Righthaven Begs To Be Put Back Into Case That Judge Dismissed The Company From, Claiming It's Fixed All The Problems

from the mere-technicalities dept

Mon, Jun 27th 2011 4:15pm — Mike Masnick

Having lost bigtime in its lawsuit against the Democratic Underground, in a ruling where the judge questioned Righthaven's motives and legality, it appears Righthaven is fighting back. In that original ruling, Righthaven was totally dismissed from the case, because the judge recognized that the company never actually held the copyrights in question, and thus had no standing to sue. Righthaven has now filed with the court to be added back to the case, claiming that its "amended" agreement with Stephens Media has fixed all the problems and has now made it clear that Righthaven is, in fact, the copyright holder. Not only that, but Righthaven claims that the new agreement means that Righthaven is the only one with standing, in an attempt to get Stephens Media off the liability hook.

Of course, it seems that Righthaven may have a serious uphill battle here. The judge in the case had already seen the amended agreement and suggested that it was cosmetic, at best. Judge Hunt clearly saw this for what it was: a highly questionable attempt to pretend Righthaven had copyrights it never actually had, to give it only a very limited right to sue -- and, an attempt to shield (the much larger) Stephens Media from liability for having filed questionable lawsuits. I would not be surprised to see the judge reject this as just a superficial attempt to get around the clear intention of the Copyright Act to bundle the right to sue with the actual rights prescribed in the Act, and not to allow companies like Righthaven to merely buy lawsuits.

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, nevada, standing
Companies: righthaven

11 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 27 Jun 2011 @ 4:42pm

Conspiracy To Pervert The Course Of Justice
Isn't this behavior of Stephens Media and Righthaven a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice? Such a conspiracy has been illegal for many decades. Why have not the both of them been charged?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jun 2011 @ 5:22pm
  
  Re: Conspiracy To Pervert The Course Of Justice
  Lawsuits get the heave-ho for questionable standing all of the time. Never heard of a statute regarding "conspiracy to pervert the course of justice" in the US. In the UK and Canada, there is such as statute but it's limited to the following, which don't seem to apply either:
  
  1. Fabricating or disposing of evidence
  2. Intimidating or threatening a witness or juror
  3. Intimidating or threatening a judge
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - A Guy, 27 Jun 2011 @ 11:28pm
    
    Re: Re: Conspiracy To Pervert The Course Of Justice
    Surely, there is some sort of law against purposeful misrepresentation of facts to the court. Could perjury laws apply?
    
    Maybe not. Maybe this is just an ethics violation and therefore just a matter for the state bar.
    
    IANAL
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 28 Jun 2011 @ 2:02am
    
    Re: Re: Conspiracy To Pervert The Course Of Justice
    In the UK and Canada, there is such as statute but it's limited to the following, which don't seem to apply either:
    
    1. Fabricating or disposing of evidence
    2. Intimidating or threatening a witness or juror
    3. Intimidating or threatening a judge
    
    Perjury is also included so Righthaven could (if this was in the UK) be charged if they have made false statements or deliberately concealed evidence - seems a bit of a stretch however as Righthaven have been mostly openly stupid..
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jun 2011 @ 5:02pm

Hopefully both the judge will react by finding both Righthaven and Stephens, in contempt of court at the very least.
Perjury and criminal charges should follow.

Well a fella can dream can't he?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Donnicton, 27 Jun 2011 @ 5:29pm

Do they really think that they can change the agreement after the fact and that somehow makes it okay?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jun 2011 @ 5:49pm
  
  Re:
  Apparently they do.
  But rather than change, they are clarifying and amending to respectfully satisfy the judge who has as far as they are concerned failed to understand the agreement as written originally and the changes are only to help his feeble mind come to the understanding that is clear to everyone else.
  
  OOOOH please let him throw the book at them.
  
  please please please
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 28 Jun 2011 @ 4:13am
    
    Re: Re:
    Ah, screw that, let's throw the entire LVRJ archive at them! And the Denver Post archive! And the Archive archive server farm!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 27 Jun 2011 @ 5:38pm

Let's hope the judge drops a rock on these jerks. Preferably the one they crawled out from under.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 28 Jun 2011 @ 4:49am

Just what does it take to get yourself disbarred these days?
Keep trying WrongHaven, you're almost there.

Remember when Jack Thompson was disbarred?
http://kotaku.com/5054772/jack-thompson-disbarred
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Devil's Coachman (profile), 28 Jun 2011 @ 11:42am

Righthaven fellates pigs, violently!
And that's only if they can't find a goat. Pigs are more numerous in this country, so that explains that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]