Righthaven Ordered to Pay Attorney's Fees in Case Involving the Democratic Underground

Righthaven Ordered to Pay Attorney's Fees in Another Case

Righthaven LLC, the Las Vegas copyright infringement lawsuit filer, was ordered Thursday to pay $131,457 in attorney's fees to a defendant that prevailed against Righthaven in court.
U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt in Las Vegas ordered that Righthaven pay the fees to attorneys for the Democratic Underground, a political website operator in the Washington, D.C., area.

The order raises the amount Righthaven has been ordered to pay copyright defendants to $318,138. The article also notes that only 24 of its lawsuits remain open, excluding four appeals cases.

See: VEGAS INC article in full

'Moribund' Righthaven Defeated Again; Recap on Important Democratic Underground Case

Problems Pile Up for Righthaven with New Ruling

Legal problems are snowballing for Las Vegas copyright lawsuit filer Righthaven LLC, with a judge on Wednesday entering yet another judgment against the firm.
In Righthaven’s 2010 lawsuit against the Democratic Underground political website, U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt in Las Vegas granted a motion by the Democratic Underground that final judgment be entered against Righthaven.

Why was Righthaven's lawsuit against the Democratic Underground so significant?

• Attorneys for the defendant, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, brought to light the Strategic Alliance Agreement establishing Righthaven's lack of standing to sue.
• Through these actions, the term "sham copyright assignment" was born.
• Chief U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt then threw out the case against the Democratic Underground and fined Righthaven $5,000 for misleading the court.
• Later, in a Democratic Underground counterclaim filed against Stephens Media, the media group admitted that the defendant's use of the material was fair use. 
• On Wednesday, Judge Hunt found that his June dismissal of the case "was a dismissal on the merits" and granted a dismissal "with prejudice."

The Democratic Underground now seeks to recover the legal fees it racked up defending itself.

See: VEGAS INC article in full

Righthaven Files Responses; Judge Hunt Again Raises the Issue of Unauthorized Practice of Law

Week's Recap:

Back in June, attorneys for defendant Dana Eiser filed an amended counterclaim against Righthaven with a laundry list of complaints, including defamation. This past week, Righthaven denied that statements made by Steve Gibson defamed the defendant and filed papers to dismiss the case.

Righthaven Denies Defaming Copyright Defendant

"The Gibson statement does not identify Eiser as someone 'caught violating the law' so that the statement fails to satisfy the element of defamation that it is 'about the plaintiff,'" Righthaven’s filing said.
"Righthaven contends that when considering the statement in the context in which Eiser asserts it should be understood, it could not reasonably be interpreted as stating false statements with a defamatory meaning of and concerning Eiser," Righthaven’s filing said.

In a separate case, Righthaven attorney Shawn Mangano argued that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is jeopardizing its due process rights and also disputed arguments by Citizens Against Litigation Abuse (CALA) that its litigation campaign involves the unauthorized practice of law.

Righthaven Says Foe is Jeopardizing its Due Process Rights

“In a stroke of legal irony, an organization that claims to protect free expression seeks to unquestionably deny Righthaven the fundamental right of procedural due process by asking the court to enter summary judgment when this ground for relief was not requested in defendant’s motion,” Mangano’s brief said. “EFF disregards the fundamental right of procedural due process because it seeks to advance its organizational goal of obtaining a decision from this court that can qualify as an adjudication on the merits so that it can attempt to bar future Righthaven actions.”

Lastly, in a July 14 hearing, U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt stated that the "arrangement between Righthaven and Stephens Media is nothing more, nor less, than a law firm -- which incidentally I don’t think is licensed to practice law in this state." On Wednesday, Hunt suggested this theme again:

Judge Again Suggests Righthaven is Practicing Law Without a License

"The court is dubious as to whether Righthaven can essentially create standing in the middle of a case so as to either prosecute the case independently or intervene. Further, the court questions whether Righthaven can even have a legitimate interest under any agreement (no matter the rights purportedly transferred) because Stephens Media and Righthaven’s arrangement seems very much like a contingency fee arrangement with an entity unauthorized to practice law," Hunt wrote in his order Wednesday.

Question: Does Righthaven LLC Consist of 'Activities Other Than the Practice of Law'?

UPATE 08/22/11: In a filing submitted to a Colorado court yesterday (Unopposed Motion to Withdraw as Counsel), attorney Steven Ganim asked to withdraw as counsel for Righthaven LLC in the case against Leland Wolf, the subject of our August 8th post. Ganim stated that the reason for his withdraw was due to no longer being employed by Righthaven. Observers learned last week that Ganim filed for an address change, from an office address to a P.O. Box, foreshadowing yesterday's court filing. 

08/08/11
Back in May, we noted that according to a statement written by Righthaven attorney Shawn Mangano in an April 19, 2011 letter, "Mr. Ganim is admitted to practice in the State of Florida and he is awaiting his bar examination results from the State Bar of Nevada." (See: Affidavit of J. Malcolm Devoy in Support of Motion for Attorney’s Fees). In the subsequent posting of these examination results May 12, Unofficial February 2011 Nevada Bar Pass List, Ganim's name was not listed.

In the State of Nevada, in-house counsel, such as Ganim, seeking non-standard admission to practice law (an individual who is licensed to practice law in another state but has not taken or passed the Nevada Bar Exam) are allowed to practice under limited conditions set by Nevada Supreme Court Rule 49.10. One of the areas restricted from practice is with businesses who primarily engage in the practice of law, which is exactly what Righthaven LLC appears to largely participate in.

Limited Practice for Government or In-House Counsel:
Nevada Supreme Court Rule 49.10 provides for limited practice of an attorney who is admitted to practice law in any other jurisdiction, and who is employed exclusively for a single governmental entity or as in-house counsel for a single corporation (including its subsidiaries and affiliates), association, partnership, or other business entity situated in or qualified to do business in Nevada, whose lawful business consists of activities other than the practice of law or the provision of legal services.

Rule 49.10 further defines the limitations of activities in part seven:

7. Limitations of activities.
(a) Unless otherwise permitted by law, an attorney certified under this rule may not: (1) Appear as counsel of record for the employer in Nevada in any court, before any administrative or political agency, or in any arbitration, mediation, or alternative dispute resolution proceeding which is court ordered or annexed or authorized by law or administrative rule;

Given all of this together, it must be noted that in Righthaven's recent Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss in the case involving Leland Wolf filed July 29, Steven Ganim is listed as Attorneys for Plaintiff Righthaven LLC along with Shawn Mangano. That document was filed in a Colorado court where the laws may be different than Nevada. It still though raises questions of why Ganim's name is listed on that document as an attorney for Righthaven LLC.

To summarize: 1.) Ganim is licensed to practice law in Florida 2.) Ganim is living and practicing law in the role of in-house counsel in Nevada 3.) Ganim did not pass the Nevada Bar Exam in February. If he took the July exam, the results will not be known until October and 4.) IF Ganim is practicing under Rule 49.10, Judge Hunt made it very clear that Righthaven is nothing more, nor less, than a law firm masquerading as a company, thus Ganim could be facing some consequences.

Judge Hunt's Response to Extension: Focus on Material Issues, Not 'Wishful Research' Efforts

In response to Righthaven's application for extension, Chief U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt granted the 10 additional days, then scolded the copyright trolling group and again clarified the July 14 order by defining legal terms such as "parties" and "pending matters" for Righthaven. Hunt also wrote that Righthaven's situation is "largely—if not entirely—of his and Righthaven’s own making" and that, "its counsel should concentrate their efforts on material issues and court orders, not wishful research."

First, as Righthaven points out in its motion, when the Court issued the sanctions the Court and counsel referred to “parties,” not merely cases. Accordingly, it is insufficient to merely file the required documents; Righthaven must produce the documents to the parties in those cases as the Court clearly stated. The reason for this is simple: the Court is fully aware of Righthaven’s practice of filing suit against a party and then entering settlement negotiations (and frequently settling) without ever serving the party. The Court concludes that depriving those parties of the benefit of the Court’s order would be unjust.
Second, Righthaven must produce the required documents to all parties in all pending matters. The Court stated that the order would “not apply to those cases that have been dismissed unless there’s going to be an appeal in those cases.” The Court clearly ordered that Righthaven produce these documents in cases that have been dismissed but are later appealed. This logically includes cases that have already been appealed. Further, if there are any pending motions in a case, that case is still pending in some fashion. Accordingly, Righthaven must produce the required documents in those cases as well even if all that remains pending is a request for attorney’s fees or some similar matter.

See: Judge Hunt's Response to Application for Extension

Service of process costs money; yet another fee Righthaven has been trying to avoid when filing their no-warning lawsuits. Hunt knows Righthaven's game and effectively just tightened up the screws.

Too Busy to Meet Terms: Righthaven Files for Extension to Comply with July 14 Order

Righthaven appears too busy to comply with Judge Hunt's recent July 14 ruling, specifically with Local Rule 7.1-1, which requires the disclosure of interested parties in all actions. This includes providing each party with a copy of Judge Hunt's June 14, order, the transcript from the July 14 hearing, a copy of any order from the July 14 hearing to all parties involving Stephens Media and a copy of the Strategic Alliance Agreement (SAA). The application for extension requests 10 additional days.

Righthaven’s counsel has diligently investigated the number and nature of Righthaven’s pending cases concerning Stephens Media. Counsel has identified seventy-eight (78) cases that appear to fall within the Court’s Order. Counsel’s investigation has further revealed that service of process has not been made in a significant number of these cases. Counsel’s investigation has been extremely time consuming and has also been impacted by numerous pending responses dates in a significant number of Righthaven and non-Righthaven matters. In short, performing the degree of due diligence required vastly exceed the amount of time counsel anticipated dedicating to this portion of complying with the Court’s Order.

See: Application for Extension in full

In part 6, the document adds, "As of now, counsel still is investigating how to provide non-served parties with the materials required under the Order." In the past, Righthaven has wrongly served, not served on time or not served defendants at all. As stated not long ago by observer Eric Goldman, "I don't know if it's their staff turnover, general incompetence or something else, but Righthaven has made a surprisingly high number of unforced errors for a company whose sole business is litigation."

Attorneys for Eiser File Supplemental Notice; Request Full Transcript of July 14 Hearing

On Friday, attorneys representing Dana Eiser filed a supplemental notice to her previous motion to dismiss. The new filing requests a full transcript of Judge Hunt's July 14 sanctions hearing and any written connection to it, as well as the consideration of a public statement recently penned by "Sherm." As readers recall, "bully-hater" Sherm vacated his roles as CEO of Stephens Media and publisher of the R-J in November 2010, but continued his column, which time and again gets him into trouble.

Yesterday, Frederick authored a blog post about Sharron Angle and media reaction to her unsuccessful Senate campaign. This post is attached as Exhibit 1.9 The Angle posting elicited comments, and Frederick responded to several of the comments. In one of those responses, Frederick referenced the Righthaven lawsuit against Sharron Angle:
Frederick’s remark, “I even sued her for lifting our material”, is a statement that is of substantial relevance to Defendant’s claims that the Righthaven-client relationship is a sham. It constitutes a public admission by Stephens Media’s then-CEO that he—and by extension, Stephens Media—was truly in control of the Righthaven litigation. It is ironic that several hours before Judge Hunt’s sanctions hearing, Sherman Frederick made a public statement confirming everything that Judge Hunt would find later that same day.

Attorneys for Eiser, who are now litigating against Righthaven in four U.S. courts, requested in the filing that the court withhold ruling on the cross motions to dismiss until Righthaven provides the court with materials from the July 14 hearing. As pointed out in the filing, Hunt not only issued a monetary sanction against Righthaven on that day, he also ordered Righthaven to provide specific materials to every court currently handing a Righthaven case, including items requested in Friday's filing.

South Carolina attorneys representing Dana Eiser include: Todd Kincannon of The Kincannon Firm, Bill Conner of Horger and Conner LLC and Thad Viers of Coastal Law LLC.

See: Eiser's Supplemental Notice Regarding Cross Motions to Dismiss
See: Eiser's Amended Response to Righthaven's Motion to Dismiss

Judge Hunt Fines Righthaven $5,000 for Misleading Court; 'Masquerading as Company'

Earlier today, VEGAS INC reported in a brief article that U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt fined Righthaven LLC $5,000 for misleading the court about its lawsuits. No attorneys for Righthaven were personally punished by the judge. Shortly thereafter, the newspaper published a follow-up with more details. There were indeed damning aspects of Hunt's ruling, including his belief that Righaven's failure to disclose Stephens Media as an interested party was not an oversight, but intentional.

Judge: Righthaven Masquerading as a Company

Besides the $5,000, Hunt ordered Righthaven to disclose its original lawsuit contract with Stephens Media in active lawsuits over R-J material. He also ordered that a transcript of today’s hearing, in which he made several negative comments about Righthaven’s conduct, be posted on Righthaven court dockets.
--snip--
“In the court’s view, the arrangement between Righthaven and Stephens Media is nothing more, nor less, than a law firm — which incidentally I don’t think is licensed to practice law in this state — with a contingent fee agreement masquerading as a company.”

See: Related VEGAS INC article

Blogger Ken Comments on Possible Results of $5,000 Sanction Ordered by Judge Hunt

Righthaven Sanctioned for Lying to a Federal Court

Judge Robert Hunt of the Federal Court of Nevada has issued a rule 11 citation against Righthaven for misleading a Federal Court. The fine is $5000 but the actual result of this will be DEVASTATING to Righthaven. The Nevada State Bar will have to act on this and perhaps even the Nevada Attorney General. Righthaven, Steve Gibson, and Shawn Mangano’s reputations will forever be tarnished. Righthaven is finished.
This stems from a case against the Democratic Underground who was sued by Righthaven over copyright infringement. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) defended the DU against Righthaven. Judge Hunt has already dismissed the case due to lack of standing and now has fined Righthaven for claiming they were the owners of the copyright in question even though Stephens Media only assigned them the bare minimum right to file lawsuits...

See: Blog post in full

However, after gathering a few quick opinions, the concern is that the State Bar of Nevada will drop its investigation. Why get involved after a federal judge has already meted out punishment?

Third Judge Rejects 'Alliance' Agreement; Dismisses Case Against Website Operator

UPDATE 07/14/11: Late last night, when the updated information became available, it was not known if Righthaven had filed a new case against Mostofi. This is exactly what Righthaven has done. (See: Righthaven LLC v. Mostofi) The new case, bound by the third revision of the SAA, only enjoys non retroactive status by its third revision. It was expected that Righthaven would re-file at least one case under the third revision of the SAA to show the rest of the defendants how far they are willing to go.

UPDATE 07/13/11: VEGAS INC reports that just hours after Judge Dawson dismissed the copyright lawsuit against Dean Mostofi, Righthaven sued Mostofi again -- this time based on the third version of the SAA. Righthaven has been called many names in the past including: copyright extortionists, parasitic bottom feeders, un-American, shameful, engaging in unclean hands and just recently a gang of con artists. It's hard to know what to add to this list in light of this re-filing. Denialist scavengers?

Third Judge Rejects R-J Copyright Suit Arrangement

In today’s ruling, Dawson rejected the first set of amendments Righthaven and Stephens Media made to their lawsuit contract in May. The contract is called the Strategic Alliance Agreement (SAA). In this case, a second set of amendments unveiled this month apparently weren’t presented to Dawson before his ruling.
"Here, plaintiff and Stephens Media attempt to impermissibly amend the facts to manufacture standing. Therefore, the court shall not consider the amended language of the SAA, but the actual assignment and language of the SAA as it existed at the time the complaint was filed," Dawson wrote in his ruling.

See: Related VEGAS INC article
See: Order to Dismiss (Righthaven v. Dean Mostifi)

This news is critical to existing defendants who fear that Righthaven will continue to churn out new versions of the Strategic Alliance Agreement (currently in its third form) until one sticks. As stated now by both U.S. District Judge Kent Dawson and Chief U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt, "the court shall not consider the amended language of the SAA, but the actual assignment and language of the SAA as it existed at the time the complaint was filed." Amendments to the agreement are not retroactive.

A grand congratulations goes out to defendant Dean Mostofi who was sued last June and embarked upon his legal journey pro se. For everyone else, keep your dancing shoes handy. The highly anticipated sanctions hearing with Judge Hunt is tomorrow and may mean the END of RIGHTHAVEN.

Righthaven Throws 'Former In-House Counsel' Under the Bus

First it was a "clerical error" that caused Righthaven to sue an Ars Technica journalist for using an image that was part of a court filing, now Righthaven is blaming an undisclosed "Former In-House Counsel" for not disclosing Stephens Media as an interested party in hundreds of cases they have filed over copyright infringement.

Righthaven submitted their answer to Judge Roger Hunt's order to show cause why they should not be sanctioned for the omission. Their only answer was this unnamed rogue in-house counsel screwed up.

For the foregoing reasons, Righthaven respectfully requests that the Court find its failure to comply with Local Rule 7.1-1 through its former in house counsel does not rise to the level of sanctionable conduct given the circumstances described herein. Moreover, Righthaven has taken corrective action in response to the Court’s June 14th Order by filing amended disclosure statements in almost 120 pending cases in within this District and within the District of Colorado. Dated this 28th day of June, 2011.

See: Shawn Mangano's response

Since so many lawyers have left Righthaven it is difficult to determine exactly who Righthaven is blaming which cannot go over well for any lawyer that has ever worked for Righthaven.

After reading their reply it is not only a question of how much the sanctions will be, which is almost a certainty, but which "former in-house Counsel" will be the first to inflict some pay-back on Righthaven?

Didn't Steve Gibson just say on a TV interview that Righthaven hires some of the smartest laywers in the country?

10 Cases Hinge on Dismissal; Righthaven Given 10 Days to Show Cause

Another Judge Threatens to Dismiss Righthaven Copyright Suits

A fifth federal judge is threatening to dismiss newspaper copyright infringement lawsuits filed by Righthaven LLC.
--snip--
U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks in Reno on Tuesday gave Righthaven 10 days to show cause why 10 suits he is handling should not be dismissed for lack of standing.
These cases are against Chris Brown Web Network, Fullthrottletv.net, Jeffrey L. Nelson, Hush-Hush Entertainment Inc., Wehategringos.com, Charles Coker, Gunner’s Alley LLC, Computer Services One LLC, John Kirk and Bob Sieber.

See: Article in full

Also, it appears Righthaven failed to file a response to Judge Hunt's order to show cause why it should not be sanctioned. What does it mean to fail to file this response?

Amended Corporate Disclosure Statement Shows Fear and Potential Sham Agreement

Is the Righthaven-Denver Post Agreement a Sham?

Righthaven LLC filed an Amended Corporate Disclosure Statement today that shows that the Denver Post (aka MediaNews Group, Inc) had a stake in the litigation brought by Righthaven against persons and website operators who allegedly infringed against the Post. The filing reveals that though not threatened with sanctions by a Colorado judge (yet), Righthaven is afraid that it will be. The document also shows that the "agreement" between Righthaven & Company and MediaNews Group is apt to be very similar to the sham Strategic Alliance Agreement it struck with Stephens Media LLC.

See: Amended Corporate Disclosure Statement

Two federal Nevada judges have already determined that the Strategic Alliance Agreement is a sham and have begun dismissing cases governed by it. The countdown clock is ticking Righthaven...

Judge Hunt Dismisses Another Righthaven Lawsuit Due to Lack of Standing

Judge Tosses Righthaven Suit Against Former Prosecutor

Another bitterly-contested Righthaven copyright infringement lawsuit was dismissed in Las Vegas today – but this time there was no determination about fair use.
Roger Hunt, chief U.S. District Court judge for Nevada, today dismissed the Righthaven LLC lawsuit alleging copyright infringement against former federal prosecutor Thomas DiBiase.
Just as he ruled last week in the Democratic Underground case, Hunt today found Righthaven lacked standing to sue DiBiase.

See: Article in full | View: Dismissal Ruling by Judge Hunt

Hunt also noted that Judge Philip Pro found this week that Righthaven still lacks standing to sue after it's May 9 "clarification" of the Strategic Alliance Agreement.

Related articles:
06/14/11: Judge Rules Righthaven Does Not Have Standing to Sue; Threatens Sanctions
04/19/11: EFF Releases Important Commentary About Friday's Crucial Discoveries
10/20/10: EFF Files Counterclaim on Behalf of Site that "Benefits the Public Interest"

Wired Interview Shows a Defiant Steve Gibson

Righthaven CEO Steve Gibson gave a very defiant response in a telephone interview given to WIRED. Gibson said “As of today, there should be no question whether Righthaven has standing,”. Oh has something changed? Is Gibson referring to the changes that Judge Hunt has already deemed "Cosmetic". Is Righthaven and Stephens Media again altering the agreement? If so it would show continued bad judgment on Stephens Media's part that has already subjected themselves to potentially massive liabilities over Righthaven.

Gibson also says they may refile suits that are either dismissed over standing or if any of those that have settled are vacated. Gibson is being defiant at a very bad time when a Federal Judge has ordered his company to explain why they should not be subject to sanctions. My guess is that these pronouncements by Gibson is not going to impress the judge.

Sorry Steve Gibson but you are no longer in a position to threaten people anymore. The Jig is up. Game Over. Checkmate. You lose!

Read Wired Story: Bloggers Mulling Legal Action Against Righthaven

Intellectual Property Law Expert Weighs In: 'Righthaven's Entire Enterprise is on the Ropes'

Eric Goldman, an intellectual property law expert and Righthaven critic, comments on the ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt in a blog post today. Among other aspects, Goldman addresses the judge's severe criticisms of Righthaven, such as the rejection of Righthaven's basic substantive argument as "flagrantly false—to the point that the claim is disingenuous, if not outright deceitful." Given the tenor of the opinion, Goldman writes, "it seems like a sanctions order is inevitable."

Righthaven Benchslapped in Ruling Saying It Lacks Standing--Righthaven v. Democratic Underground
--snip--
In addition to the adverse substantive ruling, the judge criticized Righthaven unusually harshly in this opinion. The "high"lights:

• the judge rejects Righthaven's basic substantive argument as "flagrantly false—to the point that the claim is disingenuous, if not outright deceitful."
• the judge emphatically rejects Righthaven's attempt to argue that other judges had already upheld the copyright assignment, saying that "at best, this argument is disingenuous." Righthaven took the very aggressive position of citing one of the judge's earlier rulings back to him--and he seemed pretty angry that Righthaven sandbagged him in the prior ruling and then tried to estop him.
• the judge summarizes the overall ruling by saying "the Court believes that Righthaven has made multiple inaccurate and likely dishonest statements to the Court."
• the judge then goes on to lambaste Righthaven for not identifying Stephens Media as an interested party in the lawsuit, calling that omission "brazen" and "egregious."

See: Article in full

Eric Goldman is an associate professor at California's Santa Clara University School of Law and director of its High Tech Law Institute.

Judge Rules Righthaven Does Not Have Standing to Sue; Threatens Sanctions

Could Lead to Dismissal of Many Cases

Judge Rules Righthaven Lacks Standing to Sue, Threatens Sanctions...

A federal judge in Las Vegas today issued a potentially devastating ruling against copyright enforcer Righthaven LLC, finding it doesn't have standing to sue over Las Vegas Review-Journal stories, that it has misled the court and threatening to impose sanctions against Righthaven.
Because he found Righthaven doesn't have standing to sue, Chief U.S. District Judge for Nevada Roger Hunt dismissed Righthaven's copyright infringement lawsuit against the Democratic Underground.

See: Article in full | View: Ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt

EFF Issues Announcement

Righthaven Copyright Troll Lawsuit Dismissed as Sham

San Francisco - In a decision with likely wide-ranging impact, a judge in Las Vegas today dismissed as a sham an infringement case filed by copyright troll Righthaven LLC. The judge ruled that Righthaven did not have the legal authorization to bring a copyright lawsuit against the political forum Democratic Underground, because it had never owned the copyright in the first place. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Fenwick & West LLP, and Las Vegas attorney Chad Bowers are defending Democratic Underground.
"We are pleased that the Court saw through Righthaven's sham assignment of the copyright and dismissed its improper claim," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "Today's decision shows that Righthaven's copyright litigation business model is fatally flawed, and we expect the decision to have wide effect on the over 270 other cases Righthaven has brought."

See: Article in full

Related articles:
04/19/11: EFF Releases Important Commentary About Friday's Crucial Discoveries
04/18/11: Recent Dismissal Filings Available for Active Righthaven Defendants - Download Now

Case Against Michael Leon Dismissed Without Prejudice

Righthaven Case Against MAL Dismissed

Thanks to the work of an array of brilliant attorneys and friends, [hat tip to J. Malcolm DeVoy of Randazza Legal Group], Righthaven's case against me was dismissed (without prejudice) this morning by the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro, United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
--snip--
The status of litigation against my co-defendant, Denise Nichols, a Vietnam-era, Gulf War veteran, and a retired U.S. Air Force flight nurse—who spends her time when not fighting off ailments sustained in the '91 Gulf War—helping other veterans is not yet clear...

See: Article in full | See: Related Vegas Inc article

The copyright infringement lawsuit against Michael Leon and co-defendant Denise Nicoles, a Gulf War Veteran and a retired U.S. Air Force flight nurse, was filed in September 2010. The case against Leon was dismissed because he was not served on time. The was also true in the lawsuit against Michael Nystrom, whose case was dismissed in March.

As mentioned in Leon's post, the strain upon Denise has taken a heavy toll. His MAL Contends website is accepting legal and financial assistance to help Denise. A congratulations though, is still due: Congratulations! Your case is also the first to be dismissed since critical information was unsealed last week by Chief U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt.

Judge Rejects Righthaven Website Domain Demand

Judge Strikes Righthaven Website Domain Demand

Things went from bad to worse on Friday for Las Vegas copyright enforcement company Righthaven LLC when a judge rejected Righthaven’s standard copyright infringement lawsuit demand that defendants forfeit their website domain names to Righthaven.
--snip--
Hunt’s ruling on those two issues came in a Righthaven lawsuit against former federal prosecutor Thomas DiBiase, who has a website covering “no body” murder investigations nationwide...

See: Article in full

See: Commentary from the Electronic Frontier Foundation

Talk about a killer Friday for Righthaven!