Posted on 11/22/2011 11:45:01 AM PST by RobertClark
San Francisco - In a victory for fair use, the publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Stephens Media, filed papers yesterday conceding that posting a short excerpt of a news article in an online forum is not copyright infringement. The concession will result in entry of a judgment of non-infringement in a long-running copyright troll case that sparked the dismissal of dozens of baseless lawsuits filed by Righthaven LLC.The case began when the online political forum Democratic Underground -- represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Fenwick & West LLP, and attorney Chad Bowers -- was sued by Righthaven for a five-sentence excerpt of a Review-Journal news story that a user posted on the forum with a link back to the newspaper's website. Democratic Underground countersued, asking the court to rule that the excerpt did not infringe copyright and is a fair use of the material, and brought Righthaven-backer Stephens Media into the case.
The Court dismissed Righthaven's infringement case because it did not own the article, but Democratic Underground's counterclaim against Stephens Media continued. After initially attempting to defend the bogus assertion of copyright infringement, Stephens Media has now conceded it was incorrect.
"I knew the lawsuit was wrong from the start, and any self-respecting news publisher should have, too," said Democratic Underground founder David Allen. "I'm glad that they have finally admitted it."
"This concession comes after more than a year of needless litigation," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "Stephens Media never should have authorized Righthaven to file this suit in the first place, and should never have wasted our client's and the court's time with its attempts to keep Righthaven's frivolous claim alive for the last year."
The original lawsuit against Democratic Underground was dismissed earlier this year, when Judge Hunt found that Righthaven did not have the legal authorization to bring a copyright lawsuit because it had never owned the copyright in the first place. Righthaven claimed that Stephens Media had transferred copyright to Righthaven before it filed the suit, but a document unearthed in this litigation -- the Strategic Alliance Agreement between Righthaven and Stephens Media -- showed that the copyright assignment was a sham, and that Righthaven was merely agreeing to undertake the newspaper's case at its own expense in exchange for a cut of the recovery. In addition to dismissing Righthaven's claim, Judge Hunt sanctioned Righthaven with fines and obligations to report to other judges its actual relationship with Stevens Media.
Righthaven has filed hundreds of copyright cases based on its sham copyright ownership claims. Despite several attempts by Righthaven and Stephens Media to re-write their Strategic Alliance Agreement, half a dozen judges have ruled against the scheme to turn copyright litigation into a business.
"This is a hard fought and important victory for free speech rights on the Internet," said Laurence Pulgram, the partner who led the team at Fenwick & West, LLP in San Francisco. "Unless we respond to such efforts to intimidate, we'll end up with an Internet that is far less fertile for the cultivation and discussion of the important issues that affect us all."
WILL FREEREPUBLIC GET IT’S MONEY BACK?
This is great news!
Does this mean we can post from Gannett, now?
Only if we have the wherewithal to fight off another lawsuit. We don’t.
Hmmmm Does Stephens Media have a potential to be sued for this? (Like in being forced to pay out money?) Verrrrry Interesting. That out to cool their zeal for such scams.
As much as this pains me to say:
Kudos to DUH for taking on Righthaven.
To kick those bottom feeders you’d need a submarine to find them and a torpedo to clear away the slime.
You and I think alike. They were careful to craft, into the summary judgement, an agreement for confidentiality of contract data related to, but not limited to: Righthaven. I wonder if those documents demonstrate a liability? Or worse yet, a potential RICO violation involving lawyers, Righthaven, and Stephens?!?! Just speculation on my part, but it does make one wonder......
Righthaven will be filing for bankruptcy soon if they haven’t already. The sheriff has already been sent to seize their assets to satisfy claims against them. Turns out their bank account only had a couple thousand in it. I suspect they’ll be trying to take the CEO’s personal assets next. Sincerely doubt we’ll be seeing any of our money back.
Stevens media will probably slither out of any responsibility.
Doubtful but I have no idea of the terms FR agreed to but usually a prior settlement isn’t impacted by future judgements. The settlement is a contractual agreement and would often cost as much to fight, even under these circumstances, as the settlement cost. That’s how these trolls work; they find a magic middle-ground where it makes more financial sense to settle than to fight. It is legal blackmail. (If you don’t give us $X.XX, we’ll sue you and it will cost you twice as much in legal fees.)
That’s to bad. Always been a source of irratation to me( and I’m sure many others)
But at least their con game is OVER!
Right is right, and in this case DU was right, even if they are DU.
That type of approach could put a lot of chips on the gambling table.
Media types do not like liabilities.
Only one way to break an “egg sucking dog”.
It ain’t over until Righthaven coughs up all the dough it cost for the attorneys that had to be hired.
Very sad they took us and others in their scam and we can’t get at least some money back.
The turkey’s have at least been stopped and hopefully the CEO’s personal assets will be taken.
Are there celebratory threads over at the DUmp?
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.