The cases are much too small, with too little possible publicity or monetary value. The DOJ will leave these to the State courts, which don't seem to be particularly interested in controlling the likes of Righthaven.
Ya know, it didn't dawn on me until you mentioned it, but if it can be proven that Stevens or any other organization tied by agreement to Righthaven, actually received money from Righthaven as a consequence of those agreements, they can be legally linked to the suits and made to pay.
Mike:
I'm repeating what I said in Ars Technica, it still applies:
No, Righthaven won't pay anything to anyone. The only way the defendants will see anything is to have a judge include Stevens Media into the fray and get THEM to pay. Righthaven will be bankrupt by then.
What really frosts me is the fact that the courts have allowed this crap to go on for two years, and have essentially ignored Righthaven's pranks. If you or I went into court and pulled even ONE of their tricks, we'd find ourselves in jail for contempt so fast our heads would spin. Why was this allowed to go on? And why is it being allowed to continue????
Re: A radical restructuring of world economics and politics may be required
Actually the changes won't happen soon. Too much of an old boys network. What will happen is that eventually they all will die out or be replaced. Until then, the suffering continues.
Each patent idea, the patent application reduced to a specification or problem definition, should be submitted to a panel of experts in that field. If they come up with the same basic design as a solution, it fails the uniqueness and/or obviousness test and is not approved.
Has anybody noticed that the logo looks like a twisted "C" rather than the 3D effect I presume they wanted? They should fix that unless they want to advertise themselves as the twisted party.
Richard:
Don't pay any attention to the idiots. You're essentially correct. The real problem with the patent office is the same problem that exists in the FDA. Too many applications that are too complicated (unnecessarily), too few really qualified examiners, and too little time for a proper examination. Most applications are an excercise in obfuscation with the main purpose being a snow job on the PTO to get a quick patent issued. There should be a secondary review process instituted to eliminate the "so what" factor and to be able to pass the laugh test, BEFORE the final patent is issued. Maybe something like peer-review by a panel of reasonably expert engineers. Unfortunately, the range of possible subject matter pretty much precludes that approach, but we need something similar.
Mike:
I generally agree with your excellent article. I do differ on one point, however. The corporate requirement for communication with it's employees would develop as it has. Therefore, the Microsoft Server suites, Mailserver, and the Blackberry or something similar, would have been developed. Perhaps not as well as today, but the functionality would be there. Also, wireless phones of some sort were inevitable.
Mike:
I have several questons. First, it has been acknowledged by several courts that RightHaven has lied in many of it's briefs. Is there a functional difference between perjury on the stand and lying in briefs? If not why has Righthaven not been held in contempt?
Second, the matter of champerty. In English Law, this is illegal and punishable. Is it not here?
Third, the matter of barratry. ALL of Righthavens lawsuits have been frivolous and without merit. Is this also not illegal here?
Fourth, Is there no mechanism, such as a class-action suit, that would allow recovery of settlement amounts and fees from those defendants already scammed?
Fifth, since we are dealing with such blatant misrepresentation, and since the firm of Righthaven has NOT been admitted to practice law, why are the courts even wasting time on the cases? They should all be summarily dismissed with prejudice, with fees and penalties against Righthaven.
Sixth, since it is likely that Righthaven will disappear in a puff of smoke the minute the tide turns against them, is there any way, via the "agreements", that Stephens and MNG could be made responsible for the penalties, reimbursement of the settlements, and the legal fees of all defendants? Also is there any way Righthaven, Steve Gibson, and perhaps the publishers could be held criminally liable?
Several parts of this piece don't make sense.
1. RE/MAX is NOT in the business of selling tickets of any sort, just real_estate and ONLY real_estate.
2. Medical data???? What's HIPAA got to do with anything?
3. You should move/copy the attachments to an isolated computer and open them just to see what's what.
4. Sounds very much like spam or malware.
5. Has anyone checked out this alleged attorney?
Somethin's fishy.
As we all know, the larger the corporation, the more immune to rule by law they feel. I'm just waiting for one of them to put out (large) contracts on judges or lawyers that cause them to lose in court. Cousin Guido, pay attention, work coming up. Wouldn't put it past the Righthavens of the world, either.
Mike:
My real worry is that continued efforts by the Gummints of the world against these kids will have the effect of pissing off people that are WAY smarter and WAY more talented. These people will then turn on the government sites, and their corporate sponsors and do some real damage. At least I hope so. This has gone far enough.
People:
What we're seeing here isn't a crime being procecuted. We're seeing the Gummint trying to divert your attention from all of the legal failures they represent, such as drug abuse, financial disasters in the making ($14 TRILLION debt), failures to apprehend or procecute real, dangerous, criminals harming the citizenry, etc. Nothing unexpected.
I do, however, disagree with his attack on the media, both on fair-use grounds (and yes Mike, I agree that is a unique US phenomenon), but also from the standpoint that any publicity is going to enhance his potential sales. He's maybe being a bit too greedy.
Folks, the real bottom line on this silly thread is that Slater wants to be paid for the picture in HIS camera, regardless of who or what pushed the button, and preferably in large amounts. That is the ONLY reason for a copyright claim. And yes, he will continue with the claim until a court, somewhere, shuts him down. I don't blaim him. I'd do it too.
On the post: Another Court Makes Righthaven Pay Up For Its Trolling Ways
Re: Re: WHY?
On the post: Another Court Makes Righthaven Pay Up For Its Trolling Ways
Re:
On the post: Another Court Makes Righthaven Pay Up For Its Trolling Ways
WHY?
I'm repeating what I said in Ars Technica, it still applies:
No, Righthaven won't pay anything to anyone. The only way the defendants will see anything is to have a judge include Stevens Media into the fray and get THEM to pay. Righthaven will be bankrupt by then.
What really frosts me is the fact that the courts have allowed this crap to go on for two years, and have essentially ignored Righthaven's pranks. If you or I went into court and pulled even ONE of their tricks, we'd find ourselves in jail for contempt so fast our heads would spin. Why was this allowed to go on? And why is it being allowed to continue????
On the post: The Washington Declaration On Intellectual Property And The Public Interest... Which Politicians Will Ignore
Re: A radical restructuring of world economics and politics may be required
On the post: The Economist Notices That The Patent System Is Hindering Innovation And Needs To Be Fixed
Uniqueness Test
Each patent idea, the patent application reduced to a specification or problem definition, should be submitted to a panel of experts in that field. If they come up with the same basic design as a solution, it fails the uniqueness and/or obviousness test and is not approved.
On the post: Canadian Political Party Threatens Widow For Using Its Logo In Ad Criticizing Canadian Government
Logo
On the post: What If Tim Berners-Lee Had Patented The Web?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hilarious
Don't pay any attention to the idiots. You're essentially correct. The real problem with the patent office is the same problem that exists in the FDA. Too many applications that are too complicated (unnecessarily), too few really qualified examiners, and too little time for a proper examination. Most applications are an excercise in obfuscation with the main purpose being a snow job on the PTO to get a quick patent issued. There should be a secondary review process instituted to eliminate the "so what" factor and to be able to pass the laugh test, BEFORE the final patent is issued. Maybe something like peer-review by a panel of reasonably expert engineers. Unfortunately, the range of possible subject matter pretty much precludes that approach, but we need something similar.
On the post: What If Tim Berners-Lee Had Patented The Web?
Re: Re: I'd like to expand an example a bit further...
On the post: What If Tim Berners-Lee Had Patented The Web?
Re: Re: Re: Re: I'd like to expand an example a bit further...
On the post: What If Tim Berners-Lee Had Patented The Web?
Mail
I generally agree with your excellent article. I do differ on one point, however. The corporate requirement for communication with it's employees would develop as it has. Therefore, the Microsoft Server suites, Mailserver, and the Blackberry or something similar, would have been developed. Perhaps not as well as today, but the functionality would be there. Also, wireless phones of some sort were inevitable.
On the post: Defendant Uses Glengarry Glen Ross To Try To Teach Righthaven About Truth
RightHaven in General
I have several questons. First, it has been acknowledged by several courts that RightHaven has lied in many of it's briefs. Is there a functional difference between perjury on the stand and lying in briefs? If not why has Righthaven not been held in contempt?
Second, the matter of champerty. In English Law, this is illegal and punishable. Is it not here?
Third, the matter of barratry. ALL of Righthavens lawsuits have been frivolous and without merit. Is this also not illegal here?
Fourth, Is there no mechanism, such as a class-action suit, that would allow recovery of settlement amounts and fees from those defendants already scammed?
Fifth, since we are dealing with such blatant misrepresentation, and since the firm of Righthaven has NOT been admitted to practice law, why are the courts even wasting time on the cases? They should all be summarily dismissed with prejudice, with fees and penalties against Righthaven.
Sixth, since it is likely that Righthaven will disappear in a puff of smoke the minute the tide turns against them, is there any way, via the "agreements", that Stephens and MNG could be made responsible for the penalties, reimbursement of the settlements, and the legal fees of all defendants? Also is there any way Righthaven, Steve Gibson, and perhaps the publishers could be held criminally liable?
Thank you,
davnel
On the post: If You Can Read This, You're Breaking The Law!
I Don't Understand
1. RE/MAX is NOT in the business of selling tickets of any sort, just real_estate and ONLY real_estate.
2. Medical data???? What's HIPAA got to do with anything?
3. You should move/copy the attachments to an isolated computer and open them just to see what's what.
4. Sounds very much like spam or malware.
5. Has anyone checked out this alleged attorney?
Somethin's fishy.
On the post: What Do They Say About The Lawyer Who Represents Himself?
Re: Re:
On the post: What Do They Say About The Lawyer Who Represents Himself?
Re: For the Record...
Or, more likely, your head is so far up your bum, you're looking out your navel and the image is distorted by lint.
On the post: Summit Entertainment Commences Criminal Legal Action Against Twilight Fan Who Shared Images From Movie
The Real Problem
On the post: Arresting People Associated With Anonymous Unlikely To Have The Impact The Feds Expect
Hack Attack
My real worry is that continued efforts by the Gummints of the world against these kids will have the effect of pissing off people that are WAY smarter and WAY more talented. These people will then turn on the government sites, and their corporate sponsors and do some real damage. At least I hope so. This has gone far enough.
On the post: Feds Charge Aaron Swartz With Felony Hacking... For Downloading A Ton Of Academic Research
Diversionary Tactics
What we're seeing here isn't a crime being procecuted. We're seeing the Gummint trying to divert your attention from all of the legal failures they represent, such as drug abuse, financial disasters in the making ($14 TRILLION debt), failures to apprehend or procecute real, dangerous, criminals harming the citizenry, etc. Nothing unexpected.
On the post: Photographer David Slater Claims That Because He Thought Monkeys Might Take Pictures, Copyright Is His
On the post: Photographer David Slater Claims That Because He Thought Monkeys Might Take Pictures, Copyright Is His
Followup: More BS
On the post: Photographer David Slater Claims That Because He Thought Monkeys Might Take Pictures, Copyright Is His
More BS Rides Again
Next >>