Righthaven rocked, owes $34,000 after "fair use" loss

[DainBramaged]

The wheels appear to be coming off the Righthaven trainwreck-in-progress. The litigation outfit, which generally sues small-time bloggers, forum operators, and the occasional Ars Technica writer, has just been slapped with a $34,000 bill for legal fees.

Righthaven v. Hoehn, filed in Nevada federal court, has been an utterly shambolic piece of litigation. Righthaven sued one Wayne Hoehn, a longtime forum poster on the site Madjack Sports. Buried in Home>>Forums>>Other Stuff>>Politics and Religion, Hoehn made a post under the username "Dogs That Bark" in which he pasted in two op-ed pieces. One came from the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which helped set up the Righthaven operation. Righthaven sued.

This was the salvation of the news business? Targeting forum posters in political subforums of sports handicapping sites? But at least it looked like Righthaven had a point; copying had certainly occurred. Had infringement?

Before it was all over, the judge decided that Righthaven had no standing even to bring the case, since only a copyright holder can file an infringement suit (Righthaven's contract only gave it a bare right to sue… which is no right at all). Then the irritated judge decided that Hoehn's cut-and-paste job was fair use, helping establish a precedent that could undercut the entire Righthaven approach.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/08/righthaven-rocked-owes-34000-after-fair-use-loss.ars

Then the defense lawyers wanted to be paid. They asked for $34,000 in fees, arguing that they had won the case. To avoid paying the opposing lawyers, Righthaven recently argued that fees could not be awarded; since Righthaven had no standing to sue in the first place, it argued, the court had no jurisdiction over the case at all, not even to assign legal fees.


Scum

[xchrom]

1. Righthaven = vulture excrement.

May Life hold many bad things in store for them.

[valerief]

2. I don't agree. At least vulture excrement does some good. nt

[Hassin Bin Sober]

3. "Righthaven recently argued that fees could not be awarded; since Righthaven had no standing to sue"

:rofl:

[catbyte]

4. I know, LOL. They admitted their own scam.

:rofl:

[Lone_Star_Dem]

5. We were full of shit, and as such should not have to pay a dime to our legal team!

Is this justice or Karma? Either way, I like it. :D

[struggle4progress]

6. Maybe they'll write a book: "Common barratry: profit from groundless judicial proceedings!"

[Hassin Bin Sober]

7. I would buy it. The guy must be smart...

He's got a vest and a headset and a wood-paneled office and everything!!

[struggle4progress]

8. There may be a sequel: "Idiot's guide to moonlighting as a whorehouse pianist"

[Hassin Bin Sober]

9. You're killing me.

He has a wife, you know....