Righthaven CEO: Judges Are Really Just Giving Guidance To Righthaven Competitors
from the swimming-in-the-river-in-egypt dept
It gets better. Gibson tries a new tactic to explain why the judges have so thoroughly trashed Righthaven's cases. You see, all those angry words about Righthaven's dishonest activities and questionable behavior? Apparently that's not really meant for Righthaven at all. Oh, no no no. The judges respect and appreciate Righthaven, but they're so impressed by Righthaven's brilliant legal minds, that they're afraid others will copy Righthaven's plan... and use lawyers who aren't quite as smart. I'm not kidding:
GIBSON: I think part of what's happening here is that the federal judges realize that Righthaven has hired some of the top lawyers across the country. Copyright lawyers. Harvard law professors. And they understand that we're affiliated with an organization as reputable as Stephens Media.... In any event, I think what the judges are saying is 'listen, folks, Righthaven is filing a lot of lawsuits.' They understand that we're potentially genuine with respect to upholding copyrights. They don't want to see Righthaven competitors potentially come on with not solid documentation, and they're giving us guidance as to what the documentation should be.I'm fascinated that anyone could possibly make such a statement and not have their brain explode from the sheer dishonesty of it. No, Steve, the judges aren't giving guidance to Righthaven competitors. They're threatening to sanction you (big time) for filing a bunch of sham lawsuits, for which the Nevada bar is investigating your lawyers as well.
Also, perhaps I heard wrong, but right before the first commercial break, it sounded like Gibson claimed (1) that only Righthaven has standing to sue and (2) that they only granted Stephens Media a non-exclusive license. I don't believe either claim is accurate. Even if you grant the idea that Righthaven had the copyrights from Stephens and then granted a license back to Stephens, then Stephens would likely have standing to sue (Righthaven, on the other hand, does not). Also, it seems abundantly clear that Righthaven has no right to further license the works in question to anyone other than Stephens Media, so I don't see how that's a non-exclusive license at all.
But, honestly, that's all sideshow. Righthaven has lost badly, and it looks like Gibson hasn't quite come to terms with how much trouble his company may be in.