Is This the End of Righthaven?

New submitter Serpents writes "The new management of MediaNews Group (owner of the Denver Post) decided to terminate their contract with Righthaven. So far, the infamous copyright troll has lost all the infringement lawsuits they've filed (although it seems they've managed to settle out of court in a dozen cases or so). Is it possible this will finally spell Righthaven's doom?" The new CEO of MediaNews said that while the copyright issues are real, the involvement of Righthaven was "a dumb idea from the start."

Comments

1 down

[Dthief]

30,000 trolls to go?

Yes it's the end

[iamhassi]

Righthaven says it might have to file for bankruptcy
"Despite its backing by the billionaire Warren Stephens family, Las Vegas copyright lawsuit filer Righthaven LLC warned today it may have to file for bankruptcy because of a series of setbacks in its litigation campaign.

The warning came in an emergency request by Righthaven to a federal judge in Las Vegas that he stay his order that Righthaven pay $34,045 in legal fees to attorneys who successfully defended Kentucky message board poster Wayne Hoehn against a Righthaven lawsuit."

Re:Yes it's the end

[jank1887]

hmmm.... so, company hires copyright troll. copyright troll creates quite a fuss, creates a bunch of lawsuits, causes a number of other groups to spend lots of money on the suits.

company loses all of the lawsuits, declares bankruptcy before they can be forced to pay back any of the costs their lawsuits created.

way too many steps, but... ???, PROFIT?

should defendants be able to sue MediaNews Group for those costs?

Re:Yes it's the end

[MightyMartian]

I think the complainants should be chained to a wall and the defendants each given a baseball bat and one swing per complainant.

Re:Yes it's the end

[jank1887]

well, Q was hired by company X to do Y. Y incurred lots of costs to other people that Q can't make good on because they go bankrupt. Can people sue X?

Re:Yes it's the end

[MightyMartian]

And you can be sure that defendants who have spent their hard-earned money will be near the bottom of the list. And you can also be sure that the lawyers who created this obscenity made good and sure they were insulated from it. You can be sure that the company never had anything meaningful in the way of assets, so there's nothing for creditors to take a bite of. The lawyers who created Righthaven will still be practicing law tomorrow, will still be living in their houses tomorrow, still be driving their cars tomorrow, their wives and/or girlfriends will still be getting expensive manicures tomorrow.

That any legal system allows something like this to be perpetrated and affords the perpetrators the level of protection these shysters will get isn't worth a damn. Those guys should lose everything and should be thrown in prison and never ever be allowed to practice law anywhere in the United States ever again.

Re:Yes it's the end

[Dhalka226]

It sounds to me as though the respondents should be able to sue Warren Stevens.

One of the reasons that a judge will pierce the corporate veil is undercapitalization, particularly if it is intentional. $34,000 is a ton of money to you or me, but it's not a ton to a company and especially not one funded by a billionaire. "We lost a lawsuit and have to pay attorney fees in one case, we're bankrupt!" sounds undercapitalized to me. For what amounts to a legal group, that is one of the costs of doing business.

Re:Yes it's the end

[Jeng]

Sounds to me that you are the one who is quick to judge.

1) Why does it matter which state he comes from? Just because California is known for hippies doesn't mean everyone in California is a hippie, same with rednecks from Kentucky. Just because he is from Kentucky does not mean he is a redneck. And if he is a redneck, why does it matter?

and

2) Can you confirm that he killed anyone in Vietnam? Can you confirm if he volunteered or was drafted? He might not have volunteered but may have instead made the best of a bad situation after all he was awarded a medal for SAVING lives.

I think you need to step back and look at why you are judging him in such a way before you go and tell other people how they should judge him.

Shell Relationship?

[Frosty Piss]

I thought there was some corporate shell relationship between Righthaven and MediaNews Group? So "terminating their contract" means what, exactly?

Re:Shell Relationship?

[Marc_Hawke]

I thought it was specifically because there wasn't "some corporate shell relationship" between the two that RightHaven started losing all their cases. They simply didn't have the rights to sue because they were just a contractor of MediaNews and didn't own anything.

Righthaven V2

[Bob9113]

Is it possible this will finally spell Righthaven's doom?

I don't think so. I think that the founders of Righthaven have taken one approach at mining the flaws in the copyright system that have become so apparent with the advent of the Internet. They were told, "You did not get the contract right." From Righthaven's perspective, this is nothing more nor less than new market information. They have learned one of the angles that does not work. Every startup has cases like this.

The next step for a startup is to analyze the failure, consider alternatives, and develop a new approach. Of course, that depends on whether they have the operating capital to continue. They may have it in their war chest. If they do not, they would have to seek a new round of funding.

Can Righthaven find some angels or VCs that would be interested? I think the answer to that is a clear, "Yes." Investors want a return on their money. Copyright enforcement has been made extremely lucrative through more than a decade of increasing strictness and penalties. That vein of cashflow exists, and is waiting to be mined. Righthaven has some existing experience in the field. Now Righthaven asks you for funding. Suppose that you believe that this kind of copyright enforcement is not wrong, or that you are antisocial; what would you decide?

Righthaven will exist for at least as long as Darl McBride. And in the unlikely event that Righthaven itself closes its doors, a clone (or several) will rise.

When the government creates revenue opportunities, they get mined. That is what our economic system is designed to do. The only sure solution, assuming one wishes to change the outcome, is to remove the revenue opportunity.

Righthaven isn't done until....

[bmo]

...the lawyers are disbarred, the company closed, their offices destroyed, and the land salted with plutonium dust.

Righthaven Delenda Est!

--
BMO