Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleSharron Angle signals interest in settling copyright lawsuit
Saturday, Oct. 9, 2010 | 2:05 a.m.
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle is signaling she's interested in settling a copyright infringement lawsuit filed against her by the Las Vegas Review-Journal's copyright enforcement partner.
A settlement in the Sept. 3 lawsuit wouldn't be surprising, given that the Review-Journal has endorsed her candidacy over incumbent Democratic Sen. Harry Reid.
And settlements are routine for Righthaven, which through this week had settled at least 49 of its lawsuits.
The potential for a settlement in the Angle case was signaled Friday when a Las Vegas attorney she retained to handle the case, Patrick Byrne of the law firm Snell & Wilmer LLP, and Righthaven filed a stipulation in court giving Angle extra time, until Oct. 25, to answer the lawsuit. The initial deadline for Angle to respond had been Oct. 2.
"The parties acknowledge that the law firm of Snell & Wilmer was just recently retained to represent Angle and has not had time to investigate the claims and prepare a responsive pleading within the time frame required for Angle's responsive pleading," the stipulation said. "The parties agree that they would like to explore a potential negotiated resolution before proceeding further with formal discovery."
Even as Righthaven works on potential settlements with defendants like Angle, its legal workload appears to be growing as other defendants like the Democratic Underground fight back.
Besides the Democratic Underground, the owner of Field & Stream magazine is one of the latest defendants to answer a Righthaven lawsuit alleging an unauthorized use of Las Vegas Review-Journal material on its website.
Bonnier Corp., based in Winter Park, Fla., was sued Sept. 14 after a prolific poster on the Field & Stream website, Clay Cooper, posted on a site message board a July 19 Review-Journal story about a gun rights lawsuit.
"Bonnier knew, or reasonably should have known, that websites, such as the (Field & Stream) website, are and were at all times relevant to this lawsuit, the habitual subject of postings by others of copyright-infringing content," Righthaven charged in the suit, further alleging Bonnier failed to monitor for or delete infringing content from its website.
This "constitutes Bonnier's willful blindness to copyright infringements occurring on the website," Righthaven alleged.
Attorneys for Bonnier, however, fired back in their answer Oct. 5, saying:
•"The plaintiff's purported assignor (Review-Journal owner Stephens Media LLC) granted an implied license to copy and share the work (story) by posting the work on its website and by providing tools for electronically sharing the work."
• "The posting of the work by Clay Cooper was fair use. The work was attributed to the author and publisher."
• "The plaintiff's claim is barred by its unclean hands, in that the plaintiff is engaged in barratry."
(Barratry is defined as the excessive incitement of litigation. Righthaven defendants say the company's typical procedure of suing without trying to resolve copyright infringements out of court backs up this claim. Righthaven says it's not practical for newspapers to contact alleged infringers to request they stop infringing.)
• "The plaintiff's claim is barred by its unclean hands, because the alleged infringement, if any, resulted from the plaintiff's purported assignor's use and promotion of electronic tools for copying and sharing the work."
• "The plaintiff's claim is barred by copyright misuse."
Bonnier is represented in the litigation by attorney Michael Crosbie of Shutts & Bowen LLP in Orlando and by Byrne of Snell & Wilmer.
Attorneys for Stephens Media and potentially Righthaven may also have to deal with a subpoena requiring Review-Journal Publisher Sherman Frederick to appear to testify during a deposition Oct. 20 at the law offices of Lewis and Roca LLP in Las Vegas.
The subpoena was issued in the case of Righthaven defendant Internet Brands Inc., owner of the www.corvetteforum.com website, where someone allegedly posted on a message board a Review-Journal story involving Nevada's U.S. Senate race.
Internet Brands, represented by Lewis and Roca as well as Manhattan Beach, Calif., attorney Wendy Evelyn Giberti of iGeneral Counsel P.C., has responded to the lawsuit by alleging Righthaven is involved in copyright misuse, barratry and champerty and that the online posting didn't infringe on any copyrights because the Review-Journal provides an "implied license" to share its content online.
The questioning of Frederick may involve issues including the allegation of champerty, which is defined as an improper relationship between a party funding a lawsuit and the party actually filing the suit.
An affiliate of Review-Journal parent company Stephens Media in Arkansas has invested in Righthaven, and Stephens Media provides the copyrights upon which the lawsuits are based.
Righthaven, which through Oct. 7 had sued at least 146 website operators since March, separately reached confidential settlements with two more defendants:
• Paul Anthony Parson
• Hepatitis C Support Project
Discussion: 14 comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Photos: Olivia Culpo, 20, of Rhode Island is crowned 2012 Miss USA at Planet Hollywood
- US Navy hopes stealth ship answers a rising China
- Learning about Electric Daisy Carnival fans will help Las Vegas court them
- On the horizon: A quick look at projects poised to shape downtown
- Clark PG Kentrell Washington heading to Hofstra basketball
Everything Under the Sun
Blogs
The Kats Report
Joe Pesci remembers his own honeymoon in Vegas -- meeting the Rat Pack
Las Vegas Philharmonic says search for new music director to begin 'immediately' (1 Comment)
With Shenandoah project stalled, Wayne Newton hits back legally (7 Comments)
Where does a Playmate play when she turns 21? Vegas! (3 Comments)
Ice Ice Billy
The road to six-toed cats and Mayor Bubba
The Kats Report
David Itkin tells L.V. Philharmonic officials he's on his way out (14 Comments)
Diamond Dave sells it well as Van Halen pours out the power at MGM Grand (2 Comments)
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
Why isn't she fighting this? People all across the country are being bullied and pushed around by Righthaven and she's not going to stand up and fight for them? Well, she's lost my vote.
Sharron Angle shows us something here that is very disconcerting. She was sued on 9/3 and had 30 days to respond. On 10/8, some 6 days after the deadline, she responds and asks for more time because she's just hired a lawyer.
Angle has shown us that she has no regard for our laws nor our judicial system.
Face it; this particular lawsuit was brought about because and independent investigative journalist, Friess, found one of Shermie's favorites, Angle, doing the same reposting that his henchman third party litigants, Righthaven, have been suing over. This will be "settled" privately probably with Angle paying something like a nominal dollar and keeping the website. No problem, just smoke and mirrors.
Only in America,
The RJ sues her for copyright infringement and then endorses her to be our Senator? I am passing on both.
41Willys
You got it right only in America,would we let a law firm become predatory,and buy the copyrights after the fact! Then set-up a team of clerks to find anybody that posted one of RJ stories, or a few lines from the story, even when they gave credit to the news paper.
Cut off the link, so nobody can get sued, most of these poster didn't even know they did anything wrong, and they were never asked to take the story down. Wouldn't it cost less money to send out one Email, and if the story was not taking down, they would have no problem suing anybody. It would be an open and shut case!
Everyone should do one thing about all of this, and that is to boycott the news paper, the same goes for the advertisers, here you had more web sites linking back to the news paper, that's what the advertisers are paying for, more readership, and when they are getting that the RJ is suing the persons that put-up the links for them!
This has got to be the worst business plan, I ever saw in my life time! Sure we will go out and sue our readership, that will bring plenty of readers to out news paper! "Smart"
will she pay off the r/j with campaign contributions ?
Sharia Law says she shouldn't have to pay.
If you going act like you know what Barratry is then please give the correct definition.
It is not defined as the excessive incitement of litigation.
In Nevada laws (NRS) it is defined as incitement of litigation that has no merit with the intent to harass a defendent.
None, as in zero, of Righthaven's lawsuits have been dismissed for lack of merit.
NRS 199.320 Inducing lawsuit. Every person who shall on his or her behalf bring or instigate, incite or encourage another to bring, any false suit at law or in equity, in any court of this State, with intent thereby to distress or harass a defendant therein, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
sigbg says, "Well, she's lost my vote".
Will I think that makes you one big fat liar?
I have never seen you post anything that says you were voting for her and you constantly say you are supporting Reid.
Thanks for giving us the 411 that you are a 100% liar.
Lewis and Roca LLP in Las Vegas are the copyright law firm for the Sun.
Lewis and Roca LLP in Las Vegas has stated often that websites that allow cut and paste and have words like "Share" on their website give an implied license for copyright use.
The Sun's lawyers are saying that Sun has given everybody the implied license to copy and paste Sun's articles at will because the Sun does the above actions.
The Sun's quotes their lawyers in their news stories which actually builds additional foundation to the implied license argument if one wants to copy and paste Sun's articles.
Please note, the Sun never discloses that Lewis and Roca LLP in Las Vegas are the Sun's copyright lawyers.
Angle shows she has no respect for private property and property rights. Thanks for bringing this to light RJ. I am now voting for Harry Reid.
Americans need to pay close attention to what is going on in these Righthaven cases. Google, Verizon, and other ISPs have plans to do something similar concerning the internet and internet access. Many people don't understand net neutrality, but if net neutrality isn't maintained, ISPs like Google, AOL, Verizon, and others will be able to control what you can access on the internet, and of course, their content will be promoted over that of other ISPs even if you don't want it. Many of us will have the open access we have to the internet today restricted greatly in the future. It's similar to pay to play. Companies that use Google and can afford to pay Google more money than others will have their content pushed more vigorously than companies that can't afford to pay Google as much. This will affect our ability to access certain sites and download certain information. Companies with the money get to dominate the internet and choose the content we can access.
I've already heard some networks/websites telling lies about net neutrality. Please take the time to find out what net neutrality really means for your internet access.
Gee SgtRock, you just don't understand sarcasm. Should I have said *sarcasm* after the last sentence in my first post to help you out?
You are correct when you say "I have never seen you post anything that says you were voting for her"
You are a liar when you say " and you constantly say you are supporting Reid." I haven't said I support Reid. Find that statements and the dates and times and post them. You say I'm constantly doing it so it should be really easy. Oh, and my stating the facts where someone else has misrepresented them is not an indication that I support Reid; only that I support the facts.
You're just childishly lashing out at me because I called you out on the List-Rogich article and you can't defend yourself. http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ralston...
Care to admit you're wrong this time? No, I didn't think so.
Oh, Sharron...Sister Palin is going be disappointed, she is starting to think that your campaign doesn't have the cajones, needed to be worthy of her endorsement.
People pass the word!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DRkUU-qh...
MG... How about Wimpy ,Dingy,Reid? Was he supposed to have Transparency in the OBAMA administration. Health care was put before the people 1 day before XMAS and signed with no one reading the Bill. Speaking about Dingy how about his medical records ? He had a Stroke 2 years ago and no one knows what was wrong and no press conference . Is this what we want from our leaders? I would rather have Angle who will uphold the CONSTITUTION and work for the people (not the casino owners, banks and special interests,EG Illegals)
I don't understand how Ms. Angle is going to pay. Mr. Angle works or worked for the federal government. From reading her official campaign bio, she hasn't had a job in the private sector since she moved to the Reno area. So what is she going to use for money to settle with Righthaven? Campaign funds?
There is a a special place in Hell for these Righthaven clowns.
" So what is she going to use for money to settle with Righthaven? Campaign funds?"
___
Absolutely.
chazbean, how can Sharron Angle uphold the Constitution when she believes that Separation of Church and State is unconstitutional?
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights defines and restricts the power of the Federal government.
It does not restrict of the power of the people or the states (at least as originally written).
sigBG, I have never been a fan of Rogich.
Here you are defending Reid: "So, no, Reid's not "creating more science fiction for the public to swallow"."
And again, "that's why it's so funny to hear Angle supporters claim that Reid is some sort of ultra-liberal! He's pretty conservative in social ways."
And again, "So, Harry Reid did NOT vote for Social Security benefits for illegal aliens as you claim. He voted to give CITIZENS credit for Social Security payments made while they were illegal aliens. No citizenship, No Social Security."
And again, "So you condemn Reid for lying. (Uh, which of his votes are lies? For that matter, what does that mean "Reid's votes are lies?")"
And again, "Well gbigs, you're WRONG AGAIN: "Reid released a statement this afternoon urging Obama to "lay off Las Vegas."
Yeah....you are a big Angle supporter.
I forgot to bring my special shovel to remove BS.
Nice try SgtCRock. You said "you constantly say you are supporting Reid."
You are a liar. I have never said I support Reid and since I haven't said that, I certainly can't "constantly" say it. I challenged you to prove your allegation and show where I SAID that I am supporting Reid. I specifically said that presenting facts doesn't mean I support Reid; it means I support and defend the facts. And you pull out a few quotes of mine that quite simply DON'T prove your allegation and show where I ever said that I support Reid. In fact, all of my statements challenged the allegations and lies put forth by other commenters about Reid.
So once again, SgtRock, you are a liar. You can admit that you are a liar or you can apologize to me for calling me a liar. Or you can run and hide. I believe you'll run and hide.
According to your logic, hardly anybody has ever supported any candidate at all.
Most people have some gray matter between their ears.
When you are constantly mouthing off pro-Reid crap and anti-Angle crap they can put two and two together to get four.
But I can understand how you struggle with such concepts for you probably embrace BS output like Reid's new spin on the "War is lost" and Clinton's "I don't know what is is".
Curious that your "facts" are always pro-Reid and anti-Angle.
Hmmmmm.......I wonder why.
So go back into your la-la land.
Yeah...you are not a Reid supporter. I believe in the tooth fairy before accepting that.
Well Golly Gee Sarge, that's a wonderful response. Very mature and fact-filled. *sarcasm* (See, I've learned to spell that out for you.) If calling me names and calling me stupid is what you have to resort to, you are just another right-wing commenter without a clue trying to bully the smart kid in class.
You claim that I SAID something I did NOT say and then used that claim to call me a liar. In simple language just for you, you made stuff up about me. That's EXACTLY the type of "fact" I try to correct in the comments. People keep making stuff up about Reid. None of the sane people are making stuff up about Angle. They're quoting her. When the comment begins "Sharron Angle said" and then she's quoted accurately, what facts are there to correct the record?
But back to our pas de deux. You still CAN'T prove that I SAID what you claim so you try to make fun of me and change the subject. Impressive (*sarcasm* again) and childish. But it still doesn't back up your claim that I "constantly say [I] support Reid", does it? NO, of course not.
Facts, Sarge, Facts. The FACTS are neutral. They are the FACTS not somebody's opinion or spin. I can see that you don't like facts. They can't support your opinions. We know what opinions are like. In our little tete-a-tete now, the FACTS are that you called me a liar and made stuff up about me to make me look bad. That makes you a liar.
It's funny you picked a fictional hero for your username. Aspirational?
You know SgtRock, the funniest thing about you deciding to go after me for the sarcastic comment you couldn't understand (I believe you mentioned gray matter), is that you totally ignored the serious and important part of the post and the article.
While you're busy lying about me and calling me names, going on about attorneys when the Sun has in fact told readers about the relationship, and quoting State law in a Federal case, the FACT of the matter is that Angle claims to be fighting for the little guy and when she has a chance to fight the trial lawyers and defend Free Speech for the little guy, she announces she wants to settle out of court. Sharron Angle has millions of dollars she can use to defend this lawsuit while almost all defendants have to scrape up a few hundred dollars to settle. That sends a powerful statement to me about who Sharron Angle represents. Sharron Angle represents herself.
sbigg.....the last time I checked the Constitution it does not say that it is Free Speech to steal other people's content. In fact, Copyright is a clause in the Constitution.
I have no freaking idea why she is settling or did not choose to defend. I think you have no freaking idea either unless you have the ability to read people's minds.
Perhaps, she realized that her staff performed copyright infringement and that her campaign has no good defense to win with in a court of law. I know your pea size brain will find that difficult to comprehend.
Somebody on her staff did something that was not only illegal but unethical. It takes very little brain power to realize that taking one's mouse, hightlighting somebody else's work, copying that work and then pasting it on your site is wrong.
There is no real need to defend unethical behavior.