5 ms·

I'd love to have something like Netflix but with every movie ever. I'd even be willing to pay a reasonable fee per movie to stream them. I have hope that comp

by jewel 11y ago

I'd love to have something like Netflix but with every movie ever. I'd even be willing to pay a reasonable fee per movie to stream them. I have hope that companies with a business model like VidAngel could legally provide that. VidAngel is a family-friendly video streaming company that filters movies as they stream. While filtering may not be something that you're interested in personally, what I'd like to draw your attention to is their business model. They sell the movie to the viewer for $20, and then the viewer has the option to sell it back for $19 (SD) or $18 (HD) within 24 hours. I have no idea if this is legal or if they are just under the radar, but so far VidAngel has a wide selection of new releases with a price point that feels reasonable to me personally.

jsmthrowaway 11y ago
https://www.vidangel.com/legal/terms https://www.vidangel.com/legal/terms > VidAngel provides a service that allows its Users to buy or sell physical media, such as DVD and Blu-ray discs. While a User owns any physical media purchased from VidAngel, VidAngel will provide streaming services to permit the User to stream the Video Content associated with that physical media as many times as desired. [...] Using the VidAngel Services, a User may purchase physical media from VidAngel, whom then stores the physical media in VidAngel’s physical media vault. [...] VidAngel also provides shipping and handling service that allows any User to direct VidAngel to ship, to an address identified by the User, any physical media the User owns which is stored in VidAngel’s physical media storage vault. A reasonable shipping and handling fee applies. The amount of the shipping and handling fee, which is generally dependent on shipping location, time, and other shipping and handling circumstances, is disclosed to a User when the User requests the shipping. You are buying a physical copy which they keep, or so they say. It is almost certainly questionably legal, because the license you receive from the film distributor when you purchase a physical copy does not permit you to stream the work, nor does VidAngel's license permit digitizing the work and streaming it out to you simply because you "own" another copy. There's no army of contractors running around inserting your disc in racks upon racks of Blu-Ray players. They digitized and are serving a film from some other copy. That requires special licensing which their pricing scheme does not circumvent, nor the "ownership" (which is flirting with fraud, by my read). Modifying the content with filters, especially user-selected ones, is even worse. Just doing that for broadcast requires special care. I know because I used to edit films for OTA broadcast, and observed the legal side that went into crossing every T. It took months before I was even allowed to load up a film in an editor, because merely importing the content into Avid entails a licensed usage. Film copyright is serious. I don't care how many lawyers vetted this, it will not stand up under scrutiny (and, importantly, I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with that). What concerns me more about VidAngel, though, is their mixed messaging and shadiness. On their about page, they say: > That’s why VidAngel does not claim to be a moral authority. We will never tell you what to watch or what filters to use. You have the choice to watch however the BLEEP you want. Sounds great. But then, one reads this: > As VidAngel has grown and reached a broader audience, a few new customers have begun asking if they can stream on VidAngel without filters. [...] The short answer is, unfortunately, NO. > There are a lot of great streaming websites for unfiltered movies like Amazon, Google Play, and Vudu. Use those sites for watching movies as-is, and use VidAngel for any movies you choose to filter. (Note that the second link asks "why are filters required?" and then does not answer the question.) http://blog.vidangel.com/2016/01/07/vidangel-policy-can-i-watch-vidangel-without-filters/ http://blog.vidangel.com/2016/01/07/vidangel-policy-can-i-wa... https://vidangel.groovehq.com/knowledge_base/topics/why-are-filters-required https://vidangel.groovehq.com/knowledge_base/topics/why-are-... So it sounds like the filtering is important in their interpretation of copyright law (I only say this due to "unfortunately") or they are a moral authority and don't want to admit it to you. Which smells either way. Avoid like the plague and throw a few bucks at someone who flies by day, has a registered DMCA agent, and doesn't employ WHOIS privacy on their domain. What are they hiding? Seriously, if you take money and employ WHOIS privacy, I get immediately suspicious. They're based out of Provo and only reveal that on their Privacy page (legally-required, I'm sure). I can safely predict exactly what is going on based on their being based in Utah and that the owner went to BYU, which is why it's funny that they try so hard to convince you that they're not a moral authority but then don't let you watch uncut content at all, then tell you that you're getting a choice. Quite the spin.
- civilian 11y ago
  You can select a filter like "ending credits". Then you can watch a filtered movie that is essentially unfiltered.
- djloche 11y ago
  Guessing: Their justification is: You're not streaming 'Batman', you're streaming, 'JoeBob's Batman Personal Fair Use Derivative Version'. Whether that would stand up in court, might depend on jurisdiction, judge, jury, etc.
- thomas4019 11y ago
  My guess is there's some provision in the "Family Entertainment and Copyright Act" that they think makes this streaming legal. The text clearly makes the displaying an edited version legal and does talk about transmitted works. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/110 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/110. The key point is in (11). the following are not infringements of copyright: "the making imperceptible, by or at the direction of a member of a private household, of limited portions of audio or video content of a motion picture, during a performance in or transmitted to that household for private home viewing, from an authorized copy of the motion picture"
  - jsmthrowaway 11y ago
    The "authorized copy" being the important part, unless you're clicking "buy" and then getting an e-mail the next day when your copy of the film, as digitized at your direction, is ready to stream. Which would make it pointless, so I'm almost positive they don't do that, and even if they did there is no streaming license of any kind in the whole scenario, so... Good position to be in for them, though, because any type of enforcement will (a) rally a large portion of the community that company represents and (b) start a copyright-vs-family or copyright-vs-church or government-vs-church war, which will be a fountain of bad PR for all involved. (Not that MPAA cares.)
- cpeterso 11y ago
  CLEANFLIX is a documentary (available on Netflix :) about CleanFlicks, a similar editing service (though they sold physical DVDs of the edited films) that was sued by Hollywood. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1007026/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1007026/
forrestthewoods 11y ago
iTunes has almost every movie ever. It costs between $4 and $6 to rent. That's sounds pretty reasonable to me.
- mixmastamyk 11y ago
  Nope, most are only avail to buy as I was reminded when looking for star wars with my daughter, no way I'm paying $20 to see a forty year old movie.
  - theWheez 11y ago
    Try VidAngel.com, $1 per movie after an initial $20 purchase
    - cr1895 11y ago
      >I'm an employee at VidAngel
  - forrestthewoods 11y ago
    iTunes has most movies and most of those movies are available to rent. New releases usually start as purchase only and become available for rent after a month or two. Star Wars is a special case and is not representative of "most".
    - mixmastamyk 11y ago
      That was just my last try, I've found more than half the time I want to see something it is buy only or not there, quite disappointing.
- alexashka 11y ago
  So only those who have money should be able to enjoy Indiana Jones? Your worldview makes total sense... Thankfully, nobody sane agrees with you. Even Apple doesn't agree with you - its success of the iPod and iPhone is predicated upon pirated music and free access to information (the internet)
comex 11y ago
In 2011 a company called Zediva tried something similar, though without the "sell back" or filtering bits. They were successfully sued into oblivion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_Inc._v._WTV_Systems,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_Inc....
dragandj 11y ago
Currently, only torrents seem to offer this. On the technical side. I won't argue about the legal side, which might be different in different parts of the world. If people weren't so moralizing, maybe the movie mafia would listen to the users a bit more.
- m_t 11y ago
  The technical side of torrents is lacking in this case, as a lot of rare, old, or more unheard of movies have no seed at all. This is the main problem that you'll get with torrent if your goal is to have access to "every movie ever".
  - licebmi_at 11y ago
    karagarga is great in that regard. I have a netflix account and also hulu for a while, but torrents are truly the best of all.

by jewel 11y ago

jsmthrowaway 11y ago

https://www.vidangel.com/legal/terms https://www.vidangel.com/legal/terms > VidAngel provides a service that allows its Users to buy or sell physical media, such as DVD and Blu-ray discs. While a User owns any physical media purchased from VidAngel, VidAngel will provide streaming services to permit the User to stream the Video Content associated with that physical media as many times as desired. [...] Using the VidAngel Services, a User may purchase physical media from VidAngel, whom then stores the physical media in VidAngel’s physical media vault. [...] VidAngel also provides shipping and handling service that allows any User to direct VidAngel to ship, to an address identified by the User, any physical media the User owns which is stored in VidAngel’s physical media storage vault. A reasonable shipping and handling fee applies. The amount of the shipping and handling fee, which is generally dependent on shipping location, time, and other shipping and handling circumstances, is disclosed to a User when the User requests the shipping. You are buying a physical copy which they keep, or so they say. It is almost certainly questionably legal, because the license you receive from the film distributor when you purchase a physical copy does not permit you to stream the work, nor does VidAngel's license permit digitizing the work and streaming it out to you simply because you "own" another copy. There's no army of contractors running around inserting your disc in racks upon racks of Blu-Ray players. They digitized and are serving a film from some other copy. That requires special licensing which their pricing scheme does not circumvent, nor the "ownership" (which is flirting with fraud, by my read). Modifying the content with filters, especially user-selected ones, is even worse. Just doing that for broadcast requires special care. I know because I used to edit films for OTA broadcast, and observed the legal side that went into crossing every T. It took months before I was even allowed to load up a film in an editor, because merely importing the content into Avid entails a licensed usage. Film copyright is serious. I don't care how many lawyers vetted this, it will not stand up under scrutiny (and, importantly, I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with that). What concerns me more about VidAngel, though, is their mixed messaging and shadiness. On their about page, they say: > That’s why VidAngel does not claim to be a moral authority. We will never tell you what to watch or what filters to use. You have the choice to watch however the BLEEP you want. Sounds great. But then, one reads this: > As VidAngel has grown and reached a broader audience, a few new customers have begun asking if they can stream on VidAngel without filters. [...] The short answer is, unfortunately, NO. > There are a lot of great streaming websites for unfiltered movies like Amazon, Google Play, and Vudu. Use those sites for watching movies as-is, and use VidAngel for any movies you choose to filter. (Note that the second link asks "why are filters required?" and then does not answer the question.) http://blog.vidangel.com/2016/01/07/vidangel-policy-can-i-watch-vidangel-without-filters/ http://blog.vidangel.com/2016/01/07/vidangel-policy-can-i-wa... https://vidangel.groovehq.com/knowledge_base/topics/why-are-filters-required https://vidangel.groovehq.com/knowledge_base/topics/why-are-... So it sounds like the filtering is important in their interpretation of copyright law (I only say this due to "unfortunately") or they are a moral authority and don't want to admit it to you. Which smells either way. Avoid like the plague and throw a few bucks at someone who flies by day, has a registered DMCA agent, and doesn't employ WHOIS privacy on their domain. What are they hiding? Seriously, if you take money and employ WHOIS privacy, I get immediately suspicious. They're based out of Provo and only reveal that on their Privacy page (legally-required, I'm sure). I can safely predict exactly what is going on based on their being based in Utah and that the owner went to BYU, which is why it's funny that they try so hard to convince you that they're not a moral authority but then don't let you watch uncut content at all, then tell you that you're getting a choice. Quite the spin.

civilian 11y ago
You can select a filter like "ending credits". Then you can watch a filtered movie that is essentially unfiltered.
djloche 11y ago
Guessing: Their justification is: You're not streaming 'Batman', you're streaming, 'JoeBob's Batman Personal Fair Use Derivative Version'. Whether that would stand up in court, might depend on jurisdiction, judge, jury, etc.
thomas4019 11y ago
My guess is there's some provision in the "Family Entertainment and Copyright Act" that they think makes this streaming legal. The text clearly makes the displaying an edited version legal and does talk about transmitted works. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/110 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/110. The key point is in (11). the following are not infringements of copyright: "the making imperceptible, by or at the direction of a member of a private household, of limited portions of audio or video content of a motion picture, during a performance in or transmitted to that household for private home viewing, from an authorized copy of the motion picture"
- jsmthrowaway 11y ago
  The "authorized copy" being the important part, unless you're clicking "buy" and then getting an e-mail the next day when your copy of the film, as digitized at your direction, is ready to stream. Which would make it pointless, so I'm almost positive they don't do that, and even if they did there is no streaming license of any kind in the whole scenario, so... Good position to be in for them, though, because any type of enforcement will (a) rally a large portion of the community that company represents and (b) start a copyright-vs-family or copyright-vs-church or government-vs-church war, which will be a fountain of bad PR for all involved. (Not that MPAA cares.)
cpeterso 11y ago
CLEANFLIX is a documentary (available on Netflix :) about CleanFlicks, a similar editing service (though they sold physical DVDs of the edited films) that was sued by Hollywood. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1007026/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1007026/

forrestthewoods 11y ago

iTunes has almost every movie ever. It costs between $4 and $6 to rent. That's sounds pretty reasonable to me.

mixmastamyk 11y ago
Nope, most are only avail to buy as I was reminded when looking for star wars with my daughter, no way I'm paying $20 to see a forty year old movie.
- theWheez 11y ago
  Try VidAngel.com, $1 per movie after an initial $20 purchase
  - cr1895 11y ago
    >I'm an employee at VidAngel
- forrestthewoods 11y ago
  iTunes has most movies and most of those movies are available to rent. New releases usually start as purchase only and become available for rent after a month or two. Star Wars is a special case and is not representative of "most".
  - mixmastamyk 11y ago
    That was just my last try, I've found more than half the time I want to see something it is buy only or not there, quite disappointing.
alexashka 11y ago
So only those who have money should be able to enjoy Indiana Jones? Your worldview makes total sense... Thankfully, nobody sane agrees with you. Even Apple doesn't agree with you - its success of the iPod and iPhone is predicated upon pirated music and free access to information (the internet)

comex 11y ago

In 2011 a company called Zediva tried something similar, though without the "sell back" or filtering bits. They were successfully sued into oblivion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_Inc._v._WTV_Systems,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_Inc....

dragandj 11y ago

Currently, only torrents seem to offer this. On the technical side. I won't argue about the legal side, which might be different in different parts of the world. If people weren't so moralizing, maybe the movie mafia would listen to the users a bit more.

m_t 11y ago
The technical side of torrents is lacking in this case, as a lot of rare, old, or more unheard of movies have no seed at all. This is the main problem that you'll get with torrent if your goal is to have access to "every movie ever".
- licebmi_at 11y ago
  karagarga is great in that regard. I have a netflix account and also hulu for a while, but torrents are truly the best of all.