| picture rips
| defrost wrote:
| Bittorrent use has declined, Piracy hasn't particularly.
|
| https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-is-no-longer-the-
| king-of...
|
| If traffic by application is of interest to anyone, there
| should be a new 2025 Sandvine Global Internet Phenomena
| Report out any day now.
|
| See past reports at: https://www.sandvine.com/phenomena
| NavinF wrote:
| In the 2024 report file sharing was #4 in downstream
| volume. 9% of total compared to 39% for video. Youtube
| was 16%, Netflix 12%. Piracy is still way less common
| compared to streaming, tho I do enjoy the unbeatable
| quality of a 50GB bluray remux
| defrost wrote:
| > Piracy is still way less common compared to streaming
|
| There's been a substantial uptick in pirate streaming -
| dodgy IPTV Internet Protocol Television apps abound.
|
| https://www.sportico.com/business/media/2024/sports-
| stream-c...
|
| Are you limiting "Pirating" to "File sharing" or are you
| including pirate content on demand by means not including
| either bittorrent of file sharing?
| pkkkzip wrote:
| i definitely use free streaming websites when i can't
| find a show or region locked.
|
| strange how much torrenting i used to do. theres just
| more content on youtube thats interesting.
| defrost wrote:
| There's a lot of overlap and it takes time and resources
| to determine the status of content.
|
| eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herb_and_Dorothy
|
| via bitTorrent or eDonkey from MVGROUP:
| https://docuwiki.net/index.php?title=Herb_and_Dorothy
|
| on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYcPLLiGFk
|
| Is that a copyright violation on youtube? Do we care
| enough to find out and or report it?
| NavinF wrote:
| I used pirate streaming websites as a kid, but I thought
| fewer people use them today because the video quality
| sucks. Any stats on the percent of people using them over
| time?
| defrost wrote:
| Not really my focus, you'd have to hunt about.
|
| This is current: According to research
| conducted by NERA Economic Consulting and the US Chamber
| of Commerce's Global Innovation and Policy Center, over
| four-fifths of all online piracy-related activities are
| linked to illegal streaming websites. This trend is
| especially prominent in the TV and movie industry.
|
| ~ https://dataprot.net/statistics/piracy-statistics/
|
| but vague on details, there are many sources quoted by no
| drill down on methodology, context, details that matter
| to nerds, etc.
| gosub100 wrote:
| Modern piracy sites have 1080p standard. Many titles are
| in 4K and 720p.
| DaiPlusPlus wrote:
| Normies don't pirate using BitTorrent, especially for
| live-events streaming (which BitTorrent doesn't support):
| they'll find some dodgy website offering a proxy'd (and
| downsampled) video stream for free (with ads overlayed)
| or for a modest one-time fee via PayPal or a cryptocoin,
| especially when some big event has an extortionate pay-
| per-view fee.
|
| Music piracy was killed-off by Spotify.
|
| For movies/TV, they'll turn to publicly-shared Plex
| libraries - I only found out about this a few weeks ago:
| so in 2025, with more-and-more people having high-upload-
| bandwidth Internet connections it turns out that now you
| don't need a distributed DHT-based swarm of chunks of
| files with hundreds of seeders: all you need is a couple
| generous individuals running an open Plex box that's
| served-up behind a cheap offshore VPN provider, using the
| official Plex App from the Samsung TV app-store.
|
| ...I've no idea how long that's going to last: running
| behind a VPN means the MPAA (et al.) can't do much
| against those sharing their collections publicly like
| they did with BitTorrent (c.f. PeerGuardian), and Plex
| has somehow survived this-far given it does have
| legitimate uses, and the apps don't violate any app-store
| policy I'm aware-of, so I'm concerned the MPAA is going
| to lobby for some laws outright prohibiting
| apps/software/technology that facilitates piracy for
| nontechnical users _somehow_.
|
| (Or they could follow GabeN's advice and start offering a
| superior service and convenience to the user with a
| cooperative consolidation of all rightsholders under a
| single branded tent, but we all know that's not going to
| happen)
| pmontra wrote:
| > Music piracy was killed-off by Spotify
|
| I've seen many places playing music from a YouTube
| playlist, with ads included. And anybody can download the
| audio stream from YouTube with a minimal software setup.
| There used to be browser addons that added a Save As
| button to YouTube pages. I'm not using them, maybe Google
| banned all of them from its store but there are many ways
| to do it.
| n144q wrote:
| > And anybody can download the audio stream from YouTube
| with a minimal software setup.
|
| That's the issue. Almost nobody downloads music anymore,
| however easy it is. Because streaming apps like Spotify
| make the experience so much better. You are in the middle
| of the song and wants to cast to your living room
| speakers? Two clicks. You want to transfer that from your
| phone to your computer? Just a few clicks. Want to
| quickly jump back into an album or get recommendations of
| similar albums? It's all there on the home page. It's
| hard to beat this experience. The only exception I know
| is people who rip/pirate FLAC files because they want the
| best quality possible and don't care about anything else.
| That's like <0.01% of the users these days.
| gosub100 wrote:
| By "places" do you mean physical establishments like bars
| and restaurants?
| xboxnolifes wrote:
| qBittorrent has been on a very gradual climb. Though,
| most people pirate through streaming sites, not torrents.
| mitemte wrote:
| The Australian open runs for two weeks, solely in January,
| so you can subscribe for a single month. ~$12 is roughly
| the price of a single beer at a game. If you can get 2
| weeks of entertainment for $12, I think that's reasonable.
| Neonlicht wrote:
| Sports is a multi billion industry. You want to watch your
| favourite football team you pay up. It seems to be pretty
| sustainable.
| Eridrus wrote:
| This is the sort of thing I used to think when I was a
| student with no money. Now I have a job in tech and I can
| afford many multiples of $12 a month, thousands even.
| mmooss wrote:
| What about your time, which is now more valued by others,
| and probably (hopefully) is extremely valuable to you?
|
| Personally, I wouldn't do it because I don't even want to
| spend the time subscribing (and then unsubscribing, and
| dealing with whatever other issues come up), much less
| watching.
| gosub100 wrote:
| Wait till the H1B come to drive your wage down.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| I have a low tolerance for paying to watch advertisements.
| indigodaddy wrote:
| None of the good matches are on ESPN+ though
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| The way most sports works you can't just get espn+. They
| might not license all the games so you are beholden to
| multiple services to get them. Playoffs are also a mess.
| Services know viewerships are up and rights are traded for
| specific games like cattle. It is the most anti consumer
| thing I've seen trying to follow college football. Easier to
| just watch it at a bar that pays into all of this.
| zfg wrote:
| Nothing like a bit of synthetic tennis:
|
| https://cs.stanford.edu/~haotianz/vid2player/
| courseofaction wrote:
| Is there a level of fidelity at which the animated character
| becomes an issue? Are we going to be seeing unreal engine powered
| photorealistic characters before this loophole is closed?
|
| Does the rights holder have to specify that the motion data is
| not acceptable for rebroadcast?
|
| On the surface this seems like a cheap abuse of loopholes and any
| broadcast partner would be looking at them askance and consulting
| contacts and lawyers...
| numpad0 wrote:
| Animation bone format probably needs a redesign. Human anatomy
| is universally represented as a simple chain of sticks with
| ball joints at the end, which is good enough for many purposes
| but not ideal for closeup shots of muscular figures.
| edgarvaldes wrote:
| Last FIFA World Cup I was looking for recaps on Youtube after the
| day's matches. A lot of results were unofficial videogame
| recreations (think XBox EA Sports FC) of the real match final
| score. It was very weird.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Yeah, they were good enough that it took a while for me to
| realize why they seemed off. Creepy stuff.
| nyjah wrote:
| In case anyone is wondering how to pay for and watch tennis in
| US: there is a tennis tv app. That app allows you to watch the
| men's tour. There's another app, the tennis channel app, that is
| for the women's tour and maybe some other random tourneys.
| Neither of those apps have the grand slams tho, ie the Australian
| open. For that , in the US you need espn plus and can't get away
| from ads. And then there's also the French open. And between nbc,
| peacock and whatever else, beyond pirating the matches, I've
| genuinely been stumped trying to pay for it legitimately.
|
| I saw this the other day on YouTube and it made me turn on the
| real thing.
| mbajkowski wrote:
| This is 100 percent the truth. Watching tennis in the US has
| become increasingly frustrating. I almost long for the old days
| where one could count on one of two channels to always have
| coverage. I wish Amazon, Netflix, YouTube or similar would step
| up and secure all the rights from college to Grand Slam tennis.
| djtango wrote:
| Not quite on the subject of sports, but in Singapore sometimes
| it's really hard to pay to stream/download random movies/shows.
|
| Territorial rights just don't make sense anymore and I will die
| on this hill. The whole point about Netflix was that it proved
| that customers know what they want if you make it available.
|
| We now have global-first distribution channels why is it still
| so slow to disrupt those old creeky TV players
| chii wrote:
| > The whole point about Netflix was that it proved that
| customers know what they want if you make it available.
|
| yes, but the media rights owners want the maximum money from
| their viewers, where as netflix model leaves money on the
| table.
|
| It's why i almost always resort to piracy, now that netflix
| has lost a lot of their licenses for stuff as media rights
| owners start their own walled gardens.
| djtango wrote:
| Does it leave money on the table? Genuine question...
|
| Would traditional media have been able to produce Squid
| Games? I remember Disney suddenly falling over themselves
| to "Me Too" that they did the Korean thing too.
|
| I can see for certain things like sports where there's big
| money, but still seems like having "Domestic" oriented
| distribution management leaves money on the table. When you
| can broadcast to the entire planet what new opportunities
| can you get, will they offset what you give up under the
| old model
| swores wrote:
| > _" Does it leave money on the table? Genuine
| question..."_
|
| Yes it does, 100%.
|
| Once you've got content that people in multiple countries
| want to watch, you've broadly got two options: let
| everyone watch on the same terms, or split it up by
| region. Even Netflix chooses the latter - each country
| that Netflix has customers in has a different price for
| subscribing. (They also have different libraries of media
| that can be watched, but that's mainly as a result of the
| companies they license it from doing different deals for
| different countries, as far as I know Netflix do release
| their own content in all regions at the same time.)
|
| This is because if you don't price it differently, you
| either price it for countries like the US, and make it
| unaffordable - or too expensive to be worth paying for,
| at least - for much of the world, or you price it more
| cheaply and leave money on the table from Americans (and
| other rich countries) who would've been willing to pay
| more.
|
| If the media industry hadn't existed before the internet
| then probably all companies would look more like Netflix
| and the other streaming companies, and it would be simple
| for all content to be licensed globally to the same
| streaming platform. But because both historically and
| still today we have broadcast companies which are country
| specific, any time they get involved (which is pretty
| much every time with the exception of content made by the
| steaming companies themselves), you now not only have
| custom pricing per country but also custom where-can-you-
| watch per country. And while this can be annoying, it
| ultimately leads to the content owners earning more than
| if they didn't do specific deals with specific
| broadcasters and instead sold a single package to a
| single streaming company.
|
| > _" Would traditional media have been able to produce
| Squid Games?"_
|
| I'm not sure what aspect of it you think required
| Netflix, but for decades media companies have been
| producing things with more than a single country in mind
| - whether that's BBC's Top Gear being syndicated to a
| huge number of countries, or Friends being dubbed in
| French, or whatever. I don't see any reason that a BBC or
| Apple or whoever else couldn't have done it, the only
| difference is that BBC doesn't have a global distribution
| platform like Netflix does, so BBC would have had to do
| deals with broadcasters (or streaming companies) for any
| country they want viewers in other than the UK.
| tomhoward wrote:
| The thing is that major live sport is now the only category
| that is successful in the broadcast TV market. Without that,
| many (most?) broadcast networks may as well shut down. We saw
| the best evidence of that recently in Australia when the
| Foxtel pay TV company was sold to European sports streaming
| service DAZN.
|
| Foxtel has dozens of channels including the "agenda-setting"
| Sky News but in the end only its major sports rights deals
| (which it's been bidding up and losing money on for years)
| held any value.
|
| One day we'll all accept that broadcast TV is dead and
| everyone can just have a personalized content feed streamed
| to them, but for as long as broadcast TV license holders keep
| up the fight, it's going to be a frustrating endeavor trying
| to see the sports we want, wherever we are.
| mzs wrote:
| And after you pay for ESPN+ if the match you are interested in
| is actually broadcast you have commercials interrupt game play.
| I paid for this once, never again.
| JimDabell wrote:
| This reminds me of the voice ban Thatcher enacted in the UK back
| in the late 80s relating to the Troubles.
|
| It was illegal to broadcast the voices of representatives of
| specific political groups (apart from during elections). Mainly
| Gerry Adams, who was leader of Sinn Fein, a party strongly linked
| to the IRA and terrorism.
|
| The law was overly specific, so broadcasters, including the BBC,
| just dubbed his voice with a soundalike.
| defrost wrote:
| _Spitting Image_ had a lot of fun during those days with
| puppets and voice actors.
|
| Puppet Gerry Adams made a comeback on radio years later:
| https://youtu.be/vutbvLbRiMk?t=64
| isodev wrote:
| I would love to see a revival of this tbh. Everyone could
| benefit from not hearing or reading <insert rich guy that shall
| not be named> ever again.
| benreesman wrote:
| I wish there was a browser extension where you you ad-block
| people's voices while still hearing the news.
|
| When shit like that works well by default with very little
| effort or downside? That's some AI I can get excited about.
|
| This tennis thing is so cool, I hope we see more shit like
| this where AI comes down on the side of the little guy.
| rainonmoon wrote:
| > I wish there was a browser extension where you you ad-
| block people's voices while still hearing the news.
|
| You're gonna freak out when you find out about reading.
| benreesman wrote:
| That's pretty good, I'm stealing that. You've just
| motivated me to go buy the cord I need for my Kindle and
| probably made my life a few percent better by doing so.
| antihipocrat wrote:
| if (voter == 'left')
|
| then insert(billionaire[0])
|
| else if (voter == 'right')
|
| then insert(billionaire[1])
|
| else insert(billionaire[2])
|
| let billionaire = ['Elon Musk', 'Bill Gates', 'Mark
| Zuckerberg']
| enneff wrote:
| I'm a leftist but not an American and I would prefer not to
| hear from any of those billionaires again, nor any others
| for that matter.
| cropcirclbureau wrote:
| This comment is a perfect encapsulation of the ridiculously
| simple understanding of the political landscape that seems
| to be rampant among the tech industry.
| alexey-salmin wrote:
| Surely nothing bad can come out of laws impeding the
| expression of opinions
| Ylpertnodi wrote:
| The opinions were expressed, just with an actor's voice.
| swores wrote:
| The person you replied to was themselves replying to
| someone talking about a theoretical future ban, not the
| past ban, and since that first person was talking about a
| positive of no longer hearing from unspecified famous
| people they clearly weren't talking about a law that
| would once again make it easy for impersonators to make
| it so that people still hear the same views in the same
| voices just technically spoken by actors.
| userbinator wrote:
| I wonder if the relative acceptance of this has anything to do
| with the popularity of "vtubers".
| wdutch wrote:
| I think vtuber sports could be an interesting genre! Real
| displays of athleticism and sportsmanship but with digital
| effects to augment it. Maybe it's already been done, I'm not
| particularly in touch with online trends.
| aktuel wrote:
| I guess this is for the kind of person who thinks that Esports is
| sports.
| worthless-trash wrote:
| I expected wii sports music on the introduction. Was
| disappointed.
| verisimi wrote:
| Nick Kyrgios isn't actually black though. Wierd.
| fshafique wrote:
| With all the motion tracking they're doing, they could replicate
| this in a VR environment. You could watch the cartoonified game
| like you're actually there.
| ascagnel_ wrote:
| The NHL[0] and NBA[1] have already done officially-sanctioned
| cartoonified simulcasts.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCupuTnNmQ0
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE68Q4oPcPs
| amelius wrote:
| How would they animate this:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD-FkGeeR-U
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-01-19 23:01 UTC)