14 thoughts on “DECLARATION of Neal Harmon in Support of VidAngel, Inc.’s Ex Parte Application to Stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal

  1. @Neal I wish this was just a bad dream. VidAngel is amazing service that just works and works perfectly in my opinion. Thank you so much for providing this service. It’s so nice that no matter the age we can all enjoy a movie without having to race to the remote to mute or skip a part.

    What is the expected timeframe for court’s decision on stay?

  2. @Neal,
    Praying for you and the business. Ultimately, you and your team have proven that values centered Americans are hungry for wholesome entertainment options.

    Personally, I would easily pay 2 or 3 times your current rates for your services. Perhaps, that would ease the licensing questions?

  3. Keep up the good fight. My family and I love VidAngel and I am frequently referring my friends to this outstanding company. Being able to watch movies with our whole family (that we would have previously ruled out due to content we deem inappropriate) has been a joyous experience. I personally can’t understand why any studio would want to limit there exposure and availability to new potential customers through the VidAngel service. We are in your corner and hope that VidAngel stays in business for a very very long time. Thank you for creating and maintaining this much needed service, enabling our family to decide what content we allow into our home.

    1. Just like all, so called good, honest, religious people, you would fight
      for a company, that has out and out, been doing illegal streaming from
      the get go.

      I would think any person, even though you like their service, would not
      support someone who is completely using the studios illegally.

      Guess what, even though you say our would fight for them. Your fight
      will go no where, as this is illegal. No fight will win for them.

      1. You must not be aware of how many times VidAngel has tried (with $ in hand) to obtain the exact same streaming rights as Apple, Google, Netflix, Hulu, etc. Their current DVD model was a last resort. Can you explain to us exactly what makes VidAngel illegal? How about why these studios have repeatedly refused to sell VidAngel the same streaming rights that they have sold to multiple other businesses that don’t offer their customers a filtering option?

  4. Just finished reading your Declaration. Hopefully the judge uses common sense here and realizes that granting an addition 2-4 weeks to comply, if the stay is not granted, is peanuts when considering the length of time that plaintiffs have been aware of the service.

    One other point worth making here that hopefully the court and studios understand. While ClearPlay is another filtering service it is not a viable replacement for VidAngel – at least not for our family. ClearPlay does not give the consumer individual choice regarding what to edit – rather it edits in broad swaths which may or may not be consistent with how the consumer wishes to filter the movie. VidAngel, on the other hand, gives the consumer precision control of how they wish to edit out objectionable content. This is HUGE. For us, it makes all the difference in the world. Additionally, VidAngel is far, far more consumer friendly and simply works the way you would expect a filtering service to work. I shouldn’t have to buy a special Bluray or DVD player or use a USB drive to upload filters. Streaming filtered content is the ideal way for this to work in 2016. I hope and pray that this service will survive and thrive.

    Given that the service, even after the studios rejected a licensing agreement, still makes money for them, it seems pretty clear that this is not about money. There is real spiritual warfare for the hearts and minds of the people of the world. I always tell my kids you can’t un-see something. Whatever we choose to feed into our brain and heart will effect us, either positively or negatively, so we need to choose wisely. Thank you for carrying the gauntlet on the front line.

  5. Mark, please explain to me how this is a spiritual warfare, when ClearPlay has been filtering since 1998.

    Out of the 12 companies Vid Angel mentions that got sued nearly 20 years ago, ClearPlay survived and congress decided that they couldn’t find anything wrong with ClearPlay and created the Family Movie Act because of how they legally filter.

    Clean Flix was ripping a single DVD and editing that copied movie and selling back to customers the updated copy of that movie on a DVR disc – they were shut down.

    Vid Angel takes DVD and Blu-ray movies, uses an unauthorized decryption method to copy that movie to a server – just like 40 yr old guys in their mom’s basement. This is what you’re warned against doing at the beginning of every movie ($250,000 fine and/or up to 5 years in prison.) The courts have ordered Neal to shut it down.

    I’m noticing a pattern to people that want to do the right thing, but end up getting shut down, because they have been and are going about it the wrong way.

    1. You can make out the spiritual warfare aspect of it yourself if you actually put some thought into it (Hmmm…we want to remove foul language and body parts but Hollywood doesn’t want us to).

      If you’ve paid attention, Vidangel attempted a number of avenues to work with the studios and was either ignored, blocked directly, or blocked indirectly. Clearplay is using one of those methods currently (filtering Google/yahoo videos) and one can only speculate they haven’t been shut down either because they are too small through that avenue or their filters are so general (the reason I don’t use them anymore) as to be unable to have broad appeal. Perhaps Clearplay even submits their filters to Hollywood for approval. Who knows? Regardless, Vidangel ultimately exploited an ambiguity in the law. I think of the Adam and Eve quandary–How do we obey the command to multiply if we are separated? Oh well, I guess I’ll have a bite of apple–when I think of this filtering issue. The law allows filtering of owned content for personal viewing. The law allows decryption for streaming. If Vidangel is my playback device (much like Vudu or Flixster) that happens to be vertically integrated (they have to purchase the movies to sell them to me) then I see no issues reading the ambiguity in their favor until a higher authority clears it up for everyone. I do wish they could expand/integrate to link with Ultraviolet so I could filter movies I own elsewhere. Perhaps that is also the studios fault. I have never liked that a movie I own on Vidangel can’t be viewed anywhere else, but I feel likewise about Google and Amazon which is why I don’t buy movies there.

      1. The Judge says ClearPlay is filtering legally… what aren’t you and anyone else not understanding about that??? The LAW says Vid Angel is Illegal and ClearPlay is legal. The courts are very well aware of ClearPlay and they are saying they are legal.

        Judge Birotte said that if people want a legal filtering solution to use ClearPlay.



        The courts are not making a filtering witch hunt, otherwise ClearPlay would have been out of business a while ago.

        If Neal tells the courts that there is a large market share of people that want filtering, and to just look at how long ClearPlay has been in business to prove his point, he shoots himself in the foot. The courts then have to examine how Neal is taking the DVDs Vid Angel buys and how they are illegally breaking encryption and still tell them to shut down. The only alternative Vid Angels can resort to is fear mongering.
        “Let’s tell everyone that if we lose, filtering is gone forever. Because if we tell everyone that they can still use ClearPlay, why would anyone want to keep coming to us.”

    2. Actually, If you watch there videos, for every movie you buy, they have to buy a new DVD, which in turn they can send to you if you request. There is nothing illegal about that. So, it’s not like there just ripping a single copy of a movie and having everyone access it. They have several copies of a movie, and that number is how many people can access. This is not yify, but someone with the likes of you probably won’t understand that.

  6. https://www.copyright.gov/1201/

    The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), codified in part in 17 U.S.C. § 1201, makes it illegal to circumvent technological measures used to prevent unauthorized access to copyrighted works, including copyrighted books, movies, videos, video games, computer programs.

    Vid Angel has broken this law with every movie they “sold.”

    1. You don’t have to be an employee of ClearPlay to support lawful activity.

      I’ve had my intellectual property stolen, so I’m extremely passionate about anti-piracy.

      I’ve been a ClearPlay user since 2009. I was just about to start using Vid Angel when I looked into them further and found that they admitted that they pirated movies to provide steaming, I couldn’t in good conscience be a customer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *