"All of the rights Stephens Media assigns to Righthaven are 'subject to the assignor’s rights of reversion,' which are not specified anywhere in the assignment. This raises serious questions about what rights Righthaven actually has to sue (the Vote for the Worst) defendants and those similarly situated, as it could be paying Stephens Media for the bare right to sue for copyright infringement, with those rights reverting back to Stephens Media once Righthaven has recovered a settlement or judgment from the affected defendants. In fact, the wording of the purported transfer seems to indicate that the sole purpose of assigning the copyrights is to give Righthaven technical legal standing to pursue infringements on rights that, in all actuality, still belong to Stephens Media. Such arrangements are prohibited as champertous under Nevada law," the attorneys [Lewis and Roca] wrote.See: Article in full
Righthaven LLC -- a bottom feeding legal outfit -- has teamed up with the Las Vegas Review-Journal and Denver Post to sue mom and pop websites, advocacy and public interest groups and forum board operators for copyright infringement. The strategy of Righthaven is to sue thousands of these website owners, who are primarily unfunded and will be forced to settle out of court.
 | To date Righthaven has been ordered to pay $323,138 in legal fees and sanctions. |  |
Showing posts with label Vote for the Worst. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vote for the Worst. Show all posts
Monday, September 27, 2010
Defense: 'Rights of Reversion' and Champerty Explained
Attorneys Attack Review-Journal Copyright Suit Arrangement
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)