Skip to comments.Righthaven extends copyright lawsuit campaign to individual Web posters
Posted on 01/13/2011 11:42:25 AM PST by mnehring
Las Vegas copyright enforcement company Righthaven LLC is now suing individual message-board posters, not just website operators...
..An attorney for Righthaven on Wednesday said those notices (DCMA) don't apply to individual website users who violate copyrights by posting material online without authorization.
(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...
Make sure you get the name right.
It’s Obi-Wan Kenobi.
Accept no substitutes.
Here's an instance where the originating source wasn't given, just like that jerk blogger kept doing at FR a week or so back.
LVRJ (closest I will get to the actual name)
You are ...Obsolete.
Sentence ... Death by Obscurity!
Send my subpoena to Schultz, Ed, c/o MSNBC.
It would not be difficult to blackhole the Journal-Review.
For example, Google could just remove it from their searches. “We don’t want to infringe your copyright! What, no readers can find you now? Well, that’s not our problem...”
I'm beginning to wonder if this 'rampant' infringement is due to blogging. If they don't give a link to an originating source, you wouldn't know if they wrote said article or not. I'd bet there are cases where bloggers don't cite the actual source and in that case they should get into trouble.
So how is an individual poster supposed to do this?
I don’t think there’s anything they can hit me on, but you want to take me on, I’ll have a pro-bono attorney, and we will procedurally delay, delay, delay, and drain your coffers in attorneys fees. I’ll have some real fun with the discoveries. All my stuff is protected anyway, so as DX used to say. I got two words for you! Suck it!
I gots no moneys, Obama din give me no pie.
We need to know why this agent was protected and how we can utilize that.
Oh! It's been a looooong time since I heard that name, Luke."
Reminds me of a Twilight Zone Episode
Just have to remember 4 paragraphs good, 9 bad! lol
It’s a cookbook.
** We dont want to infringe your copyright! What, no readers can find you now? Well, thats not our problem... **
works for me ... I won’t even click a link from LVRJ.. I’d rather accept a link from National Enquirer before these idiots.
:pinching his nose: “The Force is strong in this one.”
Thanks. I don’t like bullies, and this is the online equivalent of beating you up to steal your lunch money.
They play the settlement game.
Go for a jury trial. Defend yourself there.
Poverty has its silver linings.
Nobody should allow them to put anything so much as a name on their website without threat of a lawsuit.
These guys don’t bother with DMCA takedown notices. If you notice on the front page, FR has a contact. This company circumvents that entire process, which was meant to stop infringing while allowing sites like FR to function, and goes straight to lawsuits.
It’s not for individual posters in any case though.
I have a question. This is from another article.
Righthaven is a Las Vegas company that detects online infringements to Review-Journal material, obtains copyrights to that material and then sues alleged infringers on a retroactive basis and typically without warning.
Righthaven looks for an abuse, obtains the copyright then sues. Isn’t that like creating a law after the fact. If they didn’t have/own the copyright and the time the alleged abuse occurred, why should they be able to sue?
They also pay the "bankrupt the defendant" game. You'd better have big bank before defending, because they'll pour money into their side in order to prevent precedent against them. Or you could get lucky and have a smart judge who will throw it out on a motion for summary judgment.
If there’s ever any doubt, keep your excerpts brief. It’s my understanding that non-commercial fair use allows anyone to quote portions of copyrighted material for criticism or commentary. But they’re always trying to make it tough on us peons.
I guess it depends on how many words are in the four paragraphs? I believe FR limits posts to 300 words. Another problem we sometimes have here on FR is people changing the title of the article.
Some paragraphs are bigger than others. I think it comes down to percentage. The real estate agent posted 4 paragraphs out of 34. I'm thinking a really short article, even 50 words might be too much.
I sure hope Fr has spent the $105.
OP, expect to be sued by ‘Wrong’haven for using their name in your post. I have avoided the lawsuit by changing their name in my post.
Something to consider, for sure.
Oh, damn. Guess it’s gonna be a real PITA if your posters are behind proxies. Good luck with that, Righthaven.
I looked, they did! :)
They can contact me about lawsuits at:
c/o MSNBC, NBC News
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, N.Y. 10112
I thought you were going to say that you were changing your screen name to Righthaven! lol
They will have to subpoena you in order to obtain our personal identities or contact information, correct?
I have a serious question in regards to this.
At one point I was an admin/moderator on a “bi-partisan” message board. Of course I lit all the libs up there like a Christmas tree in how much they disliked me and my posting style. I decided it wasn’t worth the trouble and quit.
On my way out the door I deleted ALL my posts/threads and the site content was reduced dramatically. The owner of the site restored my posts from a site backup against my wishes and said I had no recourse but to accept that I posted it and since he owned the site and messages posted to it.
Now, what exactly would MY legal options have been?
They do this and all of sudden message boards will have “post as anonymous” option.
Well, we’ll fight off any subpoenas to the best of our ability. I’m pretty sure there are precedents to protect anonymity on public postings.
They are even going after posters on boards they already sued and settled with.
How can they do this?
Obviously they have turned this into a business. Has nothing to do with the Law.
IANAL, but I would think that if you have proof (logs, screen shots, cached web pages) that you removed/deleted any such postings that your liability, if any, would be limited to the time period during which you had administrative control over said postings.
Will we ever have tort reform in this country?
Unfortunately, anonymous posting would give an open door to automated spambots. Forums would be filled with Viagra and “enlargement” ads and things much worse.
Any way to obscure a public post with “Name Withheld” or some other descriptor, but leaves a record in the server would only invite supoenas of the identity of the poster. If the record of the true poster was deleted from the server after the post, then a lawsuit could allege that data was being deleted on purpose and the owners liable.
So, for example, if they subpoena my information, will you notify me and give me the option of hiring an attorney to fight the subpoena or pay for your attorney’s legal costs to do so?
I’m just curious. I don’t think I’ve violated their copyright.
By agreeing to post, you probably gave them rights to own your post forever