Righthaven Loses Again, Has To Pay More Attorneys Fees… And Has Lawyer Scolded By The Court

from the schadenfreude dept

The hits just keep on coming for Righthaven. Having already lost in Colorado, in its case against Leland Wolf (though, likely in all of its cases, since the same judge is handling them all), Righthaven has been told that it needs to pay Wolf’s legal fees as well, to the tune of $32,147.50 along with additional costs of $1,000.85. Plus, Wolf and his lawyers have been told they can add on some more legal fees for the costs of the hearing in question. But, really, the best part of the minutes from the 13 minute hearing are that immediately after Righthaven’s lawyer, Shawn Mangano, makes his argument, the minutes note:

The Court admonishes Mr. Mangano regarding his lack of civility.

Perhaps he’s too busy trying to protect Righthaven assets from the US Marshals service to be civil these days.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: righthaven

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Righthaven Loses Again, Has To Pay More Attorneys Fees… And Has Lawyer Scolded By The Court”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
ken (profile) says:

At least one bank account has been seized but Shawn Mangano said it was no big deal because it had less that $1000. Mangano’s cavalier attitude towards the seizures is very shocking for a lawyer.

It is possible Righthaven is moving money around to hide it from the US Marshals. If that is the case they may be committing felonies.


DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Righthaven's true business model

I dearly hope Righthaven is moving money around trying to hide it from the US marshals, which is a felony.

That will ensure that we get more free entertainment in the future.

Only freetards want free entertainment.

I seem to have uncovered Righthaven’s true business model.

They will be knocking on our doors later asking payment for the great comedy entertainment they have been providing.

Androgynous Cowherd says:


I really have to hand it to the copyfighters this time. Righthaven is a stroke of genius. I could not conceivably have thought of a better move myself; it’s that brilliant.

First, this ?ber-aggressive straw copyright-Doberman does more than anything else to help bring the whole notion of copyright into disrepute.

And then it causes all kinds of favorable rulings to become precedent via its litigation, such as the one that says a judge can find that something is obvious fair use and throw a lawsuit out before it gets really expensive for the defendants.

By bringing ridiculous cases and being as unsympathetic a plaintiff as possible, the clever folks behind the farce that is Righthaven ensured a wealth of useful pro-everyman anti-big-entertainment-business rulings to do at least a little bit to level the playing field.

And the best part is, the real pro-copyright forces are stuck on the horns of a dilemma: either back Righthaven and suffer more disrepute themselves, or actually do some work for the forces of good by opposing it, or at least distancing themselves from it!

Benefacio (profile) says:

Could Righthaven rulings be a defense against SOPA and ProIP?

Mike, I know you are not a lawyer but, in your opinion, couldn’t these rulings be used as a defense against SOPA and ProIP and possibly various three strikes laws by removing the intermediaries due to a lack of standing? Seems to me these rulings are saying that a third party cannot act on behalf of a copyright holder to initiate copyright based legal actions. Would this include PayPal attempting to void a contract based on alleged copyright infringement? Would any of the lawyers who frequently post please weigh in on this as well?

I find it hopeful that the courts are enforcing jurisprudence issues and expect there to be a serious backlash against third parties attempting to bypass the court by attempting to be a court themselves.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...