Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Righthaven defendant wins first lawsuit dismissal motion
Las Vegas Sun ^ | Wednesday, Oct. 20, 2010 | 12:54 p.m. | By Steve Green

Posted on 10/20/2010 4:44:06 PM PDT by redreno

The Las Vegas Review-Journal online copyright infringement lawsuit campaign sustained a setback Tuesday when a judge granted a real estate agent's motion for dismissal, ruling his posting of part of a Review-Journal story on his website amounted to fair use under copyright law.

(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Free Republic; News/Current Events; US: Nevada
KEYWORDS: barratry; copyright; copyrightsuit; dmca; extortion; fairuse; lawsuit; lvrj; nevada; righthaven

1 posted on 10/20/2010 4:44:10 PM PDT by redreno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: redreno

Ha-ha! Almost as good as when a republican beats a democrat!


2 posted on 10/20/2010 4:51:48 PM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn; Jim Robinson; John Robinson

Ping!


3 posted on 10/20/2010 4:56:45 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows (You can't have IngSoc without an Emmanuel Goldstein.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redreno

At the very end of the article there’s a list of defendants who arrived at settlement agreements with Righthaven, FreeRepublic being one of them. I didn’t realize FR had settled.


4 posted on 10/20/2010 5:15:53 PM PDT by lonevoice (Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice; Fiddlstix

Yes. FR settled. DU is fighting. What’s up with that?


5 posted on 10/20/2010 5:17:41 PM PDT by don-o ("At this point, Islam is just surging into a vacuum" - Mrs Don-o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: don-o

A sound business decision, no doubt. Jim has always believed in the free exchange of ideas. DCMA, while offering some relief in that regard, is not perfect and Righthaven deftly and maliciously navigated between the seams to squeeze as much money as they could from defendants.

There are other defendants who stand a better chance of shutting this slime dog down, and there’s no sense in encouraging Righthaven with a cheap win.


6 posted on 10/20/2010 5:39:10 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: redreno

YESSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those vicious chumps got a beatdown!!


7 posted on 10/20/2010 6:53:59 PM PDT by chilltherats (First, kill all the lawyers (now that they ARE the tyrants).......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; bigheadfred; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; dervish; ...

Thanks redreno.


8 posted on 10/20/2010 8:37:21 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: redreno
Thanks. Almost missed this one but usually on Friday (after motions) I go looking for anything on Righthaven just to see what's happening.

This was definitely good ~ unlike the analysis referenced in the other article I think what happened here was very simple ~ the judge read the article.

8 sentences out of 30 sentences? I'm sure this particular federal judge was prepared to throw the book at Righthaven over that one.

BTW, lest anyone forget it, George Bush was inaugurated in 2005. The next morning the Washington Post claimed a copyright (with the big Circle C mark in fact) on the column containing the inaugural address. There was no content there except that address.

The analysis piece pointed to one of the doctrines regarding news ~ that there are some things that aren't the fruit of your creative juices so you can't copyright them ~ "news", to a degree, being one.

Statements issued by government officials are among those other things you can't copyright either.

What I do when there's an interesting news piece that involves a government agency is go to their website and reference their own piece, and copy their stuff! That does a couple of things of benefit ~ (1) It protects me from some sort of copyright infringement claim, and (2) It helps me do an internal validation of the facts of whatever it was the government agency or official had to say. Many times that will be different than what was reported in the MSM.

9 posted on 10/22/2010 4:10:33 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson