Disney Enterprises LLC et al. v. VidAngel Inc.

Copyright

Central District

U.S. District Judge André Birotte Jr.

Plaintiff's lawyers: Kelly M. Klaus, Blanca F. Young, Rose L. Ehler, Juliana M. Yee, Stephanie G. Herrera; Rowley J. Rice, Glenn D. Pomerantz

Defense lawyers: Call & Jensen APC, Mark L. Eisenhut, Samuel G. Brooks, VidAngel Inc., David W. Quinto; J. Morgan Philpot

Following a years-long pursuit by an alliance of film studios led by Disney and Warner Brothers, a federal jury clipped the streaming service VidAngel's wings.

Prior to a 2017 injunction, VidAngel offered a vast library of films - many originally produced or distributed by the plaintiffs - streamed at a fraction of their original cost. With U.S. District Judge André Birotte Jr. having previously found in favor of the plaintiffs on liability, the jury was left to decide in June what the company's damages were.

VidAngel counsel argued the intention of the company's founders was to create a movie filtering service that would offer family friendly watching options, removing violent or sexual content from a film for example. Having purchased DVD copies of the films, the defendants claimed to believe their method for collecting and redistributing the films was protectable under the Family Home Movie Act of 2005.

Blanca F. Young

According to the plaintiffs, VidAngel was fully aware that its service was violating the law, and were hoping to use the Home Movie Act as a loophole against theft claims contrary to its intended design. Disney Enterprises LLC et al. v. VidAngel Inc., 16-cv-064109 (C.D. Cal., filed June 9, 2016)

After a week of argument and a few hours deliberation, the jury made clear it wasn't sympathetic to the defendants' apparent blind spot, citing 819 instances of apparent infringement and rewarding the plaintiff studios $62.4 million.

Kelly Klaus, who led a team of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP attorneys to victories in the case both in the Central District of California and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, declined comment Friday, deferring to spokespersons from Warner and Disney.

A Warner Brothers spokesperson celebrated the victory as proof of VidAngel's willful infringement.

"It sends a clear message to those who would attempt to profit from unlawful infringement conduct at the expense of the creative community," said Warner's statement.

Already forced into bankruptcy not long after the start of litigation, the result could very likely be a fatal blow for the streaming service. But the company claimed at the time of the verdict that it would fight for a new trial and to reduce the judgment. Though VidAngel counsel Mark Eisenhut did not respond to a request for comment, the company has made good on its promises, with a motions for a new trial and reduced judgment currently pending in the Central District.

--Steven Crighton