Righthaven extends copyright lawsuit campaign to individual Web posters

Las Vegas Sun ^ | Steve Green

[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.

[mnehring]

Oh great, now the sharks are going after individual posters on message boards, not just the sites. They are even going after posters on boards they already sued and settled with.

[mnehring]

ping

[BenKenobi]

Make sure you get the name right.

It’s Obi-Wan Kenobi.

Accept no substitutes.

[Netizen]

Higgins, according to Righthaven, posts as Jim_Higgins on a Google Groups message board. Records indicate that on Nov. 21 he posted a Review-Journal column about Transportation Security Administration pat downs of the elderly and disabled at Reno-Tahoe International Airport. The post credited columnist John L. Smith but didn't credit the Review-Journal, records show.

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.

[gwilhelm56]

LVRJ (closest I will get to the actual name)

You are ...Obsolete.
Sentence ... Death by Obscurity!

[SnuffaBolshevik]

Send my subpoena to Schultz, Ed, c/o MSNBC.

[proxy_user]

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...”

[Netizen]

Righthaven, which is half owned by an affiliate of Review-Journal owner Stephens Media LLC, says its lawsuits, typically filed without warning, are necessary to crack down on rampant online infringement of newspaper stories, columns, editorials, photos and graphics.

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.

[smokingfrog]

The $105 Fix That Could Protect You From Copyright-Troll Lawsuits

So how is an individual poster supposed to do this?

[Darren McCarty]

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!

[cripplecreek]

Rotsa ruck.

I gots no moneys, Obama din give me no pie.

[Netizen]

So far, the only definitive ruling is one that went against Righthaven when a judge found a Las Vegas real estate agent was protected by the fair use doctrine in posting part of a Review-Journal story on his website.

We need to know why this agent was protected and how we can utilize that.

[sam_paine]

It’s Obi-Wan Kenobi.

Oh! It's been a looooong time since I heard that name, Luke."

[funfan]

Reminds me of a Twilight Zone Episode

[Netizen]

Just have to remember 4 paragraphs good, 9 bad! lol

[JPG]

It’s a cookbook.

[gwilhelm56]

** “We don’t want to infringe your copyright! What, no readers can find you now? Well, that’s 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.

[Clioman]

:pinching his nose: “The Force is strong in this one.”

:)