Microsoft patents device to stop playback if too many people are on the couch

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18477 posts) -

http://www.gamespot.com/news/microsoft-patents-tech-that-watches-viewers-6399616

This is not a joke: I checked and April 1st is still months away. Microsoft has patented a device that counts the people sitting in front of the TV and negates access to media content if too many people are watching until you pay more money.

Basically, in the (near?) future, shows and movies you rent on XBOX, Netflix or what have you, may come with a user limit, past which playback will stop and you will need to pay extra money for it to resume. Simply put, the more people you invite to sit in front of the TV, the more you're going to pay.

The way I see it, this is an orwellian nightmare: imagine if you decide to rent a movie and unexpected guests comes visiting and you welcome them on the couch to share the movie, at which point playback stops until you pay extra for each new viewer.

Also, this sounds a lot like a rib of Kinect technology and we all know how well that crap works, right? Imagine the stupid device mistaking a table lamp for a head or a coat rack for a person and negating playback out of the blue. And let's not even go on the potential privacy violation of having a camera constantly watching you whenever you want to watch something.

Is there no bottom to the Microsoft barrel? And then they complain about piracy.

#2 Posted by Metamania (12010 posts) -

It's not going to happen. People are not going to pay more money for something like this.

#3 Posted by coasterguy65 (5966 posts) -

Not going to happen. It would be too easy to trick. Just disconnect the Kinect, or if that doesn't work aim it towards a part of the room that only has one or two people in it. Seriously companies patent stuff they never use all the time. I know MS is greedy, but this kind of stuff will never fly with consumers.

#4 Posted by Justforvisit (5047 posts) -

If that REALLY would come true, let's just all have sex in front of it all the time, just to make the people who'd have to survey it reeeeaaaallyyyyyy sick all the time.

REVENGE in style :cool:

#5 Posted by Duckyindiana (2288 posts) -
Hmmm don't think it will be used and i'm sure there was 3 posts about this yesterday!
#6 Posted by Canvas_Of_Flesh (4052 posts) -
I doubt it would come to fruition, but when I read this article this morning, the calisthenics scene in 1984 immediately popped into my head.
#7 Posted by Mochyc (4421 posts) -
Nobody is going to force you to use kinect. Maybe it's a pricing strategy: pay less if you want to watch it alone, but you'll have to have kinect on as "proof"; or just pay the regular price, sans kinect, and let as many people as you want watch it.
#8 Posted by Metamania (12010 posts) -

I doubt it would come to fruition, but when I read this article this morning, the calisthenics scene in 1984 immediately popped into my head.Canvas_Of_Flesh

What calistentics scene in 1984?

#9 Posted by Jackc8 (8500 posts) -

That's kind of funny really. I'd make it so the first half hour of a movie would play just fine, and then a message will come up on the screen demanding more money.

People will grumble and then pay it.

#10 Posted by Bigboi500 (29914 posts) -

Now watch Kinect 2 be a standard part of the Xbox 720.

#11 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18477 posts) -
A precisation for the people who didn't get it: this is NOT a kinect thing. I simply presume it will use kinect technology, but it would be a separate thing altogether.
#12 Posted by Vari3ty (11111 posts) -

The thing is a terrible idea and a huge violation of privacy, I agree, but I can't imagine there not being a consumer outrage over this if it was implemented. So what, now that the whole family wants to watch a movie, parents are going to be charged more? This is simply ridiculous.

#13 Posted by Lucky_Krystal (1730 posts) -

There is no way that Xbox owners will let this slide. Ever. If this is true then Microsoft is digging its own grave.

#14 Posted by flipin_jackass (9726 posts) -
Fine with me, I'll just stick a mug shot of me in front of the camera device while my family of 11 watch a movie.
#15 Posted by Archangel3371 (15643 posts) -
Not going to happen.
#16 Posted by Canvas_Of_Flesh (4052 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canvas_Of_Flesh"]I doubt it would come to fruition, but when I read this article this morning, the calisthenics scene in 1984 immediately popped into my head.Metamania

What calistentics scene in 1984?

It's shortly after Winston Smith is introduced. He's awoken by his telescreen for morning exercises. Apparently he doesn't do them well enough and the woman televising the exercises reprimands him for it. I'm speaking of the novel, I'm not sure if the film has that scene or not.
#17 Posted by Blueresident87 (5339 posts) -

Unless it is mandatory to have the console connected to the internet at all times, this doesn't even make sense.

#18 Posted by tribalTox (802 posts) -

I think M$ is just doing the big business thing and patenting something useless, thats never going be used (god I'm hoping it won't be used), so its competitors can't use a similar idea.

#19 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18414 posts) -
It wouldn't happen.. no one would buy kinect or use it. You would just use netflix on your 360 like normal without any limits.
#20 Posted by guynamedbilly (12965 posts) -
I would say that people won't stand for it, but if they can stand the outrageous prices it takes to actually rent a movie from the store, yes, plenty of people would pay for it.
#21 Posted by PetJel (3723 posts) -

This would be pretty fun if it were to happen. Imagine the riots.

#22 Posted by SouL-Tak3R (4024 posts) -

That is pretty stupid. Always trying to control.

#23 Posted by c_rakestraw (14682 posts) -

People patent all sorts of weird gizmos that never see the light of day. Sony patented a universal game controller a couple years ago and there hasn't been any progress on that front. So until there's some signs of this thing actually existing, I won't bother worrying about it.

#24 Posted by Swanogt19 (24159 posts) -
Oh Hell no.
#25 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -
I can see visiting people being fun with this.. "Hey is that the new twilight movie? Think i'll join you guys..." GET OUTTA HERE WHAT U THINK IM MADE OF MONAH?!?!3k4,jm32kl23 Also Twilight is dumb.
#26 Posted by YoshiYogurt (5976 posts) -
Buying video on a video GAME console is a waste anyway. Never using Kinect anyway
#27 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18477 posts) -

Also Twilight is dumb.GodModeEnabled
Dumb people need entertainment too. You don't feed foie-gras to a cow, am I right?

#28 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Also Twilight is dumb.Black_Knight_00

Dumb people need entertainment too. You don't feed foie-gras to a cow, am I right?

I dunno...... not sure what cows eat.... hang on and let me give yo girlfriend a call! OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHadfd sdfkwel;ke roflsdkmflnmewklnmerofolrlolololololol pwnt.
#29 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18477 posts) -
[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Also Twilight is dumb.GodModeEnabled

Dumb people need entertainment too. You don't feed foie-gras to a cow, am I right?

I dunno...... not sure what cows eat.... hang on and let me give yo girlfriend a call! OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHadfd sdfkwel;ke roflsdkmflnmewklnmerofolrlolololololol pwnt.

She's more likely to tell you what poison snakes eat! OOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I so just 1upped you :D
#30 Posted by SciFiCat (1750 posts) -
George Orwell's worst visions come true, all the cameras in your home's devises turning on without your control, monitoring who you are, who you are with, what you wear, what you eat and drink, etc. This is one of the most messed up patents I've ever seen disclosed regarding violation of intimacy. I know it is "just a patent" but it only takes people with little scruples and ample greed to make the decision to include this tech on the next generation of MS hardware. The idea of Kinect is a despicable one to begin with, this is even worse.
#31 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18477 posts) -
George Orwell's worst visions come true, all the cameras in your home's devises turning on without your control, monitoring who you are, who you are with, what you wear, what you eat and drink, etc. This is one of the most messed up patents I've ever seen disclosed regarding violation of intimacy. I know it is "just a patent" but it only takes people with little scruples and ample greed to make the decision to include this tech on the next generation of MS hardware. The idea of Kinect is a despicable one to begin with, this is even worse.SciFiCat
I agree. Though I'd be interested in hearing the reasons why you think kinect is despicable (not that I disagree with the statement, mind you)
#32 Posted by punkpunker (3321 posts) -

i wonder if any thing that resembles people or heads in posters is going to it stop playing...

#33 Posted by SciFiCat (1750 posts) -
[QUOTE="SciFiCat"]George Orwell's worst visions come true, all the cameras in your home's devises turning on without your control, monitoring who you are, who you are with, what you wear, what you eat and drink, etc. This is one of the most messed up patents I've ever seen disclosed regarding violation of intimacy. I know it is "just a patent" but it only takes people with little scruples and ample greed to make the decision to include this tech on the next generation of MS hardware. The idea of Kinect is a despicable one to begin with, this is even worse.Black_Knight_00
I agree. Though I'd be interested in hearing the reasons why you think kinect is despicable (not that I disagree with the statement, mind you)

My reasons for thinking the Kinects is despicable are two fold: First; a personal reasons why I love video games is because these are mentally stimulating experiences and I love the responsiveness and precision a controller offers and the depth of involvement and immersion the player can achieve with this method. When this communication between game-controller-player is in tune, then it is as if the interface it is not even there. It is as is your thoughts are transferred from your brain to the screen, because when a player is really involved with a game, you are not even thinking you are holding a controller or ponder which button to press, you just do it without even thinking it. Kinect is nothing like that, because its "no controller" approach means that the connection and immersion with the game gets lost because the player becomes too self aware of its own body and the space the gestures and sweeping movements performed occupy in the real world. Trying to translate those very deliberate movements to a devise that has proven time and time again that it is a lag ridden and inaccurate way to interface with games is utterly frustrating. We are a tactile species, we need to hold things in our hands, to touch, that is how brain evolved to use tools. Kinect is asking us to grasp at thin air, depriving us of said tactile connection and feedback. It is literally counter intuitive and the player cannot immerse with the game because there is that immediate awareness that its intentions and movements don't translate to the on screen actions accurately. Furthermore, developers have to waste their time and resources making overtly simplified and glorified collections of mini games that have little to no depth, that work half of the time just to cater to an audience that have no personal investment to video games to begin with, they could be entertained with any other form of media just the same. In short, Kinect is a product aimed at people that don't consider games as a main source of entertainment. The second reason why I feel Kinect is despicable is because it is a freaking camera made by MS sitting right in the middle of your living room. Please tell me I'm not alone thinking that concept is upon itself creepy as hell. Can you say with all certainty that the Kinect is not taking snap shoots of you and your kids-friends-family when it is not supposed to? Can you really trust that thing knowing now that the patent to make a head count of the people on your living room exist?
#34 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -
[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"][QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] Dumb people need entertainment too. You don't feed foie-gras to a cow, am I right?Black_Knight_00
I dunno...... not sure what cows eat.... hang on and let me give yo girlfriend a call! OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHadfd sdfkwel;ke roflsdkmflnmewklnmerofolrlolololololol pwnt.

She's more likely to tell you what poison snakes eat! OOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I so just 1upped you :D

:lol:
#35 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18477 posts) -
[QUOTE="SciFiCat"]My reasons for thinking the Kinects is despicable are two fold: First; a personal reasons why I love video games is because these are mentally stimulating experiences and I love the responsiveness and precision a controller offers and the depth of involvement and immersion the player can achieve with this method. When this communication between game-controller-player is in tune, then it is as if the interface it is not even there. It is as is your thoughts are transferred from your brain to the screen, because when a player is really involved with a game, you are not even thinking you are holding a controller or ponder which button to press, you just do it without even thinking it. Kinect is nothing like that, because its "no controller" approach means that the connection and immersion with the game gets lost because the player becomes too self aware of its own body and the space the gestures and sweeping movements performed occupy in the real world. Trying to translate those very deliberate movements to a devise that has proven time and time again that it is a lag ridden and inaccurate way to interface with games is utterly frustrating. We are a tactile species, we need to hold things in our hands, to touch, that is how brain evolved to use tools. Kinect is asking us to grasp at thin air, depriving us of said tactile connection and feedback. It is literally counter intuitive and the player cannot immerse with the game because there is that immediate awareness that its intentions and movements don't translate to the on screen actions accurately. Furthermore, developers have to waste their time and resources making overtly simplified and glorified collections of mini games that have little to no depth, that work half of the time just to cater to an audience that have no personal investment to video games to begin with, they could be entertained with any other form of media just the same. In short, Kinect is a product aimed at people that don't consider games as a main source of entertainment. The second reason why I feel Kinect is despicable is because it is a freaking camera made by MS sitting right in the middle of your living room. Please tell me I'm not alone thinking that concept is upon itself creepy as hell. Can you say with all certainty that the Kinect is not taking snap shoots of you and your kids-friends-family when it is not supposed to? Can you really trust that thing knowing now that the patent to make a head count of the people on your living room exist?

While I agree that a standard two-sticks controller is the only viable way to do gaming right today, I still think kinect technology had the potential to do good things which, just like motion controls in general, it completely failed to deliver. I believe the main mistake they made was trying to mold games around this wobbly technology rather than using it to improve games. Playing Rainbox Six with a standard controller and being able to make gestures to order your team around would have been great, but microsoft has instead forced developers to make kinect-only games to sell the device. Combine this with the fact kinect simply doesn't work, which has severely limited the ability for developers to make something with it and you get a plethora of miserable applications with the shallowness of a dry puddle. The privacy factor is even less far fetched than it looks: I remember trying kinect adventures at a shopping mall a year ago and discovering the damn thing took pictures of me and every other person who used the device and stored them in a folder on the store's XBOX. So yes, it has the potential to spy on you and most consoles are connected to the internet at all times, plus microsoft has a history of spying on people (see early versions of Windows XP and the recent XBOX version of internet explorer, which can send your browsing history to microsoft).
#36 Posted by C2N2 (759 posts) -

They are a technological company... They have thousands of patents... They just get a patent on it because they made it and are future proofing...

20 years from now you might be able to turn your living room into a theater and pay to watch new movies still in theaters and this tech could come into play somehow (who knows)? But if it does and movie companies want to do it, guess what Microsoft has the patent and gets paid... Its just what they do...

#37 Posted by Vari3ty (11111 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="SciFiCat"]George Orwell's worst visions come true, all the cameras in your home's devises turning on without your control, monitoring who you are, who you are with, what you wear, what you eat and drink, etc. This is one of the most messed up patents I've ever seen disclosed regarding violation of intimacy. I know it is "just a patent" but it only takes people with little scruples and ample greed to make the decision to include this tech on the next generation of MS hardware. The idea of Kinect is a despicable one to begin with, this is even worse.SciFiCat
I agree. Though I'd be interested in hearing the reasons why you think kinect is despicable (not that I disagree with the statement, mind you)

My reasons for thinking the Kinects is despicable are two fold: First; a personal reasons why I love video games is because these are mentally stimulating experiences and I love the responsiveness and precision a controller offers and the depth of involvement and immersion the player can achieve with this method. When this communication between game-controller-player is in tune, then it is as if the interface it is not even there. It is as is your thoughts are transferred from your brain to the screen, because when a player is really involved with a game, you are not even thinking you are holding a controller or ponder which button to press, you just do it without even thinking it. Kinect is nothing like that, because its "no controller" approach means that the connection and immersion with the game gets lost because the player becomes too self aware of its own body and the space the gestures and sweeping movements performed occupy in the real world. Trying to translate those very deliberate movements to a devise that has proven time and time again that it is a lag ridden and inaccurate way to interface with games is utterly frustrating. We are a tactile species, we need to hold things in our hands, to touch, that is how brain evolved to use tools. Kinect is asking us to grasp at thin air, depriving us of said tactile connection and feedback. It is literally counter intuitive and the player cannot immerse with the game because there is that immediate awareness that its intentions and movements don't translate to the on screen actions accurately. Furthermore, developers have to waste their time and resources making overtly simplified and glorified collections of mini games that have little to no depth, that work half of the time just to cater to an audience that have no personal investment to video games to begin with, they could be entertained with any other form of media just the same. In short, Kinect is a product aimed at people that don't consider games as a main source of entertainment. The second reason why I feel Kinect is despicable is because it is a freaking camera made by MS sitting right in the middle of your living room. Please tell me I'm not alone thinking that concept is upon itself creepy as hell. Can you say with all certainty that the Kinect is not taking snap shoots of you and your kids-friends-family when it is not supposed to? Can you really trust that thing knowing now that the patent to make a head count of the people on your living room exist?

This is my biggest issue. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I don't like the idea of cameras in my home that could possibly be monitoring me. If the use of Kinect is mandatory with the next Xbox, I will not be getting the system.

#38 Posted by TrainerCeleste (1774 posts) -
That would be a joke, I can see if you are hosting an event in which you are selling things to people and using the program to get them there. But for family viewing thats stupid. If anything I would just tilt the camera to the side or disconnect it or put a paper in front of it.
#39 Posted by lloveLamp (2890 posts) -
well, I have no friends so this doesn't affect me.
#40 Posted by mariokart64fan (19495 posts) -

another problem i can for see if , some one happens to own more then one tv and their both in the same vincinity it sees the extra person even though they aint watching , you gotta pay more because their there

this does sound like a privacy concern -how can it not be

imagine 2 people making love in front of it haha

#41 Posted by mjf249 (2856 posts) -
I don't think it will happen but who knows. I love what Microsoft brought to the table when it first introduced the Xbox back in 2001, but it is at times it has also turn into a milking machine. I love my Xbox, but if they did I would probably stop buying it. It's bad enough you have to have XBL Gold to stream and have access to certain services. But than again that's why I have my PS3 for streaming and so forth. Hopefully it doesn't come true, but I doubt it.
#42 Posted by MirkoS77 (7484 posts) -

It's not going to happen. People are not going to pay more money for something like this.

Metamania
Agreed. There's a line consumers won't cross, and something like this is LONG past it.