Investor Appetite Loss in Righthaven's Losing Business Model; The Irony of Judge Navarro

Judge Threatens to Dismiss 7 More Righthaven Lawsuits

In its latest setback Thursday, U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro ordered Righthaven to show cause within three weeks why the seven Righthaven cases she is handling should not be dismissed ...
Navarro’s order Thursday was ironic because she is one of a handful of judges handling Righthaven cases who has not yet ruled on the crucial issue of whether Righthaven had standing to sue under its copyright assignments from the Review-Journal and the Denver Post.

See: VEGAS INC article in full

Eight More Righthaven Lawsuits Thrown Out; Judge Hicks Does Not Revive Standing Issue

UPDATE 03/02/12: Another day and another ruling against Righthaven from U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks, who dismissed two more lawsuits Friday due to lack of standing: Jeffery Nelson and Hush-Hush Entertainment Inc. and codefendants PN Media Inc. and Andrew Stoddard. Separately, U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen ordered Righthaven to show cause by March 16th why it should not be sanctioned and held in contempt of court (motion granted to attorneys representing Thomas DiBiase).

03/01/12:
Eight More Righthaven Lawsuits Dismissed

Las Vegas copyright lawsuit filer Righthaven LLC struck out again in court on Thursday when a federal judge in Reno threw out eight more of its lawsuits...
Two of the Nevada judges who have not yet ruled on the standing issue, Hicks and Navarro, for months have kept Righthaven waiting for a decision. Both judges are presiding over multiple Righthaven cases.

U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks ruled on the standing issue Thursday, and he did so by throwing out eight cases. The cases include: Chris Brown Web Network, Fullthrottletv.net, Wehategringos.com, Charles Coker, Gunner’s Alley LLC, Computer Services One LLC, John Kirk and Bob Sieber (May each of your personal lives and businesses finally move on from the "legal terrorism" inflicted by Righthaven!). The remaining Nevada judge to rule on the standing issue is Gloria Navarro.

See: VEGAS INC article in full

Judge Orders Righthaven to Pay Attorney's Fees to Defendant Wayne Hoehn (34k+)

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Philip Pro signed an order requiring Righthaven to pay attorney's fees and costs to defendant Wayne Hoehn, who is represented by Randazza Legal Group. The amount awarded by Pro is $34,045.50 and must be paid no later than September 14, 2011. On July 5, U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro ordered Righthaven to pay attorney's fees for defendant Michael Leon, also represented by Randazza Legal Group. –Kudos to some great lawyering by this group!

In this case, the Court finds that Defendant Hoehn is the prevailing party and the attorney’s fees and costs sought on his behalf are reasonable and supported by Defendant’s Memorandum of Law and the Affidavit of J. Malcolm Devoy, Esq.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Hoehn’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs (Doc. #32) is GRANTED, and that Plaintiff Righthaven, shall not later than September 14, 2011 pay to Defendant Wayne Hoehn the sum of $34,045.50 as and for reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

See: Judge Pro's order in full

Former Defendant Michael Leon

Leon's blog, MAL Contends, posted about this news and offers additional details:

Congratulations are in order for Vietnam War veteran, Wayne Hoehn (Recon Company, E 2/12, 12th Cavalry Regiment (1969-70)), who won another major First Amendment victory over Internet troll, Righthaven LLC today.
It was announced today in the United States District Court, District of Nevada that Hoehn was awarded $34,045 in attorneys' fees and costs...

See: Blog post in full

Free Speech Advocate Ken Bingham

Free speech advocate Ken Bingham also posted about this news at his OneUtah blog:

Chock up another win for the amazing Randazza Legal Group. U.S. District Judge Philip Pro of Nevada ordered Righthaven to pay $34,045 in legal fees for war veteran Wayne Hoehn of Kentucky. Judge Pro also dismissed the case for lack of standing on Righthaven’s part and said even if Righthaven had standing Mr. Hoehn’s use of the Las Vegas Review Journal article was protected by fair use. Righthaven said they will appeal but they are already appealing several cases with no guarantee the appeals court will be anymore receptive than the lower courts.

See: Blog post in full

VEGAS INC (The Heavy Lifters)

The heavy lifters over at VEGAS INC have of course posted about this news as well.

In yet another stunning reversal for Las Vegas copyright lawsuit filer Righthaven LLC, the company won’t be collecting any damages from a man it once branded as a copyright infringer.
Instead, it’s Righthaven that must pay the man's legal fees of $34,045.

See: Related VEGAS INC article

Righthaven Wrangles Over Legal Fees; Hit with New Charges, 'Just a Gang of Con Artists'

UPDATE 07/13/11: TechDirt reports that judge Navarro wasted little time in responding to the situation. In a decision dated July 12, she ordered Righthaven to pay the full fee award by July 25.

New developments occurred this week in the ongoing dispute of attorney's fees in the case against former defendant Michael Leon. On July 5, U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro's ordered Righthaven to pay attorney Malcolm DeVoy and Randazza Legal Group $3,815 for representing Leon on a pro bono basis. Righthaven allegedly balked at the order, so on Saturday the Randazza firm asked for an injunction against Righthaven, freezing $3,815 of its assets to ensure payment. On Tuesday, Righthaven responded by asking Navarro to temporarily stay judgment of the fee award.

Details of the argument, as reported by VEGAS INC, include that Righthaven is refusing to pay based on the belief that any fee award would go to a non-profit legal group not to opposing council. "Had this fact been made clear, Righthaven would have unquestionably dismissed its claims against Leon with prejudice," they argued. Except that Righthaven did not agree to this and only agreed to dismiss Leon's case without prejudice. Later the same day, the Randazza group filed a brief opposing Righthaven's motion to stay the fee award. See parts of this brief below:

The Firm is well aware of the fact that scores of poor defendants in Righthaven cases have been bullied into making payments to Righthaven, despite the clear indications that the cases had no legally supportable foundation. If Righthaven can simply frustrate pro bono counsel’s efforts to collect fees, there will be less of an incentive for experienced counsel to get involved in these kinds of cases.  For example, while the Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”) is a non-profit entity with a noble mission to protect civil liberties on the Internet, it likely would have found it frustrating to secure co-counsel if there was a certainty that there would be no possible fee award, and no possibility of collecting that award...
--snip--
The undersigned made numerous offers to Righthaven to resolve the attorney’s fee issue at the then much lower costs of the fees by donating them to non-profit entities such as the EFF or the Citizen Media Law Project, which Righthaven rebuffed. The Firm’s interest in rewarding non-profit organizations is evident from the Firm’s Reply briefing in the fee motion dispute. Righthaven cannot now complain that it would have made a different decision, had it only known that a firm, which took this case for public interest purposes, would be the recipient of a fee award rather than a non-profit entity. Not only should it make no difference where the fee award is paid, Righthaven’s “would have, could have, should have,” arguments are not in line with the facts...
--snip--
Finally, it is not as though the relief sought is in any way extreme. All the Firm has sought is the maintenance of the status quo – that Righthaven should not be able to disgorge any of its assets, such as they are, until it pays the lawfully entered fee award. This injunctive relief is so soft in nature that it is shocking that Righthaven would even oppose it – unless it has some design or scheme up its sleeve to do exactly what the undersigned suspects. Righthaven’s stated reason for the stay is to ensure that “potential appealable issues related to the July 5th Order are properly evaluated and, if sufficient grounds exist, allow of adequate time to post any security required for appeal.” A stay would change nothing; the Firm has already met the requirements for a preliminary injunction.

See: Opposition to Temporary Stay of Fees Award

The same VEGAS INC article also addresses the Denise Nichols case, who was not awarded attorney's fees by Navarro on Monday. Former defendant Leon, a friend of Nichols, expressed disappointment, but predicted that "Righthaven will get their comeuppance before the end of this calendar year." Lastly, attorneys for Dana Eiser, who are now litigating against Righthaven in four U.S. courts, filed a new motion Monday. Attorney Todd Kincannon wrote in the filing, "The lies worked for a while, but now the jig is up," and "Righthaven is just a gang of con artists, and bad ones at that."

See: Eiser's Amended Response to Righthaven's Motion to Dismiss
See: Related VEGAS INC article

Righthaven Ordered to Pay Attorney's Fees to Group Who Provided Pro Bono Representation

UPDATE 07/06/11: In the early hours of Wednesday, VEGAS INC posted an article about Navarro's order for Righthaven to pay attorney's fees. What remains striking is the volume of litigation errors made by Righthaven whose "sole business is litigation," commented observer Eric Goldman. Such errors also run in stark contrast to Steve Gibson's recent appearance on the Jon Ralston Show where he voiced oddities like: "Righthaven has hired some of the top lawyers across the country..."

07/05/11
You read the title correctly. U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro's order was issued today: Righthaven must pay for the pro bono legal services provided to defendant Michael Leon by attorney J. Malcom DeVoy of Randazza Legal Group. The case against Leon was dismissed without prejudice on April 20. Shortly thereafter, DeVoy submitted an affidavit in support of the motion for attorney's fees. The requested amount of $3,815.00 was granted by Judge Navarro on July 5 and ordered to be paid.

This is a very interesting and endearing development in Righthaven's Shakedown Operation. In the case against Leon, Righthaven failed to serve him properly, which helped his case be dismissed. (Other defendants have also been improperly served or not even served at all.) Leon was represented on a pro bono basis in the April 20 hearing. DeVoy and the Randazza Legal Group successfully argued in subsequent motions that Righthaven still must pay their legal fees -- the judge agreed.

See: Judge Navarro's order to pay attorney's fees

VEGAS INC reported today on far pricier demands for defendant's legal fees!

Another Attorney Defending a Righthaven Victim on a Pro Bono basis Seeks Attorney Fees

UPDATE 05/14/11: The affidavit of DeVoy in support of the motion for attorney's fees contains email exchanges with Shawn Mangano, who represents Righthaven. Mangano states in one letter that Ganim "is awaiting his bar examination results from the State Bar of Nevada." This explains why Ganim is not currently listed at nvbar.org. But it's perplexing that his name is not listed in the Unofficial February 2011 Nevada Bar Pass List either, which posted May 12.

05/13/11
In late April, defendant Michael Leon's case was dismissed without prejudice by the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro. The defendant was also allowed to seek attorney's fees. Attorneys who represented Leon on a pro bono basis in the April 20 hearing, Randazza Legal Group and J. Malcome DeVoy, later filed a motion asking for attorney's fees against Righthaven LLC because negotiating with Righthaven on the matter had proven fruitless.

This brings the total to at least three law groups -- the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), attorney Michael Kerr of the Santangelo Law Offices and the Randazza Legal Group and J. Malcome DeVoy and possibly other individual attorneys and law firms -- who are seeking fees after defending a Righthaven victim on a pro bono basis. (The related memorandum on the Leon case is an interesting read about the pro bono/attorney's fees issue.)

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.

MediaPost Says, "Three's a Trend," After Judge James Mahan's Recent Direction

Three's A Trend: Another Judge Challenges Righthaven's Claims

First, U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro in Nevada ruled that the Las Vegas Review-Journal might have granted an implied license to blogger Jan Klerks, who allegedly reposted a Review-Journal article on his noncommercial site about urban development, www.skyscrapercity.com. Navarro also ruled that Klerks might have made fair use of the article, despite the allegation that the article was reposted in its entirety.
Next, Judge Larry Hicks in Nevada dismissed Righthaven's lawsuit against realtor-blogger Michael Nelson, ruling that posting eight sentences of a 30-sentence Review-Journal article was a fair use.
Now a third federal judge in Nevada, James Mahan, has directed Righthaven to prove that a nonprofit didn't make fair use of an article it reposted -- even though the defendant, the Portland, Ore.-based Center for Intercultural Organizing, didn't argue fair use as a defense.

See: Article in full

Like TechDirt.com, New York-based MediaPost.com has been reporting on copyright troller Righthaven as new defendants are sued and key rulings are issued. (Kudos Wendy Davis!)

Judge Navarro Declines to Dismiss Case Against Canadian-Based MajorWager

Righthaven Gets Legal Win in Copyright Lawsuit Campaign

For purposes of the motion for dismissal, Navarro rejected MajorWager's argument that Righthaven lacked standing to sue because it didn't own the copyright to the story at the time of the infringement. Righthaven finds infringements, obtains copyrights to those stories from the Review-Journal and then sues over the infringements on a retroactive basis.
"The plaintiff’s complaint ... provides enough evidence for the court to reach a plausible inference that rights to the article as well as past infringements were transferred to plaintiff. Absent any other evidence to the contrary, the assignor (Review-Journal owner Stephens Media LLC) appears to have successfully transferred the ownership interest..."

See: Article in full