Righthaven Archives
A judge in Las Vegas delivered yet another serving of criticism Tuesday to copyright lawsuit company Righthaven LLC.
U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt, in his latest blast at the company, warned Righthaven to stop wasting time and mentioned its controversial litigation practices — tactics that critics say include coercing defendants into settling with dubious lawsuit claims.
Here’s the context:
Hunt on July 14 fined Righthaven $5,000 for deliberately hiding from Nevada federal judges the fact that Stephens Media LLC, owner of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, is an interested party in Righthaven’s R-J copyright infringement lawsuits as Stephens Media receives a 50 percent cut of lawsuit revenue, after costs.
In that sanctions order, Hunt also told Righthaven to provide certain documents about its misconduct to defendants in all active Righthaven cases over R-J material.
These documents include an order from June 14 requiring Righthaven to show cause why it should not be sanctioned for making that “flagrant misrepresentation” about Stephens Media to the court, its original lawsuit contract with Stephens Media showing it didn’t have standing to sue over R-J stories and a transcript from the July 14 sanctions hearing.
During that hearing, Hunt suggested Righthaven had been masquerading as a company while operating as an unlicensed law firm.
Righthaven later asked for clarification about whether it could provide these documents by posting them on electronic court dockets instead of providing them directly to defendants, as many of the defendants had not been served. Righthaven suggested it may take quite a bit of work to find and deliver the documents to the unserved defendants.
Hunt responded Tuesday.
“It is insufficient to merely file the required documents; Righthaven must produce the documents to the parties in those cases as the court clearly stated. The reason for this is simple: the court is fully aware of Righthaven’s practice of filing suit against a party and then entering settlement negotiations (and frequently settling) without ever serving the party. The court concludes that depriving those parties of the benefit of the court’s order would be unjust,” Hunt’s order said.
The order that Righthaven provide these documents to all parties is seen as a way for other Righthaven defendants to use that information against Righthaven as they seek dismissal of their own cases — as well as recovery of their legal fees.
Hunt also clarified Tuesday that these documents be filed in all pending matters over R-J material, including those on appeal and those closed but where issues remain such as attorney’s fee applications.
In Righthaven’s clarification motion, it also asked for an extension of time to comply, saying its counsel — Shawn Mangano — has been busy with many matters, including investigating whether it could appeal the $5,000 fine. Hunt on July 29 gave Righthaven an extra 10 days to comply.
In his order Tuesday, Hunt added some color to that decision.
“The court concludes that it was overly generous in granting the extension because counsel’s situation is largely — if not entirely — of his and Righthaven’s own making. Righthaven and its counsel should concentrate their efforts on material issues and court orders, not wishful research. Further, if counsel does not have time to do all that he needs to in Righthaven’s dozens of cases, the court kindly suggests that he or Righthaven obtain additional help, not complain to the court about time constraints,” his order said. “Righthaven also informed the court in its motion that it plans to request a stay of the monetary sanction. The court already granted an extension, which it will not change, and suggests Righthaven not waste its time on a motion requesting any further relief from the sanction.”
Righthaven has been hoping one of the judges in Nevada or Colorado will revive its lawsuit campaign, which has been stalled by standing issues.
In the meantime, the Las Vegas company took more criticism from defense attorneys in two cases so far this week.
Randazza Legal Group in Las Vegas, defending Kentucky message board poster Wayne Hoehn, again insisted Righthaven pay its $34,000 in legal fees after U.S. District Judge Philip Pro dismissed a Righthaven suit against Hoehn for standing and fair use reasons.
Righthaven has appealed and has threatened to sue Hoehn again.
“Righthaven’s threat to sue Hoehn yet again for conduct this court found to be a non-infringing fair use is just further evidence of this bad faith litigation,” Randazza attorneys said in their filing. “Without remedial action by this court, Righthaven will continue onward like a zombie in a B-Movie, clawing its way toward the protagonist no matter how many times it seems to suffer a fatal wound.”
In Righthaven’s lone active Denver Post case in Colorado, which likely will decide if all pending cases there survive or are dismissed, an old foe of Righthaven made its first appearance Tuesday.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation of San Francisco — which has done the most damage to Righthaven by convincing Hunt to unseal its Review-Journal lawsuit contract that’s been used to argue Righthaven lacks standing to sue over R-J cases — filed a brief in the Colorado court insisting Righthaven lacks standing to sue there as well under its Denver Post lawsuit contract.
EFF attorneys Kurt Opsahl and David Kerr said 57 Righthaven suits in Colorado, 24 of which have been dropped or settled, were based on “sham” copyright assignments from MediaNews Group Inc., owner of the Denver Post.
They’re shams, the attorneys said, because the Denver Post maintained control of the copyrighted material, despite Righthaven’s claim of ownership.
“Righthaven lacks ownership of any exclusive right granted under the Copyright Act. Therefore, Righthaven cannot — as a matter of law — establish the first element of a valid copyright infringement claim: ownership of a copyright,” their filing said. “By the same token, Righthaven cannot show constitutional standing, which is evaluated at the time the complaint was filed, because as a non-owner it cannot credibly allege an injury-in-fact.”
Judge John Kane in Denver hasn’t yet indicated when he may rule on Righthaven’s standing to sue there.
Righthaven since March 2010 has filed 275 lawsuits over Review-Journal and Denver Post material in Nevada, Colorado and South Carolina.