Dismissed for Lack of Standing; Defendant Entitled to Summary Judgment

Righthaven v. Wayne Hoehn

In the ongoing case of Righthaven defendant Wayne Hoehn, who is represented by Randazza Legal Group, U.S. District Judge Philip Pro has ordered the case dismissed due to lack of standing and has granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment. Hoehn was sued by Righthaven in January 2011 after posting an editorial in full (Public employee pensions - we can't afford them) to madjacksports.com, originally published by the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

See: Order to Dismiss: Righthaven v. Wayne Hoehn

Pro ruled that at the time of the posting, "Righthaven was not the owner of the Work, rather the Work was owned by Stephens Media." Pro then cites damning portions of the Strategic Alliance Agreement (SAA). Further on, he states: "The Court finds the SAA in its original form qualifies the Assignment with restrictions of rights of reversion, such that in the end, Righthaven is not left with ownership of any exclusive rights," and effectively, "does not have standing to bring a suit for infringement."

Judge Pro's ruling also denies that Righthaven's May 9 "clarification" to the SAA contract (pdf) was meaningful or significant, stating that, "It does not provide Righthaven with any exclusive rights necessary to bring suit." Pro adds, "The May 9, 2011, clarification provides Righthaven with only an illusory right to exploit or profit from the work, requiring 30 days advance notice to Stephens Media before being able to exploit the work for any purpose other than bringing an infringement action."

Lastly, the ruling states that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment -- a procedural device used during civil litigation to dispose of a case without a trial -- on the grounds of fair use. Pro states that Righthaven failed to present "an affidavit showing the specified reasons it needs to conduct discovery to oppose summary judgment, or, the types of facts it hopes to elicit, that these facts exist, and that these fact are necessary to oppose summary judgment." Pro denied additional discovery.

See: Related VEGAS INC article

Congratulations Wayne! Gold star lawyering Randazza Legal Group!

The Media Bloggers Association Intervenes on Behalf of Righthaven Defendant

National Bloggers’ Group Intervenes in Copyright Lawsuit Campaign

A national bloggers’ group intervened in the Righthaven LLC newspaper copyright infringement lawsuit campaign Wednesday, urging a federal judge not to reward Righthaven for what the bloggers call its “get-rich-quick scheme.”
The Media Bloggers Association filed a friend of the court brief in one of the Righthaven lawsuits, urging a Nevada federal judge to award only minimal damages — if any — and no attorney’s fees to Righthaven against a defaulting defendant.

See: Article in full | Read: Amicus Brief in full

Excerpts from the Amicus Brief

The vast majority of the victims of this scheme are under the impression that by giving proper attribution to a source, they are within their rights to use such excerpts. Almost none of them could ever afford legal representation; flummoxed by the threat of a $150,000 potential statutory damage award – an amount that it can safely be said none of them could dream of satisfying...
--snip--
Phony “assignments” are not the only venal and manipulative aspects of the Righthaven scheme. By design, Righthaven sues mostly retirees who, terrified of losing their retirement savings, generally settle their cases quickly and without discovery...
--snip--
Without revealing exactly what exclusive rights Righthaven has acquired in the works, if acquiring any at all, Righthaven essentially buys the bare right to sue for copyright infringement – which purchase is banned by copyright law – and uses it to sue small website operators by the hundreds...
--snip--
In every Righthaven case, Righthaven discovered a small website or blogger’s use of an article – which very well may have been fair use – and then claimed to acquire the story’s rights, followed by a copyright registration and federal lawsuit. This case follows the same formula...
--snip--
Righthaven’s agreements with Stephens Media include a mysterious “right of reversion” that allows whatever rights Righthaven does acquire to revert back to Stephens Media under circumstances unspecified in the parties’ written agreement. This raises serious questions as to whether Righthaven truly owns the copyright at all...
--snip--
Righthaven’s business model is simple, cynical, and ethically questionable. Righthaven finds instances of infringement relating to newspaper articles and pictures of essentially trivial economic value on blogs and other small websites without significant readership, advertising or other resources...
--snip--
This model, if sustained by law and emboldened by this Court granting Righthaven the damages it seeks, poses a singular and unique threat to Amicus’ membership. The interests of bloggers acting under Amicus’ umbrella will be adversely affected by any award of damages granted to an entity that collects illusory copyright rights for the sole purpose of litigation...

These excerpts do not reflect the thoughtful and informative depths of this 22-page document, but do provide insight into Righthaven's shocking predatory lawsuits.