Posted on 08/15/2010 12:11:09 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
A website that lists the victims of Righthaven LLC's "shake down" lawsuits that are causing irreparable harm to the blogging, non-profit and small business communities.
Righthaven LLC -- a bottom feeding legal outfit -- has teamed up with the Las Vegas Review-Journal to sue 'mom and pop' websites, as well as nonprofit, political action, community action, writers, and forum board operators for copyright violations. The strategy of Righthaven is to sue hundreds and thousands of these websites and counts on the fact that many are unfunded and will be forced to "settle out of court." All cases are being filed in a Nevada Federal Court and must be fought in this jurisdiction. You are not safe from Righthaven if you are out-of-state. Are you their next victim?
(Excerpt) Read more at righthavenvictims.blogspot.com ...
Ping.......
Yes, and the congress set up a routine procedure for doing this. It’s called DMCA and it works great. We’ve received nearly three hundred DMCA take down requests in the last ten years and we’ve promptly and completely complied with each and every such request. If a blogger innocently posts more material than a publisher wishes published, all he has to do is request it be excerpted further or pulled, and we do so. It keeps the federal courts from being clogged up with nickel and dime nuisance suits.
Its called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It provides a framework for copyright protections in the digital age. Righthaven is completely ignoring the intent of this act by refusing to notify offenders. Of course, if they did this, 99% of site owners would remove the materials and implement procedures to preclude reoccurence. This would put an end to the shakedowns and dry up the revenue stream.
They're suing the people that did that.
Polite communication between site operators can clear up 99% of these things with no hassles.
It's certainly obvious that you just don't get it.
But then he wouldn't make any money.
That's probably what he's referring to in that statement. It's not a case of bravado, just cold, hard facts.
Turnabout is fairplay. The victims could use the same software to countersue these guys and all their correspondent attorneys throughout the country.
Put the federal court system out of business fur shur.
Any possibility of organizing a national demonstration in front of the LVJR? Attract lots of local and national publicity and ask subscribers and advertisers to join the boycott by refusing to do business with the LVJR?
Certainly this is one stupid bunch of lawyers if they're doing business in Nevada and suing Californians!
Like what will they win? Maybe more dirt with no water rights.
You obviously didn't read my entire post.
I made it clear that in my humble opinion this particular situation is nothing more than a shake-down and should be a criminal offense (if I had my way about it). I was making a blanket statement outside of that in the defense of the folks trying to provide you with free news. I stand in full support of most of the DEFENDANTS in these cases; although I am unfamiliar with a lot of them. There are some that were probably in violation of this basic courtesy... Here on FR, it is rare to see a complete article posted and the admins have designed it in a way that the external and original source should be linked... On FR at least, it's done the right way.
My point is we shouldn't support people reposting articles anymore than we support folks redistributing music files. Not one time did I suggest the defendants in these cases were guilty of it. Even Mr Robinson points out that the system to avoid such things is in place and he cooperates with such requests 100% of the time. This is the simple communication I referenced.
Take your filters off and read my previous post again. Regardless if you are willing to accept it, I have read the articles and understand exactly what is going on, Sir.
Why? You posted redundant info.
Have a nice day.
I am the head network engineer for a solutions provider and we supply connectivity and services for many businesses , internet access being one of those services.
Since by law, we are not really allowed to filter content (it's an arguable point at this time in the law), I get at least one letter a week about some chump running peer to peer emule or something sharing copyrighted movies or music.
Not once have we been to court after dealing with at least a couple hundred of these complaints. We simply apologize and go on a search and destroy mission to find the user responsible, then shut it down. It's a pretty simple and courteous method every time and we agree with the grieving party.. it's not right and we deal with it accordingly.
These jokers here are going to end up on the defensive end of things, I can see it coming. They are going to be challenged all the way to the top and this abuse will be dealt with.
Look up "rambus" sometime and see what happened to them. They pulled a similar stunt about 10 years ago. They created a technology and then shared it with the development community so manufacturers could adopt their technology. When manufacturers started building motherboards and such to accept their new memory, they then turned and sued every one of them for patent infringement.
Ever heard of Rambus? Probably not and now you know why... this kinda stuff doesn't fly very well over the long term.
“Oddly I believe the LVRJ is considered a conservative paper.”
In Vegas, there are only two papers, (besides Spanish, unless it only very recently changed), and they are, IIRC, owned by the same man/group (The Sun even used to come in the LVRJ on some days).
As DJ MacWoW pointed out, the Review Journal, is considered only slightly better than the Sun. But neither are anything like unto conservative.
Sounds shady. They are not outright posting the article and yet getting threats. The right way is to send a warning letter, cease and desist.
A Nevadan said on a Costco shooting thread the same thing you just said. Are there any conservative newspapers anywhere? In any city?
I agree, I think this will end badly for the plaintiff.
I’m surprised that the Electronic Frontier Foundation hasn’t mounted an effort Rightshaven in defense of fair use, or perhaps they have and I just haven’t heard about it. They’d be an obvious ally in fighting this.
Are they not claiming that the entire articles were posted in some cases?
ping
Have they sued Google yet?
If not, why not?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.