Having lost bigtime in its lawsuit against the Democratic Underground, in a ruling where the judge questioned Righthaven's motives and legality, it appears Righthaven is fighting back. In that original ruling, Righthaven was totally dismissed from the case, because the judge recognized that the company never actually held the copyrights in question, and thus had no standing to sue. Righthaven has now filed with the court to be added back to the case, claiming that its "amended" agreement with Stephens Media has fixed all the problems and has now made it clear that Righthaven is, in fact, the copyright holder. Not only that, but Righthaven claims that the new agreement means that Righthaven is the only one with standing, in an attempt to get Stephens Media off the liability hook.
Of course, it seems that Righthaven may have a serious uphill battle here. The judge in the case had already seen the amended agreement and suggested that it was cosmetic, at best. Judge Hunt clearly saw this for what it was: a highly questionable attempt to pretend Righthaven had copyrights it never actually had, to give it only a very limited right to sue -- and, an attempt to shield (the much larger) Stephens Media from liability for having filed questionable lawsuits. I would not be surprised to see the judge reject this as just a superficial attempt to get around the clear intention of the Copyright Act to bundle the right to sue with the actual rights prescribed in the Act, and not to allow companies like Righthaven to merely buy lawsuits.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110625/01291014854/righthaven-begs-to-be-put-back-into-case-that-judge-dismissed-company-claiming-its-fixed-all-problems.shtml
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
