Attorneys Respond to Re-Filing of Mostofi Claim; Key Pahrump Hearing Next Week

Attorneys: Righthaven’s Latest Action Amounts to Fraud

The day Dawson dismissed that suit, July 13, Righthaven simply filed a new suit over the same alleged infringement against Mostofi. Only this time, Righthaven says its standing to sue is bullet-proof as it has obtained complete control of the copyright at issue with the latest amendments to the Stephens Media lawsuit contract, called the Strategic Alliance Agreement (SAA).
That contention is false, attorneys in another case involving the Pahrump Life blog charged in a new court filing this week.
“The restated SAA seeks to perpetuate, in fact, to revitalize Righthaven’s fraud by denying its victims the dismissals of Righthaven’s claims that they deserve,” said the filing by attorneys including Laurence Pulgram.

See: Related VEGAS INC article

More from CALA's Request to File Amicus Brief

Blogger Ken recently highlighted parts of CALA's request to file amicus brief in the claim against Leland Wolf. (CALA is also a friend of the court in the Pahrump Life and DU cases.) Another part of the motion addresses Righthaven's continuous re-filing of claims with an amended SAA.

However, there is a much deeper, much more fundamental problem with Righthaven's standing, one wholly unrelated to the Copyright Act. CALA's amicus brief presents arguments and authorities that conclusively demonstrate—as a matter of black letter law—that Righthaven's assignments are void ab initio and no amendments could ever rescue them. The CALA brief presents a way for this Court and others to conclusively resolve these issues with permanence, which will save Righthaven defendants from endlessly defending themselves against rewritten agreements.

Also, U.S. District Judge Howard McKibben in Reno dismissed a Righthaven lawsuit against a “Ben Jones”, after Righthaven served the wrong Ben Jones with the lawsuit -- and failed to show it had served the correct Ben Jones with the suit. That claim was originally filed over a year ago.

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.