Righthaven suffers new setback

That's what happens....

I am not going to comment extensively upon this, since Myself and Jay DeVoy of Randazza Legal Group are counsel for the defendant.

However, I will share that Righthaven filed suit against a guy for posting a news article into a newsgroup. We felt that this was fair use. We moved for summary judgment, and while that motion was pending, we discovered that it seemed that Righthaven did not have standing in the first place. The judge agreed on both grounds, and Mr. Hoehn has prevailed.

Judge Pro’s opinion is here.

4 Responses to Righthaven suffers new setback

  1. Al says:

    I’ve got a question about Stevens Media’s strategy. Until the existence of the details of the agreement between them and Righthaven became public information, the focus of these cases was on copyright law and whether the defendants had reasonable fair use grounds for their publication of Stevens’ materials. Fair enough, I can see how reasonable parties might disagree about some of these cases and sorting this out is what we have courts for.

    However, within days of the contracts between Righthaven and Stevens being published, everyone — laywers, judges, bloggers, and laypeople — seemed to agree that they were insufficient to confer standing to Righthaven to allow them to proceed with their lawsuits. This seems like a strategic blunder of epic proportions, which leads me to my question. How do things like this happen, and why didn’t Stevens simply hire an experience copyright lawyer to sue the people they felt were infringing on their copyrights? What was the theory behind using Righthaven as a middleman?

    I realize the answer probably is wrapped up in hubris, greed, and shortsightedness, but would appreciate any comments…

    Al in Colorado.

  2. Jay Wolman says:

    I’m impressed the judge ruled on both standing and fair use. I guess he really wanted to dissuade Stephens Media from coming back and prosecuting the case on its own. My bet is he didn’t like that they tried to play with standing against the very purpose of copyright light (to protect the author’s interest) and he decided to toss the case.
    Your client did a big no-no in reproducing the whole work; and he is not completely off the hook. Since Righthaven lacked standing, Stephens Media really isn’t bound by res judicata on the summary judgment/fair use issue. Righthaven blundered by not presenting a good argument on how the market for the work was impaired. Stephens Media could overcome that by showing that, had Mr. Hoehn cited the work, rather than reproduced it, some folks might have bought access to the original article. Proof would be by reference to similar occassions where a citation engendered subsequent purchases.
    But, it is a nice win. Looks like Righthaven will have to revise its business model.

  3. […] I mentioned him, Marc Randazza — possibly bored of kicking the shit out of sleazy copyright-troll enterprise Righthaven — was coming in to represent a posse of the […]

  4. as says:

    go marco! yay!

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: