Righthaven lawsuits backfire, reduce protections for newspapers

Las Vegas Sun ^ | March 19, 2011 | Steve Green

[Jim Robinson]

One year ago, U.S. newspapers and broadcasters could feel confident they controlled the news content they created.

It was understood that competing and special-interest websites couldn't appropriate that content and post it without authorization.

When such infringements occurred, they were dealt with swiftly and effectively with a simple phone call or email.

Infringing websites typically had re-posted material out of ignorance they were violating the Copyright Act and agreed to remove the material or replace it with a link to the source newspaper or broadcaster.

Then along came Righthaven LLC of Las Vegas, the self-appointed protector of the newspaper industry from such news sharers.

Some 250 Righthaven lawsuits later, Righthaven's startling achievement is that newspapers now have less -- not more -- protection from copyright infringers.

Righthaven may argue its lawsuits have deterred rampant online infringements of newspaper material -- but there's no proof that infringements it usually targets involving bloggers and special-interest websites ever affected newspaper revenue in the first place.

Keep in mind Righthaven doesn't sue local news competitors of the Review-Journal and the Denver Post and it doesn't sue big news aggregators like Yahoo and Google -- likely because it can't find infringements by these sites.

Back to the lawsuits: Just two of Righthaven's lawsuits have been closed by judges on the merits -- both now resulting in fair use losses for Righthaven and its partners at the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

While these aren't binding precedents upon other judges, these rulings can now be used by special-interest websites to justify their postings of what used to be copyright-infringing content. These, clearly, are setbacks for all newspapers interested in protecting their copyrights.

[dirtboy]

Fascinating, Captain...

[musicman]

BTTT !!

[loboinok]

What goes around, comes around!

[Tribune7]

SWEET!!!!!

[Fiddlstix]

[SmithL]

BTTT

[SmithL]

Mahan, James C.

Born 1943 in El Paso, TX

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court, District of Nevada
Nominated by George W. Bush on September 10, 2001, to a new seat created by 114 Stat. 2762; Confirmed by the Senate on January 25, 2002, and received commission on January 30, 2002.

Education:
University of Charleston, B.A., 1965
Vanderbilt University Law School, J.D., 1973

Professional Career:
United States Navy, 1966-1969
United States Navy Reserve, 1970-1972
Private practice, Nevada, 1973-1999
District Judge, Eight Judicial District Court, State of Nevada, 1999-2002

[FlingWingFlyer]

Exploding cigars are funny but they are even funnier when a lawyer fires one up. IMHO.

[Marty62]

Don’t ya just luv the rule of unintended consequences!

[SmithL]

Hicks, Larry R.

Born 1943 in Evanston, IL

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court, District of Nevada
Nominated by George W. Bush on September 4, 2001, to a seat vacated by Johnnie B. Rawlinson; Confirmed by the Senate on November 5, 2001, and received commission on November 7, 2001.

Education:
University of Nevada, B.S., 1965
University of Colorado, J.D., 1968

Professional Career:
Law clerk, Washoe County District Attorney's Office, Nevada, 1968
Attorney, Washoe County District Attorney's Office, Nevada, 1968-1974
District attorney, Washoe County District Attorney's Office, Nevada, 1975-1979
Private practice, Nevada, 1979-2001

[null and void]

That Righthaven's copyright assignments from Stephens Media are flawed in that Stephens Media maintains an economic interest in the content covered by the copyrights. This obscure legal point is likely to explode in the coming months as EFF attorneys representing the Democratic Underground and Righthaven attorneys fight over whether the law allows lawsuits over copyrights obtained for the sole purpose of litigation.

Proving once and for all that even DU isn't completely useless!

[Track9]

There's a real chance these counterclaims could yield further adverse rulings and awards of hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees against Righthaven on four points not covered by Mahan on Friday:

Good.

[bigheadfred]

I’ve always been puzzled by media organizations that are worried about copyright infringements on the internet.

I would think that as readership in print media declines, exposure to a wider audience through places like FR would be a plus.

I have actually subscribed to several magazines because of articles posted on FR.

But then again, what do I know? (bitterly clinging to my guns and religion)

[Track9]

One more very good reason not to advertise. Smart.

[DaxtonBrown]

I think we all kinda suspected it might backfire on the Review Journal and Righthaven given time. I have a couple Las Vegas websites I run that will never get a link to the RJ. I link to the leftist Sun though. They shot themselves in the foot.

[Frantzie]

There was post on here a week ago or something. Righthaven (RH) asked a judge to stop the defendant from “running up their legals bills” because RH was concerned that they would get stuck with the bills if RH lost.

LOL! I hope it happens. Karma is a biotch.

[2nd amendment mama]

I absolutely hope that these $#@*bags get what is coming to them. They certainly caused us at SAS sleepless nights.

[NoLibZone]

LMAO!

One thing to reduce issues would be a link redirect or anonymous buffer to an article.

[PA Engineer]

This use of the courts as an ATM machine by Righthaven hasn't gone unnoticed by the federal judges presiding over these cases.

If this decision is adopted by other judges and upheld on appeal, it would mean any nonprofit could post without authorization entire stories from the Las Vegas Sun or any other newspaper -- and presumably television and radio reports as well.

Hmmm.