Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Marshals Ordered To Seize Righthaven Property

Posted by Unknown on from the you-have-the-right-to-be-beaten-mercilessly dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Troubled times ahead for Righthaven, as Ars Technica reports that the U.S. Marshals have been instructed 'to use "reasonable force" to seize $63,720.80 in cash and/or assets from the Las Vegas copyright troll after Righthaven failed to pay a court judgment from August 15.'"

19 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. take their servers and router by swschrad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and sell them at sheriff's auction.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:take their servers and router by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Funny

      and sell them at sheriff's auction.

      Ooo. Lemme know when the auction is. Then I can share the secrets with /. =)

      It's a victory, small, but a victory no less.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:take their servers and router by Anrego · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Much as I love the image of the police carting out Righthavens office furnature while some guys in suits quietly weep in the corner.. I imagine all the real assets are long gone, and the actual guys behind it all safely out of the way. Righthaven will go under.. and then re-emerge as a different LLC and keep right on trucking.

      Not saying this isn't awesome, but lets not delude outselves to the nature of these trolls.

    3. Re:take their servers and router by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why would a law firm own their IT infrastructure

      Massive need for confidentiality perhaps?

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    4. Re:take their servers and router by GodInHell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uhm. No.

      First, you need some significant in-house resources just to connect a few hundred computers to the internet. Those aren't free. Notably, that would include routers, as the Grandfather suggested. Second, we cannot allow client data to be outside our control -- that would endanger confidentiality. In Illinois (and in every other state, I guarantee) attorneys are responsible for retaining and protecting client information -- including things like draft memos and attorneys' notes -- from access by any third party without client permission. That's why, for example, I couldn't use google-docs when I was running a solo practice. Even though I could lock access to the documents so only I could view the document, google's privacy policy (at the time I have not verified) gave them the right to view documents in their system. It is -my- responsibility to protect my client's information from search and seizure by the Gov't or a police agency. By entrusting my data to a datacluster, I could lose control of client data and not even know until I get hit for breaching the rules of professional conduct.

      That's just two of the reasons its good to have in-house hardware. I haven't even dipped my toe into how useful leases are for defraying or reducing tax liability, and the myriad other more financial driven reasons why I might want to have an internal IT team.

      Warning: the above is not legal advice. You are not my client. If you have a question, seek an attorney licensed in your state, not the ramblings of a lawyer on /.

      -GiH

  2. A pity... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm assuming that any real money(if Righthaven wasn't itself the assetless shell company being used by the real money) will already have been snuck of the premises by various means, with nothing but a bunch of leased office furniture and a few cheap suits on site; but some days watching those who would crush others with the force of law having their stuff dumped into the street and sold off is just satisfying...

    The cyclically-evicted members of the poor are all too familiar with the treatment; but we don't give it to the arrogant nearly as often as would be socially useful...

    1. Re:A pity... by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Righthaven didn't even own the copyrights to the files they were suing about. I doubt they have much else. What really needs to happen is disbarment of their legal staff.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:A pity... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nope, that's the beauty of the limited liability guaranteed to proprietors of Corps., S-Corps., LLCs., etc.. They'll just let the old corp burn, file some paper, incorporate as Righthaven 2.0 and are back in business once again. No one is held responsible for stupid business practices unless they happen to exist within the set of illegal business practices and then if and only if they neglected to strategically apply lubrication.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    3. Re:A pity... by raydobbs · · Score: 3, Interesting

      IANAL - I believe the legal language is something along the lines of 'The corporate veil (or shield) protecting agents of the corporation from judgements and legal action can be pierced if the agent in question has performed the offending actions while significantly outside the scope of the agent's duties with the employing offending organization.' Basically, it protects employees from personal lawsuits for actions taken by the corporation when the employee was acting as an agent of the corporation in performance of his/her/their job duties, when those duties are in compliance with their stated scope of their duties and those duties do not directly violate the rule of law. So, can't sue a CEO directly for when his towing company accidentally repossesses your car, causing damage - can only sue the corporation. If the CEO was using his towing company to steal cars, then you can 'pierce the corporate veil' and charge him/her directly.

    4. Re:A pity... by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sadly, the, uh bar for disbarment is set very high. You have to be absolutely whackadoodle moonbat crazy like Jack Thompson to be in with shout.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  3. Eye For An Eye by Cylix · · Score: 4, Funny

    Take their domain, computers and women!

    --
    "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    1. Re:Eye For An Eye by melted+keyboard · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, we could find a use for their domain and computers, but what would we do with their women?

  4. This victory is relatively insignificant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This victory is relatively insignificant compared to the massive corporate extortion schemes from the likes of MPAA/RIAA, tech companies, and other industry giants, that go unabated.

  5. Re:Make an example out of them by characterZer0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Copyright laywer troll companies beware!

    Really?

    1. Set up shell company.
    2. Shake down people for easy money
    3. Pay yourself lots of money immediately.
    4. Let shell company go bankrupt.
    5. Profit!!!

    No question marks. This formula will be repeated over and over. Probably by the same people.

    --
    Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
  6. Re:they're in vegas? by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 5, Funny

    go down to the local drug store, pick up a piece of posterboard, and put it on a stick (protest-style).
    print out/draw/whatever a giant-sized version of nelson muntz from the simpsons pointing a finger at the onlooker with a giant "ha-ha" balloon next to him. stand outside their offices for an hour or two as their shit is getting thrown in the street.

    for extra epic ironic insult win, get a friend to get another giant posterboard placard, and stand next to you. His placard should have an arrow pointing at yours and simply read "Copyrighted images used on these placards are protected by fair use laws of the United States."

  7. Retribution by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    but some days watching those who would crush others with the force of law having their stuff dumped into the street and sold off is just satisfying

    Retribution does satisfy the primal urges, but it doesn't help me all that much (as a member of this society).

    I want to be able to search a database of scumbags - their name, dob, and known mailing addresses, so I can avoid ever getting into a business transaction with them. The US Marshalls stealing their copy machine doesn't actually help society in any meaningful way.

    Retributive justice is deeply ingrained in human society, but we have the tools to progress beyond that now.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Retribution by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is almost certain that any such database would end up in the hands of someone who should be in the database.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Retribution by couchslug · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Retributive justice is deeply ingrained in human society, but we have the tools to progress beyond that now."

      The assumed conclusion is that something else will produce better results against determined opponents!

      Retributive justice is the only deterrent to logical people that also deals effectively with those it does NOT deter. It compels, rather than "asks for", some degree of obedience. It can be used to destroy those who harden their neck and will not obey.

      Qaddafi feared no law. He was killed. That's "retributive justice". He won't act again because he has been deleted. He had no qualities making his preservation desirable, but the example of his death is a nice reminder to others that they shouldn't shit on their people beyond tolerance.

      "I want to be able to search a database of scumbags - their name, dob, and known mailing addresses, so I can avoid ever getting into a business transaction with them."

      Boycott IS retribution, of the mildest most weakling sort.

      White collar criminals should be thrown in with vicious convicts who will abuse them, with the goal of frightening others into compliance with the law. Such "financial predators" are as bad as armed robbers, so put them together.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  8. Re:Make an example out of them by firex726 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can you cite where the copyrights were transferred to them?
    As I recall that was the whole point of the issues to begin with, was that they were suing without ownership.