Righthaven Archives
Las Vegas copyright lawsuit company Righthaven LLC is offering a new argument as it tries to prove it has the right to sue over Denver Post material.
Righthaven since March 2010 has filed 275 lawsuits over material from the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Denver Post.
The no-warning lawsuits claim defendants such as websites and bloggers posted material from those newspapers without authorization and in so doing infringed on copyrights Righthaven obtained from the newspapers.
Righthaven says the suits are necessary to deter rampant online infringement of content from newspapers — critics call the suits part of a money-making scheme involving frivolous and dubious legal claims; as well as attempts to shake down defendants into settling.
Four federal judges in Nevada this summer have ruled Righthaven lacked standing to sue over R-J material because of defective copyright assignments that left the R-J in control of the material Righthaven claimed to own.
The lone judge handling Righthaven lawsuits over Denver Post material in Colorado, in the meantime, has put 33 cases there on hold pending resolution of Righthaven’s standing to sue there.
Defense attorneys say Righthaven doesn’t have standing in the Colorado cases because those copyright assignments are similar to the Nevada cases.
In Nevada, Colorado and South Carolina, in the meantime, critics say the company has been involved in the unauthorized practice of law because its copyright assignments are really contingent fee agreements to pursue lawsuits. Righthaven has denied these allegations.
In the one active case in Colorado in which the standing issue will likely be decided for all the Colorado cases, each involving a Denver Post TSA patdown photo, Righthaven filed new court papers over the weekend disputing charges it doesn’t have standing to sue there because its lawsuit contract with the owner of the Denver Post left the Post in control of the copyrights at issue.
"An important aspect of the court’s analysis is the simple fact that this case does not concern Righthaven attempting to sue for a current or future infringement of a work. Rather, the court must examine subject matter jurisdiction given that Righthaven’s complaint is based on a past, accrued infringement claim," Righthaven said in its filing.
This argument would seem to contradict the plain language in the Righthaven lawsuit at issue against Leland Wolf and the It Makes Sense Blog.
"The defendants’ acts as alleged herein, and the ongoing direct results of those acts, have caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Righthaven in an amount Righthaven cannot ascertain, leaving Righthaven with no adequate remedy at law," Righthaven charged in its March 31 lawsuit.
The suit complained the photo, which was first published Nov. 18, was displayed without authorization on the defendant website on Nov. 29 and Feb. 5.
"The defendants directly profited and continue to directly profit from infringement of the work," Righthaven alleged in the March 31 lawsuit. "Unless the defendants are preliminarily and permanently enjoined from further infringement of the work, Righthaven will be irreparably harmed."
Despite this lawsuit language referring to continuing and future harm to Righthaven, the company in this weekend’s filing stressed the lawsuit was meant just to address past infringements.
This argument by Righthaven likely was prompted by critics pointing out that under its lawsuit contract with the Post, the Post maintained an exclusive license to use the copyrighted material at issue any way it wanted to, with Righthaven receiving only the right to file lawsuits.
"While the CAA’s terms may impact Righthaven’s ability to sue for current and future infringements of the work (photo), the CAA does not divest Righthaven of its ability to sue for past, accrued copyright infringement claims," Righthaven’s filing over the weekend said, citing case law.
The CAA is the Copyright Alliance Agreement between Righthaven and MediaNews Group, owner of the Denver Post.
Righthaven added that should Judge John Kane dismiss the suit against Wolf and the It Makes Sense Blog, the dismissal be without prejudice. That way Righthaven can amend its lawsuit contract with MediaNews Group and sue again over the same alleged infringement.
Defense attorneys in the Denver Post case at Randazza Legal Group in Las Vegas, citing their own case law, have said that even this purported right to sue for past infringements won’t hold up in court, since there’s no such right to sue under the Copyright Act.
"A plaintiff must have an exclusive right to sue for copyright infringement, and that right must be one of those specified in (the law)," the Randazza attorneys wrote in a July 8 filing.
Those rights include the right to reproduce, distribute, display and perform works.
"These rights do not include the naked right to sue for infringement, nor has any court found that they do," the Randazza filing said.
Separately, Randazza attorneys filed a brief in one of Righthaven’s Nevada cases arguing that even after twice amending its lawsuit contract with Stephens Media LLC, owner of the Review-Journal, Righthaven still lacks standing to sue over R-J material.
"This restatement simply represents Righthaven’s latest desperate attempt to acquire whatever rights are necessary to stay in court, while using its allegedly owned copyrights for no purpose other than litigation," said their filing in a Righthaven lawsuit against NewsBlaze LLC. "ighthaven has no purpose for existence other than to sue on copyrights that it obtains only after finding evidence of infringement."
In another Righthaven case, U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt last week gave Righthaven an extra 10 days to comply with his order, until Aug. 8, sanctioning the company for deliberately failing to disclose that Stephens Media is an interested party in its lawsuits.
That July 14 sanction included a $5,000 fine and a requirement that the sanction order and related documents be produced to all parties in the suits involving Stephens Media.
Righthaven said in its motion for an extension that its attorneys have been busy with numerous matters involving Righthaven and with unrelated cases.