AP is reporting that a Federal judge in Nevada ruled against Righthaven, noting that a Las Vegas law firm can't sue others in regard to copyrights owned by a news company.

It was the lawsuit against the website Democratic Underground that brought this ruling.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/arti...3dfbdd0ced

Seems like an odd ruling.

(06-15-2011 02:27 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  Seems like an odd ruling.

Not sure why you think that. Should I be able to sue you for illegally downloading that season of Dexter?

What is this all about?

Copyright infringement under the DMCA. Or actually, extortion under the DMCA.

(06-16-2011 12:20 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  What is this all about?

Righthaven LLC is suing message boards, blogs, etc. that copy and paste entire (or even snippets) of articles from the Las-Vegas Review Journal and a few other publications.

However, Righthaven isn't the owner of these copyrights, and can't sue. Even if hired by the copyright owner.

(06-16-2011 07:52 AM)Raider_ATO Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 12:20 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  What is this all about?

Righthaven LLC is suing message boards, blogs, etc. that copy and paste entire (or even snippets) of articles from the Las-Vegas Review Journal and a few other publications.

However, Righthaven isn't the owner of these copyrights, and can't sue. Even if hired by the copyright owner.

And I find that odd. Because if I were the owner, I'd be able to hire a lawyer to file that case. And as the owner, I should be free to seek redress in manners that suit me.

I don't like the cases that Righthaven bring to court, I think they abuse the fair use principle and intimidate individuals, but I still find this particular ruling contrived and illogical.

(06-16-2011 07:55 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 07:52 AM)Raider_ATO Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 12:20 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  What is this all about?

Righthaven LLC is suing message boards, blogs, etc. that copy and paste entire (or even snippets) of articles from the Las-Vegas Review Journal and a few other publications.

However, Righthaven isn't the owner of these copyrights, and can't sue. Even if hired by the copyright owner.

And I find that odd. Because if I were the owner, I'd be able to hire a lawyer to file that case. And as the owner, I should be free to seek redress in manners that suit me.

I don't like the cases that Righthaven bring to court, I think they abuse the fair use principle and intimidate individuals, but I still find this particular ruling contrived and illogical.

Hiring a lawyer so you can sue and having someone else file suit (in their name) are entirely different things..

When the goal is to force settlement. It's extortion.