How Hollywood Suppresses Filtering

Dear VidAngel customers,

 

Some of you have asked why we filed an antitrust suit against the studios. Here’s the simple answer:

Hollywood claims we don’t pay them for their movies. But the truth is, they refuse to accept our payments. (We still pay them though. Read on.)

 

Beginning in 2014, VidAngel tried to pay the studios 4 different ways. Not only did they reject every one, but then they sued us for allegedly not paying them. So Hollywood’s like the teenage girl who keeps turning down the nice guy, then complains that he never asks her out, then sues him for copyright infringement.

Look, we love Hollywood. We’re glad they make movies. But the fact is, they seem to be working to shut down the filtering industry. Here are the 4 times they rejected our payments.

 

Method 1: Traditional streaming license

VidAngel offered to buy traditional streaming licenses from the studios, but the studios said no. We get it — why partner with such a small company? Except we also reached out through a bigger company called Google. (A cool emerging tech company. Bing it.)

Google approached the studios with a plan to add VidAngel filters to Google Play movies, potentially bringing millions of new viewers to the licensed Google Play streams. The studios turned them down almost immediately.

And bear in mind, the U.S. filtering market is estimated at over 60 million people, according to National Research Group. So if Hollywood said no, they likely either…

 

  1. Want to block the filtering industry from entering the streaming age, OR…
  2. Want to avoid money and its corrupting influence

 

For now, we’ll give the benefit of the doubt and say #2.

Anyway, we also tried…

 

Method 2: YouTube extension

We created a platform that allowed viewers to buy a movie on YouTube, then buy the filter at VidAngel and add it to the movie. We hoped to bring Hollywood more money by attracting new viewers to their content.

Then the studios told Google (YouTube’s owner) that collaborating with VidAngel was a violation of contract, and forced them to withdraw crucial tech support. All of a sudden this model wouldn’t work.

“Wow,” we said. “We admire Hollywood’s moral commitment to not making money.” It certainly explained the release of Fantastic Four.

Nevertheless, we kept trying.

 

Method 3: Buying discs straight from the studios

This time we wrote to the studios asking to buy DVDs and Blu-Rays from them directly, so our customers could buy and sell back those movies online. This model would make money for Hollywood on each title, without giving a cut of sales to WalMart.

Some studios said no. Most never responded.

“Man,” we said, “their hatred of lucre is incorruptible. No wonder they can’t afford to pay actresses the same as actors.”

So nowadays we use…

 

Method 4: Our current model



VidAngel now buys DVDs and Blu-Rays from retail stores, then sells movies directly to customers. Hollywood gets reimbursed by the sheer number of movies we buy (we spend around ⅓ of our revenue on discs). And every VidAngel movie being watched is a licensed copy. It’s literally the only legal model that doesn’t require Hollywood’s cooperation.

We felt proud of ourselves for finding a way to pay Hollywood, despite their best efforts to not be paid. Then they sued us.

 

And here’s where things really get ironic.

Not only did the studios show significant hypocrisy in suing VidAngel for not buying licenses that they refused to sell — but they also claimed that Method 4 was illegal and that Method 2 was the legal way to filter streamed movies. To which we said, “Homeboy, we tried Method 2 and you shut it down!” We’re paraphrasing here.

Hollywood also implied that they sued us as soon as they learned we were using Method 4. The truth is that Albert Podrasky, Disney’s director of anti-piracy, has been using a secret VidAngel account to monitor us for a full year! (Though we’re not sure we understand his job, ‘cause he never watches movies about pirates.) The point is, it seems like Hollywood didn’t sue till we were getting too big for their comfort.

 

Anyway, the studios’ lawsuit has made us question our base assumptions. Maybe Hollywood actually likes money, and they’ve been shutting us down because they hate filtering. If that’s the case, we respect their opinion — filtering’s not for everybody. But they should come out and admit that they hate filtering, instead of pretending the case is about money.

In short, it seems to us that Hollywood is colluding to undermine the filtering industry — despite Congress passing the Family Movie Act to make that industry a reality. (In fact, Congress passed the law because Hollywood was trying to crush filtering.) That’s why we filed an antitrust counterclaim.

So that’s the scoop, VidAngel fans. Wish us luck in the antitrust suit. In the meantime, keep watching movies. We’ll keep you posted.

#SaveFiltering

Disney, Lucasfilm, Warner Brother, & Twentieth Century Fox vs. VidAngel

Disney, Lucasfilm, Warner Brother, & Twentieth Century Fox vs. VidAngel

Movies Coming in September

Go to new releases >

New releases coming in September, 2016.

TV Shows coming in September, 2016.

Doctor Who seasons 1-9
House of Cards season 4

More movies coming in September, 2016.

American Outlaws
An American Tail: Fivel Goes West
Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part 2
Beaches
Beau Brummell (1954)
Bloodsport
Bowfinger
Bull Durham
Charlotte’s Web
Chasing Mavericks
Conan the Barbarian (2011)
Daddy Day Care
David and Bathsheba
Donnie Brasco
Enough
Entrapment
Event Horizon
Evil Dead II
Executive Decision
First Knight
Flash Gordon
Fools Rush In
Free Birds
From Here to Eternity
Gentlemen Prefer Blondes
Getaway
Ghost Rider
Goodnight Mommy (2015)
Guys and Dolls (1955)
Happy Feet
Harold and Maude
Home Again
In the Line of Fire
Jack and Jill
Joe Versus the Volcano
Justice League vs Teen Titans
Justice League: The New Frontier
King Kong
Knock Knock
Laws of Attraction
Maid in Manhattan (2002)
Monster House
Niagara
One Fine Day
Only Lovers Left Alive
Rebel Without a Cause
Rookie of the Year
Shining Through
Sideways
Snakes on a Plane
Some Like It Hot
Speed Racer
Spy Kids (2001)
Step Up 2: The Streets (2008)
Step Up 3
Step Up: Revolution
Surrogates
The American President
The Artist
The Back-Up Plan
The Graduate
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
The Losers
The Manchurian Candidate (1962)
The Meaning of Life
The Misfits
The Pink Panther (1964)
The Pink Panther Strikes Again
The Return of the Pink Panther
The Time Machine (2002)
The X Files: I Want to Believe
Three Men and a Baby
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans
Van Helsing
What’s Your Number
Where the Wild Things Are
Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Win a Date With Tad Hamilton
You’re Next

VidAngel Steals Lawyer From the Studios

Dear VidAngel customers,

 

4 Hollywood studios have accused VidAngel of stealing their movies. That’s not true, but we are stealing their lawyers.

This week Attorney David Quinto, who used to be a lawyer for Disney and Warner Brothers, became the official lawyer of VidAngel. As you may recall, those studios and VidAngel are currently in a legal battle, so Quinto’s pulling a Kevin Durant and switching teams to the inevitable winners.

 

David Quinto is a fairly big deal.

The Hollywood Reporter named him to their list of Top 100 Power Lawyers. In fact, he was ranked #21 on the alphabetical list!

He spent 27 years as a lawyer for the Oscars, and during that time they never got sued for giving Best Actor to Nicholas Cage, so you know he’s good at his job.

 

He has had adventures in 140 countries during his life, including:

  • Outrunning a knife-wielding assailant for close to a kilometer in Rio de Janeiro
  • Escaping the Tuareg insurrection by fleeing Timbuktu aboard a Russian military cargo plane
  • Spending a month in Argentina during the height of the Dirty War and almost being executed in Mendoza (without cause, we should note)
  • Litigating his first case while still in law school and earning two published opinions, one of which has been cited by the Supreme Court

 

These are all true stories. No, WE PROMISE. They really are!

 

Welcome to the family, David!

 

David Quinto: silent guardian, watchful protector.

David Quinto: silent guardian, watchful protector.

Attorney David W. Quinto, Guardian of the OSCARS for Decades, Resigns Prestigious Hollywood Law Firm to Make the Case for VidAngel

via PRNewswire

Contact: press@vidangel.com

With more than three decades of experience, known both for representing Hollywood studios–including two of the plaintiffs in the VidAngel case–and for protecting the ©OSCAR® and ACADEMY AWARDS®, and representing the Producers Guild of America, David W. Quinto joins VidAngel as its General Counsel

LOS ANGELES, Aug. 3, 2016 /PRNewswire/– VidAngel, the market-leading entertainment platform empowering users to filter language, nudity, violence, and other content from movies and TV shows, is pleased to announce that legendary Hollywood intellectual property attorney David W. Quinto, who was long a partner at powerhouse firms Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP and Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, has joined VidAngel as its general counsel. Mr. Quinto’s first task will be to spearhead its defense of a lawsuit brought by four major Hollywood studios hoping to enjoin VidAngel from offering its filtering service to the public. With more than three decades of experience in entertainment and intellectual property, including protecting the ©OSCARS, Quinto has focused on copyright, trademark, trade secret, unfair competition, and Internet-based cases.

Mr. Quinto’s first task will be to spearhead its defense of a lawsuit brought by four major Hollywood studios hoping to enjoin VidAngel from offering its filtering service to the public. With more than three decades of experience in entertainment and intellectual property, including protecting the ©OSCARS, Quinto has focused on copyright, trademark, trade secret, unfair competition, and Internet-based cases.

“David’s decision to join VidAngel as General Counsel represents the single most significant development in the case to date. Having successfully represented iconic Hollywood institutions such as the ©OSCAR, the ACADEMY AWARDS® and the Producers Guild of America, as well clients dealing with cutting edge Internet legal issues, there is no one better suited to oversee our legal strategy,” said Neal Harmon, CEO of VidAngel. “David wrote the original legal opinion upon which VidAngel’s business model is based, and today’s announcement demonstrates his full confidence that values consumers seeking to filter content will prevail in court.”

“It is a privilege to be asked by VidAngel to focus on winning a landmark copyright case sure to make new law. I am confident that the studios have overreached by trying to enjoin a service expressly authorized by Congress for the protection of children, and I look forward to the opportunity to demonstrate that in court,” said David W. Quinto, General Counsel at VidAngel.

Respected Los Angeles law firm Baker Marquart LLP will continue to represent VidAngel in defending the lawsuit recently brought against the Utah-based company by Disney, Twentieth Century Fox, Warner Brothers, and Lucasfilm, and in prosecuting VidAngel’s antitrust claim against them. Mr. Quinto will oversee all aspects of the case. VidAngel chose Baker Marquart based on the firm’s litigation successes, including the recent landmark ruling in the Central District of California that FilmOn was entitled to the compulsory license enjoyed by large cable companies that deal with TV networks. The opposing plaintiffs in that case included ABC (a division of Disney) and Fox.

ABOUT DAVID W QUINTO

David Quinto is a veteran intellectual property attorney, with over 33 years’ experience. His practice focuses on copyright, trademark, trade dress, trade secret, unfair competition, and Internet-related matters, as well as general commercial litigation. Over the past three decades, David has represented a broad range of clients, including the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (for which he was responsible for protecting the ACADEMY AWARDS® and ©OSCAR® marks and copyright, as well as the annual Academy Awards© telecast), Lockheed/Lockheed Martin, Home Depot, Edwards Lifesciences, Grendene, S.A, Sae-A Trading Co. Ltd., Mattel, Avery Dennison, Bonneville International, GKN Aerospace Transparency Systems (Luton) Ltd., Samsung, ASCAP, the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, the Producers Guild of America (for whom he obtained the first-ever “No Action” letter for a certification mark from the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice), and the America’s Cup Organizing Committee.Mr. Quinto is the co-author of the national practitioner’s guide to trade secret litigation,

Mr. Quinto is the co-author of the national practitioner’s guide to trade secret litigation, Trade Secrets: Law and Practice (3d edition published by LexisNexis 2014; earlier editions published by Oxford University Press), which analyzes the ins and outs of trade secrets disputes from the viewpoints of plaintiffs, defendants, criminal defendants, and businesses seeking to avoid or investigate potential misappropriations. Mr. Quinto earlier authored Law of Internet Disputes (3 editions published by Aspen Law& Business) and was a contributing author of Trade Marks at the Limit (Edward Elgar Publishing 2006).

About VidAngel

VidAngel is the market-leading entertainment platform empowering users to filter language, nudity, violence, and other content from movies and TV shows. VidAngel’s success has been well documented, earning a #1 BestCompany.com user rating and making VidAngel one of the fastest growing entertainment companies in the U.S.

Logo – http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20160615/379479LOGO

 

Disney v. VidAngel: Round 1

Hi VidAngel customers,

 

We have a new pen-pal. Last month, four studios sent a letter saying:

“Dear VidAngel, you are violating our copyrights. Please stop.
Love, Disney, Warner Brothers, Twentieth Century Fox, and Lucasfilm”

 

So this week we responded:

“Dear studios, no we are not. Also, you’re violating antitrust laws.
Yours truly, VidAngel”

 

Okay, that’s not word-for-word. But basically, Hollywood said, “Cut it out.” We said, “That’s literally all we do.” (Eh?) And now we’re planning a trip to California to meet our pen-pals in person.

But you want details. Many of you have been asking for a thorough explanation of VidAngel’s legal case. So we’ve organized some of the key arguments below, using quotes from the studios’ complaint and VidAngel’s counter-complaint. Enjoy.

 

Issue I: Payment to copyright holders

The Studios say…

“VidAngel charges users for watching [the studios’] content but has no authorization and pays nothing for the rights it exploits.

“…[B]y cutting out payments to copyright owners, VidAngel is able to offer prices that undercut licensed services…”

But VidAngel says…

“In fact, the opposite is true. VidAngel spends over one-third of its gross revenues to lawfully purchase thousands of DVD and Blu-ray discs, which are then re-sold to VidAngel users. Shown below is the manager of VidAngel’s storage vault pictured with lawfully purchased copies of The Revenant.

 

Leo was lonely in that movie, so we bought him, like, a thousand more Leos

Leo was lonely in that movie, so we bought him like a thousand more Leos. (The Revenant is one of VidAngel’s more than 2,000 titles.)

 

“The majority of VidAngel’s purchases represent sales that would not occur but for its filtering service, because most of VidAngel’s customers would not acquire and watch a particular film without filtering.

“…[The studios] in truth receive the same payment for each of these first sales to VidAngel as they would receive from any [other] lawful first purchaser of their title.”

In other words, VidAngel lawfully reimburses the studios by buying thousands of their discs. The studios’ complaint did not acknowledge this fact.

 

Issue II: Studio permission

The Studios say…

“VidAngel does not have permission to copy Plaintiffs’ movies and television shows or to stream them to VidAngel’s users…

“By running this service without a license, VidAngel blatantly violates the Copyright Act and confers on itself unfair and unlawful advantages vis-à-vis licensed services in the VOD marketplace.”

But VidAngel says…

“[The studios] repeatedly suggest that VidAngel needs their permission to offer a filtering service, despite Congressional law which expressly authorizes VidAngel’s service without need for any such consent.

“[The Family Movie Act] provides that ‘making imperceptible (i.e., filtering)… of limited portions of audio or video… transmitted [e.g., streamed] to [a] household for private viewing, from an authorized copy of the motion picture’ does not violate the Copyright Act.

“…In asking this Court to impose a consent requirement on VidAngel’s filtering service, Plaintiffs are effectively asking that the Court repeal a federal statute enacted to protect American families.”

Meaning, VidAngel does not require a license to filter a movie that customers have already lawfully purchased. That right is protected by the Family Movie Act.

 

Issue III: Uploading DVDs and Blu-rays

The Studios say…

“VidAngel appears to circumvent the technological protection measures on DVDs and Blu-ray discs to create unauthorized copies and then uses those copies to stream Plaintiffs’ works to the public without authorization.

“…VidAngel’s circumvention of the [technological protection measures] violates Section 1201 of the [Digital Millennium Copyright Act].”

But VidAngel says…

“In enacting the Family Movie Act… Congress protected the right of families to filter and view content… in Copyright Act Section 110…

“That section provides that [filtering a streamed motion picture, as described above] does not violate the Copyright Act. Because the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is part of the Copyright Act, it is subject to the same exemption.”

“…[The studios] contend that the mere act of creating a decrypted version of a lawfully purchased DVD of their title violates… the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

“VidAngel contends that the making of a decrypted copy as the necessary first step in making a lawfully purchased DVD capable of being filtered is fully consistent with the [Family Movie Act] and otherwise complies with all copyright laws.”

In other words, VidAngel argues that decrypting DVDs is a necessary step in allowing viewers’ movies to be filtered, and is covered under the Family Movie Act.

 

Anyway, you know how pen-pals are. Sometimes you have different opinions about whether your business and livelihood should be permanently shuttered by a court-ordered injunction. LOL! Pen-pals!

Stay tuned for further updates, including a future blog post about our antitrust counter-claim. And thank you, VidAngel fans, for your support throughout this process. It means a lot.

 

Thanks a million,

VidAngel

#SaveFiltering

 

You can read the rest of our counterclaim here.

VidDavid vs. Gollywood . It's like the Bible story, except this time the giant is the Jewish one.

VidDavid vs. Gollywood 

VidAngel Files Antitrust Suit Against Disney, Twentieth Century Fox, Warner Brothers, and Lucasfilm

via PRNewswire

Contact: press@vidangel.com

The popular service empowering users to filter movies and TV shows for language, nudity, violence, and other items takes legal action to ensure that Hollywood studios comply with the 2005 Family Movie Act and discontinue their efforts to undermine the law

LOS ANGELES, July 13, 2016 /PRNewswire/ — VidAngel, the market-leading entertainment platform empowering users to filter language, nudity, violence, and other items from movies and TV shows, filed an antitrust lawsuit today against Disney, Twentieth Century Fox, Warner Brothers, and Lucasfilm in the United States District Court, Central District of California, Western Division. The legal counterstrike comes on the heels of a suit brought by the same four studios last month, attempting to shut down the service.
Neal Harmon, CEO of VidAngel, has issued the following statement:

Baker Marquart LLP, counsel for VidAngel, filed the suit in U.S. District Court, pointing out that the Plaintiffs’ “carefully selected and misleading allegations distort relevant facts and law” by “suggest [ing] that VidAngel needs their permission to offer a filtering service, despite Congressional law which expressly authorizes VidAngel’s service without need for any such consent.” The suit also states that the Plaintiffs, in asking to shut down VidAngel, are “asking that the Court repeal a federal statute enacted to protect American families.” VidAngel details how the company purchases a legal copy of each title, matching a DVD to each user, and argues that its service is a value add for the four studios because users are purchasing titles they otherwise would avoid without being able to apply filters.

The complaint states: “Plaintiffs have interfered with VidAngel’s attempts to partner with streaming content providers to filter movies. Plaintiffs have also sought to improperly expand their copyright monopoly, seeking to deprive consumers of their right to buy and sell copyrighted works. As alleged in VidAngel’s Counter-Complaint, Plaintiffs should be held accountable for their improper actions.”

“The Plaintiffs in the VidAngel case claim that this is not about their desire to stop yet another filtering company, rather it’s about our process for buying, preparing and transmitting filtered content. This case is fundamentally about filtering, and as that becomes clear in the legal process, we are confident that the courts will uphold the law of the land,” said Neal Harmon, CEO of VidAngel. “We hope that the filing will help these studios to realize that they are asking the court to shut down a service that will allow millions to filter content for themselves and their children.”

The company is asking the judge to declare that VidAngel and its process is fully legal, and is also seeking damages against the studios for interfering with its business.

View the entire filing by clicking here: https://blog.vidangel.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/VidAngel-Answer-and-Counter-Complaint.pdf

About VidAngel

VidAngel is the market-leading entertainment platform empowering users to filter language, nudity, violence, and other items from movies and TV shows. VidAngel’s success has been well documented, earning a #1 BestCompany.com user rating and making VidAngel one of the fastest growing entertainment companies in the U.S.

Logo – http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20160615/379479LOGO

VidAngel T-Shirts

We are switching providers and T-Shirts are currently on hold. Check back soon!

In case you missed it, VidAngel is being sued by Disney, Warner Brothers, Twentieth Century Fox, and Lucasfilm. So we decided to create limited-edition VidAngel T-shirts, to support filtering.

These are not the cheap-o shirts that insurance companies pass out for free at the state fair. These are the kind of shirt you are excited to wear because they’re soft like a baby bunny, yet strong like your opinions on Beyoncé. You’ll feel prouder than the bumper sticker mom of an honor student wearing these bad boys.

Click on each T-shirt below to see color/sizing/style options. Don’t miss out on getting limited-edition ‪#‎SupportVidAngel‬ gear.

Snitch Shirt
Buy the “Snitches” here!
The perfect shirt for your next family trip to Disneyland. Darth Mickey with the fox-tail on the broom represents the four big guys suing us. Available as T-shirt, hoodie, crew neck, and phone case.

David v. Goliath
Buy the “David v. Goliath” here!
The classic tale of David v. Goliath. Darth Mickey with the fox-tail and WB shield represents the four big guys suing us. Available as T-shirt, hoodie, and crew neck.

Big Logo Shirt
Buy the “Big Logo” here!
This edition features our logo large, front and center. It’s kind of like typing in all caps when you’re really excited. Available as T-shirt, hoodie, crewneck, and phone case.

The Classic
Buy “The Classic” here!
The classic logo T-shirt. A shout-out to filtering, letting the world know you watch movies however the bleep you want. Available as T-shirt, hoodie, crewneck, and phone case.

Bad Word
Buy the “Bad Word” here!
What is more blatantly VidAngel-esque than crossing out your least favorite bad words? Available as T-shirt, hoodie, and crewneck.

What the Bleep
Buy “The Bleep” here!
“What the bleep does ‘bleep’ stand for?” you may ask. Nothing. It simply means bleep. Kind of like how teenage relationships don’t mean anything, but are still fun. Available as T-shirt, hoodie, and crewneck.

VidAngel Enlists Respected Hollywood Law Firm to Defend the Rights of Consumers

via PRNewswire

Contact: press@vidangel.com

In response to legal action brought by Disney, Twentieth Century Fox, Warner Brothers, and Lucasfilm, rapidly growing movie filtering service engages highly respected law firm Baker Marquart, known for winning a landmark copyright ruling

LOS ANGELES, June 15, 2016 /PRNewswire/ — VidAngel, the rapidly growing movie filtering service that empowers consumers by allowing them to filter certain content from movies or TV shows they own, has retained respected Los Angeles law firm Baker Marquart LLP to represent VidAngel in responding to the lawsuit recently brought against the Utah-based company by fourHollywood studios—Disney, Twentieth Century Fox, Warner Brothers, and Lucasfilm. VidAngel chose Baker Marquart based on the firm’s recent success, including the recent landmark ruling in the Central District that FilmOn could legally apply for the same compulsory license available to large cable companies that deal with TV networks.

Neal Harmon, CEO of VidAngel, has issued the following statement:

“Technological innovation has transformed the way we live, offering users customized solutions that empower them to consume in a way that meets individual needs and desires. Just as iTunes transformed the way people listen to their music, VidAngel is transforming the way people view their content, in the way that works best for them.

“We created this company because—as parents and consumers—we understand deeply the surging demand for filtering content to suit the needs of families.

“We are confident in our case, and equally confident that the interests of consumers will prevail. It is for this reason we have retained Baker Marquart, a highly respected Los Angeles firm that has represented innovators and prevailed in similar landmark legal disputes.”

About VidAngel

VidAngel is an innovative, consumer-driven service that empowers consumers to filter movies and TV shows they own, viewing content via a customized experience that offers the highest degree of personal choice in the entertainment marketplace.

www.vidangel.com

Logo – http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20160615/379479LOGO

Introducing the VidAngel Lawyers

Dear VidAngel users,

 

We have good news and bad news.

The good news: We’ve been discovered. A group of Hollywood producers has recognized our potential, called the right people, and offered us the chance to showcase our talents on a national stage.

The bad news: ‘Cause they’re suing us.

 

As you may have already heard, VidAngel is being sued by Warner Brothers (creators of Catwoman), Twentieth Century Fox (Fantastic Four), Disney (John Carter), and Lucasfilm (Star Wars Holiday Special).

Those are 4 big players. Luckily, we’ve brought in some big players too.

VidAngel will be represented in this case by Baker Marquart, the law firm that recently obtained a landmark copyright ruling for another innovative company that threatens the traditional Hollywood model.

“Ooh, a copyright case,” you are probably saying to yourself, adrenaline coursing through your veins.

Last year, a streaming company called FilmOn was being sued by some major television networks and studios, including ABC (a division of Disney) and Fox. The networks said FilmOn violated their copyright, and demanded that it be shut down. But FilmOn argued back that its model was legal, and the studios should be required to give it licensing.

This debate was not new. The streaming company Aereo actually made a similar argument and lost. So FilmOn was facing an uphill battle against the studios one that everyone expected them to lose.

Enter Baker Marquart. With their representation, FilmOn obtained a landmark ruling in the Central District that FilmOn could legally apply for the same compulsory licenses available to large cable companies (an appeal will be argued this August).

 

So just to recap, Baker Marquart:

  1. Recently obtained a landmark copyright ruling
  2. Represents other innovative companies in the entertainment industry
  3. Beat the Mouse and the Fox in court.
  4. Attended law school for 3 years apiece!

Needless to say, we swooned. And hired Baker Marquart.

 

You may be thinking, “Wow, I guess VidAngel must have enough lawyers now.”

You can never have enough lawyers. That’s why we had our legal opinion written by David Quinto, the top-rated lawyer who represented the Oscars for 27 years. Yeah, 27 years! His first Oscars night was so long ago, some of the nominees were black.

The point is, we’re very proud of our legal team. We’re confident about our case. And we’re excited to tell our story to the judge.

 

Thanks for your support, and stay tuned for further updates,

VidAngel

#weareready

Lady Justice is blindfolded so she doesn't have to look at nudity.

Lady Justice is blindfolded so she doesn’t have to look at nudity.