Newspaper Publisher Sues Guy For Posting Article Based On Research He Gave The Paper For Free

from the going-a-bit-far? dept

Wed, Jul 14th 2010 3:10am — Mike Masnick

Earlier this year, we wrote about the company Righthaven, which has some sort of connection to the Las Vegas Journal Review (or, at least, its lawyer), who is now going around suing lots of sites for reposting LVJR content. What was interesting about the lawsuits is that Righthaven never sent any cease-and-desists or DMCA takedowns or anything. It just went straight to suing. That's allowed... but odd. On top of that, many of the repostings weren't competitors or sites that were trying to take business away from the LVJR. In fact, in many cases, it involved organizations mentioned in the LVJR who were trying to promote the LVJR.

Apparently, Righthaven and LVJR continue to file these kinds of lawsuits, and they just keep getting more ridiculous. Michael Scott points us to to the fact that Righthaven has sued a guy named Anthony Curtis, who reposted an article from the LVJR that talked about research Curtis had done on ticket prices for entertainment shows in Vegas.

If you're playing along at home, the LVJR published an article based on research -- which it got for free -- from Curtis, and when he then tries to highlight that article, the LVJR sues him. As the MediaPost story notes, the LVJR article about Curtis' research even notes that his annual survey is a "thankless task." Thankless, indeed.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, lawsuits
Companies: las vegas journal review, righthaven

21 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Richard (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 3:30am

Licence
Next time Curtis should publish his research on a CC "Share Alike" Licence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 3:33am

Re: Licence
Miss appropriating others work is actually a crime can he make the general attorney sue the paper for that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
bob, 14 Jul 2010 @ 4:00am

I don't understand how we got here.

Is it possible that it's cheaper for these people to file lawsuits than to actually look at the content of the case?

There has to be some backlash on all this suing eventually.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Nerve of that Guy, 14 Jul 2010 @ 4:27am

No good deed goes unpunished
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 4:41am

the difference is how each came to have the others work product. if curtis actively and willingly gave them permission to use his work (or publishes it under one of those confusing creative commons licenses) then he would have not issue with the paper.

his mistake is taking an entire article, based in part of his work, and republishing it without permission. there is no share and share alike rule in the game. he needed to ask permission (which he likely would have received).

you see, the issue isnt permission culture, its people who think they have rights to things and dont.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 4:41am

Re:
No ridiculous law suit goes unpublished on Tech Dirt.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
isabel (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 4:56am

in my opinion
[ link to this | view in thread ]
isabel (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 4:57am

in my opinion
there are too many lawyers in the world, clamouring for work. Perhaps there should be a curb on the profession?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abc gum, 14 Jul 2010 @ 5:17am

Re:
"you see, the issue isnt permission culture, its people who think they have rights to things and dont."

Everyone should require a contract which clearly defines the terms of reciprocity before allowing their content to be published.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
isabel (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 5:36am

Re: Re:
Re "Everyone should require a contract which clearly defines the terms of reciprocity before allowing their content to be published."

More work for lawyers and total blocks on bothering to produce any content, could this be any more stifling to creativity?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 6:11am

"never sent and cease-and-desists" should be "never sent any cease-and-desists"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 6:13am

Re: Re: Re:
you dont need a lawyer for that. gee. "i give you access to my work provided i republish and lvrj article that cites it for the next 2 years". how freaking hard is that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 6:13am

Re:
which creative commons license is confusing?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 6:20am

Re: Re:
The one that requires me to pet my dogs backwards three times and do the truffle shuffle before I'm allowed to use it...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 7:54am

Re: Re:
Your point?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 7:58am

Re: Re: Re:
and I'm sure that many ridiculous lawsuits go unpunished being that the mere volume of ridiculous lawsuits is too enumerating for anyone to keep up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 8:00am

Re:
"which he likely would have received"

If this is the case then why are they suing? If they would have gave permission anyways there is little point in suing.

Do you have evidence that he likely would have received permission or are you basing this on your psychic powers again?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 8:27am

Re: in my opinion
A long time ago I read "The Number of the Beast" by Robert Heinlein. In one of his universes, he wrote about how our society rose up and killed all the lawyers...

http://www.heinleinsociety.org/concordance/books/nb_hc.htm
Year They Hanged the Lawyers
In Beulahland, this momentous event occurred in 1965. It is never mentioned in the history books, and information about it is restricted.

That's starting to sound like a great idea to me...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 9:19am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
There aren't any "wherefore" and "whereas" clauses there so it's obviously unenforceable in any law court on the planet.

Plain English is a pleasant pipe dream but it's not the best way to write a legal document with all these ambulance chasing lawyers running around.

A Creative Commons license would have done the job just as well and with far less fuss.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 9:54am

Re:
Oops. Yes. Fixed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 10:22am

Re: Re:
"which creative commons license is confusing?"

none of them are confusing, but it could be a slam at me for saying ...

"There is a confusing set of rules and self entitled organizations, their hands out stretched, reaching for your wallet. As is discussed here convinience and simplicity, oft-trumps bother and complexity. Or ... in the end the simplest and cheapest system tends to win.".
[ link to this | view in thread ]