VidAngel: filtered online streaming movies

[iamse7en]

Figured some here would appreciate this brand new service that launched this week. I know the founders - great group of creative guys with a lofty goal: cleaning up sex, violence, and profanity from online streaming video (including movies and tv shows). It's a really slick service and it's FREE. (If you want access to new releases, which costs VidAngel more $$$ to filter, you need a premium account.) You can customize/specify exactly what you want shown or not shown. Right now, it only works with Google Play or YouTube (because it's an open API). They hope to get enough attention to attract the bigger partners such as Netflix. They already have hundreds of movies for you to choose from, and you can either buy/rent them through Google Play. The available ecosystems (or your ability to watch them via other avenues with greater capabilities) will expand later this year.

Go to VidAngel.com. And get updates through Facebook and their blog.



How movies are filtered:

[JohnnyL]

Awesome! Let's see how long it lasts before Hollywood shuts it down...

[jdawg1012]

Awesome! Let's see how long it lasts before Hollywood shuts it down...

Probably not long. From what I understand of the subject, this is possibly illegal. "Cleanflicks" (sp) was shut down because they lacked the legal authority to edit movies that they didn't own the copyright to. They were essentially doing what these people are: taking someone's copyrighted property, and altering it. Whether or not that should be illegal isn't something I'm going to address now, for lack of time...

VidAngel **MAY** be able to fight it depending upon the content they're using, and the fact that it's a "free" service. But I'm guessing it'll be shut down straight away. The only company (or companies, IIRC they may be separate) that I know that has successfully gotten away with this type of service is the one that uses your own media, which you have already purchased (DVD player, or VHS), and either skipped scenes, or muted the sound, respectively. They didn't actually alter the media, just fast forwarded/skipped what was already there or muted it. If that's what "VidAngel" is doing, is yet to be seen. And if so, they'll have to make a pretty convincing argument to the courts/people that own the copyrights.

Putting it into an easier-to-understand analogy, if you already own a copy of a book, and you hire someone to go through with a magic marker and cross out offending items, that's one thing. However, if you don't own a book, and someone re-writes it, minus the offending items (whatever they may be), and publishes it anew which you then purchase/rent/etc., that's a no-no. That's what Cleanflicks did. This may be something else, entirely, since technology has changed, but the argument will really probably boil down to whether this is one of the two above mentioned cases (whether they're altering a work you already "own," or if they are "republishing" something in edited form).

It seems that could be interpreted as to what these people are doing, also (though I can't say for sure). Because each time you access a stream, you could legally argue that they're "publishing" an altered work, over and over, and over, again. This is probably going to be deemed a blatant copyright violation. One may or may not agree with the principle, but as the law stands, that's my take on how it might shake down. You can thank Sonny Bono (posthumously) largely for our abominable copyright laws. But one way or another, and for good or for evil, I'm pretty sure these guys will be shut down eventually, if not sued and held liable for exorbitant amounts of money. I'm willing to bet the streaming services they're trying to partner with (Ie. Netflix) won't come near them with a 100 ft. pole. This may be a legal gray area, though, if they use an "app" to merely alter the playback of something you've already own.

Please note: I only watched the second video on the thread. I don't know the back end of this particular business, and if they've secured any copyrights to the media, etc., or if they're merely altering the interface with content that you already have running (Ie. You've streamed/buffered the entire Youtube video, and this only affects the playback of said video). If so, then disregard this post. (Though I think even if that's the case, it's murky waters for a major company, like Netflix to wade into, and still think they may not until they're certain they won't lose more content, or be sued by the production companies). With the advent of "apps" a lot of new ideas and interpretations are being addressed, though the courts are usually years behind, with good reason (technology changes daily). I guess we'll see what happens!

[Ratbag]

This is all well and good. I'm glad someone is taking seriously the problem of nudity, profanity and violence in movies, but so what? Does anyone really think that filtering out only the nudity and profanity will even help, let alone cure the problem of immorality, pornography, adultery, divorce, etc.? You’re dreaming if you think this. It goes so much deeper. It starts at modesty.

The wisdom of the world says, “Flaunt it if you’ve got it.” Unfortunately, too many Latter-day Saints are listening to the wisdom of the world. Immodestly isn’t creeping into the church, it’s charging in like a bull in a china shop. Too many men and women think that showing a little leg, a little cleavage or wearing tight fitting clothes is no problem. Hey, what can it hurt? How about your chances of gaining the Celestial Kingdom?

If anyone, male or female, wears, advocates or condones immodest dress, you have eliminated your chances of returning to your Heavenly Father. In order to achieve the Celestial Kingdom, you must obey the law of chastity. In the April 2007 General Conference, Elaine S. Dalton gave us the counsel endorsed by the prophet that, “Virtue encompasses modesty—in thought, language, dress, and demeanor. And modesty is the foundation stone of chastity.”

At the April 2004 BYU Women’s Conference, Sister Dalton also said, “Modesty extends to our actions, our speech, our attitudes, our thoughts, even our desires. Our modesty is a reflection of our desire to follow a prophet of God. I repeat, being modest is more than how we dress. Modesty is an outward manifestation of our inward commitment and understanding.”

Presumably, VidAngel is a great service, but for us to use it, we are requiring another person to watch these movies ahead of us to make the edits necessary to allow a “good” Latter-day Saint to watch it. Well, what about the person making the edit? Aren’t we subjecting that person to the same disgusting filth we don’t want to watch? If we do this, are we any better than the people who promote the filth in the first place?

The only thing to do is boycott altogether the garbage coming out of Hollywood. Boycott any movie, TV, radio or print that promotes through action or apathetic inaction the introduction of anything inappropriate or immodest into our lives.

My wife and I do not watch nor allow in our home, any of the garbage so many people consider normal.

[iamse7en]

VidAngel **MAY** be able to fight it depending upon the content they're using, and the fact that it's a "free" service. But I'm guessing it'll be shut down straight away. The only company (or companies, IIRC they may be separate) that I know that has successfully gotten away with this type of service is the one that uses your own media, which you have already purchased (DVD player, or VHS), and either skipped scenes, or muted the sound, respectively. They didn't actually alter the media, just fast forwarded/skipped what was already there or muted it. If that's what "VidAngel" is doing, is yet to be seen. And if so, they'll have to make a pretty convincing argument to the courts/people that own the copyrights.

It's not yet to be seen. It's known exactly what they're doing. All they're doing is giving you an access to a powerful remote (plugin) that allows you to fast forward (skip) or mute sections of unedited content. The content comes unedited/unfiltered from Google Play, and you pre-select when to mute or skip certain sections. It's completely legal and similar to the ClearPlay model (which still exists but is dying because they only deal in hardware and physical dvds). ClearPlay is trying to sue VidAngel because they want a monopoly on the idea of skipping or muting any type of explicit content.

[jockeybox]

If anyone, male or female, wears, advocates or condones immodest dress, you have eliminated your chances of returning to your Heavenly Father. In order to achieve the Celestial Kingdom, you must obey the law of chastity.

Yikes. That cloak of charity you are wearing is a little short. You should go change it out for something with a little more coverage!

Remember that Isaiah walked naked a barefoot for three years. Not very chaste, right?

Judge a little more easily, it'll fair you well in the next life.