Righthaven Loses

A month ago we noted that the legal system had put Righthaven on hold, but now redwolfe7707 noted that "A federal judge in Nevada says a Las Vegas law firm targeting unauthorized content on the Internet cannot sue others over a news company's copyrights. The Las Vegas Sun reported Tuesday the dismissal of a lawsuit by copyright enforcer Righthaven LLC against the website Democratic Underground. U.S. District Court Chief Judge Roger Hunt says copyright plaintiffs must control the rights to material in order to sue for copyright infringement."

Re:My favorite line.

[SirGeek]

Where is THAT text found ? That doesn't appear to be anywhere on the submission or the original story.

Re:My favorite line.

[SniperJoe]

By the way, Wired had a bit more information on the ruling also:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/copyright-troll-sanctions/ [wired.com]

A link to the PDF of the judge's order can be found on the EFF's website as well:

http://www.eff.org/cases/righthaven-v-democratic-underground [eff.org]

Re:My favorite line.

[DworkinLV]

Here's a copy of the judge's order. http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/06/huntsanctions.pdf [wired.com]

Re:My favorite line.

[Trepidity]

It doesn't appear to be included in the rather poor article Slashdot chose to link, but the much better Ars piece [arstechnica.com] links the actual ruling [pdf] [wired.com], which includes that sentence on the last page.

Re:My favorite line.

[SniperJoe]

If you would kindly go to the PDF that I just posted of the actual judge's order (through the EFF's website) and scroll to IV. Order to Show Cause (page 15 of 16), it'll be there.

Re:This is confusing, a little

[Dragonslicer]

Of course a company can hire a law firm to work on a lawsuit against anyone the company wants. When they do, though, the company's name, not the law firm's name, is attached to the case as the plaintiff. In this case, though, Righthaven is listed as the plaintiff, which means that they aren't the firm hired to work on the case, but that they are claiming to be the party that has been harmed.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion