Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Defendant accuses Righthaven of misusing legal system
Las Vegas Sun ^ | Sunday, Sept. 5, 2010 | 1:50 a.m. | By Steve Green

Posted on 09/05/2010 2:15:02 PM PDT by redreno

Even as Righthaven LLC made headlines for suing Nevada U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle last week, attorneys in another Righthaven case accused the firm of misusing the legal system to carry out its copyright infringement lawsuit campaign.

Righthaven, controlled by Las Vegas attorney Steven Gibson and the family of Arkansas investment banking billionaire Warren Stephens, has contracted with the Stephens Media LLC-owned Las Vegas Review-Journal to file copyright infringement lawsuits against 117 website owners and bloggers since March.

(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Nevada
KEYWORDS: abuse; abuseofsystem; copyright; dmca; drma; drmi; fightback; legal; legalabuse; legalmisuse; lvjr; misuse; nevada; righthaven; system

1 posted on 09/05/2010 2:15:03 PM PDT by redreno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: redreno

This will be another interesting case to watch.

Righthaven is about to wear out try the Court’s patience.


2 posted on 09/05/2010 2:24:14 PM PDT by onyx (If you support Sarah and want on her Ping List, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redreno

Bill Shakespeare was right about “lawyers”.


3 posted on 09/05/2010 2:24:21 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Algore is a politician and a con artist. He is NOT a scientist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

wear out/try the Court’s patience.


4 posted on 09/05/2010 2:25:16 PM PDT by onyx (If you support Sarah and want on her Ping List, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: redreno

Somewhere amongst these 117 lawsuits is a defendant with the money, the argument, and the gumption to put up a credible defense and allow the courts to put a stop to this nonsense. If that doesn’t happen then much of the internet and what little is left of the newspaper business will be very seriously harmed.


5 posted on 09/05/2010 2:26:56 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redreno

Many of these lawsuits are against tiny hobby and public service blogs, the kind your grandmother would write, and that no one ever even looks at.

Righthaven sustained no injury since they did not own the copyright.


6 posted on 09/05/2010 2:32:08 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (Character is defined by how we treat those who society says have no value.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redreno

I wonder what would happen if one or more of the defendents in this action, sought descovery of ALL employees of Righthaven, Stephens bunch and LVRJ. And I mean ALL.

The purpose being to check data base to ascertain if any articles were posted by said employees. Since this appears to be a money making scheme, this would be a logical trail to investigate.


7 posted on 09/05/2010 2:35:10 PM PDT by Marty62 (marty60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember
That argument has already been kicked out. What happens here is Righthaven buys a copyright ~ end of story.

What Stephens didn't count on is that he's managed to draw attention to every single periodical he owns a piece of and people are watching them like hawks. After all whenever he engages in a copyright violation that's an automatic win AGAINST HIM ~ for whatever amount, not just that $75,000 statutory deal.

I figure if I watch just the LVJ 6 months I should be able to find something worth several million bucks.

8 posted on 09/05/2010 2:37:42 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: redreno

Righthaven is like that despicable attorney in Florida who’s gotten rich on foreclosures. This isn’t about justice, it’s about money.


9 posted on 09/05/2010 2:38:57 PM PDT by Krankor (I had too much to dream last night, too much to dream.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: centurion316
Somewhere amongst these 117 lawsuits is a defendant with the money, the argument, and the gumption to put up a credible defense and allow the courts to put a stop to this nonsense.

I'm pretty sure that FR is one of those 117. Unlike most outlets they did not send a cease & desist, they sued immediately. Jim pulled the articles in question immediately and they are now on the FR "do not post or link" list but that doesn't settle the suit.

Hopefully some judge will put a stop to this abuse of the legal system quickly. I believe there is a good argument that the LVRJ granted a limited license to anyone that visited their webpage when they encouraged readers to "share and e-mail" their content.

10 posted on 09/05/2010 2:48:55 PM PDT by SC Swamp Fox (Aim small, miss small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
I'll work it in shifts with ya...

;)

11 posted on 09/05/2010 2:50:14 PM PDT by Michael Barnes (Call me when the bullets start flying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SC Swamp Fox

FR is one of the 117, the suit can be found through Google. Jim found out about it when it when it was posted on FR. These folks are predators and they will probably have a short run. The real target needs to be Stevens Media. All of their publications need to suffer from both disappearing advertisers and readers.


12 posted on 09/05/2010 2:56:29 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

We should begin a boycott of their advertisers.


13 posted on 09/05/2010 2:58:25 PM PDT by Krankor (I had too much to dream last night, too much to dream.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: redreno

Righthaven is engaging in these copyright suits more as a matter of suppressing opinion, than any intellectual property defense, making people afraid to make a statement and quoting authorative accounts, in the hopes of putting the Internet genie back in the bottle.

Malefactors of great wealth have now turned to supporting the control of the flow of information, all of a piece with the nuisance lawsuits and the ad hominem obfuscations they are throwing up against Sharron Angle. Righthaven is the spokesman and foremost defender of the status quo that supports Harry Reid, and they are using intimidation to try to win their point. Bullies in the schoolyard are the same everywhere, and they will not desist until somebody stands up to them.


14 posted on 09/05/2010 3:02:15 PM PDT by alloysteel ("If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Er, we could blackhole their IP. That would do it.


15 posted on 09/05/2010 3:13:39 PM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: redreno
"...and the family of Arkansas investment banking billionaire Warren Stephens" Folks, do a little research and you're going to find a STRONG connection with the Clintons on this one!

Curiouser and curiouser....

16 posted on 09/05/2010 3:15:11 PM PDT by Lloyd227 (Class of 1998 (let's all help the Team McCain spider monkeys decide how to moderate))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redreno

I don’t know how a Judge will rule on any of these legal points, but if Righthaven is not stopped other lawyers will pile on using the same methods. Courts will overflow with these suits.


17 posted on 09/05/2010 3:37:56 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182

If Righthaven casts their nets wide enough they will eventually catch a crazy that will go off on them. Then their money won’t mean anything.


18 posted on 09/05/2010 4:07:25 PM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt

That is possible. They appear to be filing at random and without warning. It is bound to set someone off.


19 posted on 09/05/2010 4:55:42 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

[I figure if I watch just the LVJ 6 months I should be able to find something worth several million bucks.]

An interesting hypothetical is who would allow themselves to be interviewed by LVRJ once they know that this is going on? Any friend of those interviewed who linked or mailed or posted it on their website would be subject to legal action. This has to eventually dry up the pool of sources,
both the powerful and the mom and pop.

Say you are a restaurant and they do an article on te five top Restaurants and you are one of them. Kiss of death to be interviewed much less send that article to your clients.

They could all be sued.


20 posted on 09/05/2010 5:48:32 PM PDT by DaxtonBrown (HARRY: Money Mob & Influence (See my Expose on Reid on amazon.com written by me!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182

Random thoughts:

1. BARRATRY (it is a good concept)

2. BAD FAITH (also a useful concept)

3. The most important concept? Don’t screw around with someone with NOTHING left to lose! (especially someone also possessing a casual familiarity with belt-fed weapons)

DG


21 posted on 09/05/2010 6:03:39 PM PDT by DoorGunner ("Rom 11: until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and so, all Israel will be saved")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown
One of the things you find out quickly when you end up in a job that requires auditing financial records of any kind is that there's always somebody coming along who thinks he's invented a new way to steal.

They're wrong!

The electronic age manifest as the internet makes this process possible ~ the "owner of a copyright" can search the net quickly and easily to see if his stuff has been copied.

20 years ago that wasn't possible unless you had access to a university level library periodicals collection. Then you could do research to see if someone was ripping off your stuff ~ easily done by hiring students.

So, why didn't this sort of thing take place? Well, for one, it was a tad cumbersome. Secondly someone had already done it and discovered that the second you take out after your audience you quickly lose that audience, and in the periodicals business, your friends ~

You also get watched more closely and one of your competitors will recognize the behavior as the sign of impending bankruptcy (or since this periodical is owned by a large financial interest with huge resources, simple liquidation and sale of the residual to some sucker).

Once your competitors know your status they'll begin reporting you to the USPS as someone who might maybe oughta probably be misrepresenting circulation figures ~ they also report that to ABC.

You lose advertisers ~ as well as subscribers ~ as word spreads of your impending dissolution.

So, there's nothing new about the Righthaven deal it's just that history has demonstrated time and again that it is UNWISE in the extreme.

Someone noted that the LVSun has some similar ownership, but they are not covering up this story ~ they are behaving the same as every other chief editor/publisher does when he detects a competitor failing.

22 posted on 09/05/2010 6:10:11 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown

With the geniuses of Righthaven on the job a restauranter would undoubtedly get sued for his menu!


23 posted on 09/05/2010 7:56:40 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; bigheadfred; blueyon; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; ...
Thanks redreno.
24 posted on 09/06/2010 3:50:40 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Democratic Underground... matters are worse, as their latest fund drive has come up short...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

whoops. [blush]
25 posted on 09/06/2010 3:52:57 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Democratic Underground... matters are worse, as their latest fund drive has come up short...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

FreeRepublic has finally gotten an OCILLA registration at the copyright office, so that should discourage any future legal disputes. Anyone who wants to sue FR now must first send a DMCA takedown notice first, which will allow FR to delete the disputed article and avoid litigation.


26 posted on 09/06/2010 9:21:16 PM PDT by HAL9000 ("No one made you run for president, girl."- Bill Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

FR needs some backup though, as long as the Demwits are in charge — I suggest compiling a search-engine-derived archive of basically identical violations of the copyright act that the plaintiffs haven’t done anything about, just to show that it’s an (possibly actionable) campaign against FR’s very existence, which it is clear that it is. Stuff removed here routinely doesn’t get removed elsewhere, and stays up for years. Either the plaintiffs are or are not interested in copyright enforcement. Thanks HAL9000.


27 posted on 09/07/2010 9:34:46 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Democratic Underground... matters are worse, as their latest fund drive has come up short...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson