Righthaven Desperately Trying To Avoid Paying Legal Fees

from the keep-digging dept

The Righthaven saga continues. Just as it's lost in Colorado, and was told it needs to pay legal fees there as well, the company is still trying to get out of having to pay legal fees in the Hoehn case in Nevada. As you may recall, Righthaven was ordered to pay legal fees of $34,045.50 by September 14th. It did not do so. Following that, Hoehn's lawyer, Marc Randazza (whose name you're seeing a lot in these Righthaven cases), asked the court to declare Righthaven in contempt, and sought both to put the company into receivership and to allow US Marshals to seize property from Righthaven for its failure to pay. In typical plodding fashion, Righthaven has still not paid up... but has filed a motion (embedded below) asking the appeals court to put off the district court's judgment, because it believes the ruling will be overturned (ha!) and having to pay up would cause irreparable harm. The motion is worth reading. As with previous Righthaven motions we've seen, the company seems to think that mocking the district court judge is a reasonable strategy. You can feel the contempt for the judge in the filing, which I can't imagine will go over well.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Appeals Court grants the stay. It's not uncommon for appeals courts to do so, and it's unclear if the Appeals Court is aware of Righthaven's continued antics in these cases. Still, in the end, I can't see Righthaven winning, so this just seems like delaying the inevitable.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Mike C. (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 3:47pm

    No winners

    Maybe they're just going for an ending where there are no "winners". Righthaven has lost, but if they drag this out long enough, sufficient assets will be used up such that there's nothing left to collect on, essentially making it so that nobody comes out ahead.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Scote, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 4:01pm

    Does Righthaven have to inform the appeals court about its sanctions?

    Whatever the case, I despise the way the legal system lets this company have a near infinite number of swings with virtually no accountability. It refuses to even post bond while waiting on appeal--a bond for what it may owe if it looses is pretty standard, but the refuse to do even that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    Bill Silverstein (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 4:15pm

    No mention of a bond?

    Righthaven could always post an appeal bond.

    I

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Andrew (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 4:27pm

    Simply said

    "Simply put, these sweeping contempt and judgment enforcement efforts unquestionably subject Righthaven to the immediate threat of irreparable harm by seeking to appoint a receiver over its affairs, as well as to seize and liquidate its tangible and intangible assets, which include the company’s intellectual property rights in and to copyright protected content that is directly at issue in this case, as well as those at issue in several other appeals pending before this Court along with content at issue numerous cases pending in the District of Nevada and the District of Colorado."

    If that is "simply put" I would like to know what "verbose and unnecessarily complicated" means.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    MrWilson, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 4:31pm

    Re: Simply said

    "...I would like to know what "verbose and unnecessarily complicated" means."

    Read the legal filings in the case.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    PlagueSD (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 4:31pm

    As of this filing, the District Court Motion has not been ruled upon despite Righthaven’s express request the district court do so on or before September 14, 2011.

    Dated this 27th day of September, 2011...



    On a ruling where they had until the 14th of September to pay??? Am I reading this right?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    MrWilson, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 4:34pm

    This is starting to remind me more and more of the SCO Group - sore losers who shouldn't have filed in the first place and who did so on brash and dishonest grounds, and refused to give up despite multiple and devastating losses. Who knew the zombie apocalypse would come in the form of zombie litigation companies?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 4:38pm

    Re: Simply said

    I've noticed that, too. Mr. Mangano seems to be a big fan of that phrase, but never uses it correctly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 5:38pm

    Just like SCO, RightHaven will just delay and bleed out cash until there is none left to pay anyone.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Bort Sarsgaard, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 5:54pm

    Irreparable harm NOT

    They can't rightfully claim "irreparable harm", since it can be repaired by "$34,045.50".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 5:55pm

    When I want to contest a traffic ticket, guess what? I have to pay it first!

    Pay up suckers and cry about it later!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    The Devil's Coachman (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 6:24pm

    Re: Simply said

    Simply put, Righthaven is a bunch of money grubbing parasites, extortionists, and douchebags, and should GDIAF. Their mothers, too.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Aerilus, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 6:34pm

    Re: No winners

    I was thinking the same thing delay long enough to put all the money in foreign accounts through shell companies pay all the higher-ups their bonuses and liquidate and funnel any remaining items. In short steal everything that isn't bolted to the floor.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    mr. sim (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 7:40pm

    Re: No winners

    except i see that the way righthaven messed up and i forsee the victims they tried to extort filing suit against Stephens Media for the money.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 8:36pm

    The motion is worth reading.

    Still, for those who are in a hurry, here are a few highlights:

    -"The decisions on appeal demonstrate clear error by the district court and must be reversed upon review by this Court."
    -"Serious legal questions are those that the court perceives a need to preserve the status quo." (Perhaps they meant "are needed", or "where the court perceives a need"?)
    -"Granting a stay of the Judgment during appellate review also mitigates any irreparable harm impacting Righthaven's pending and future copyright litigation efforts."
    -"Righthaven also has significant proprietary rights in its copyright infringement search engine software" (They have what now? I figured they just used Google or something.)
    -"Simply put, Righthaven cannot allow these assets to be seized and liquidated while it seeks appellate review."
    -"Granting a stay also serves the public interest. [...] For instance, Righthaven's appeal implicates the parameters under which non-content generating copyright holders can enforce rights in and to assigned content. The public would unquestionably benefit from additional case law that sets forth the requirements for properly conveying ownership in and to copyright protected content together with the right to sue for accrued infringement claims."

    And an executive summary:

    "You can't take our money because we're right and you're all wrong."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 28th, 2011 @ 8:49pm

    Re: No winners

    go after the actual people who run righthaven, get their property.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    keiichi969 (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 10:11pm

    Re:

    Except, this is nothing like that.

    This is closer to you going in front of the judge, contesting the ticket, going to court, losing, being given the fine, then appealing the ruling.

    You still need to pay the fine. if you win, you get it back.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    keiichi969 (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 10:12pm

    Re: Re:

    Wish I could edit posts...


    So quit your whining Righthaven. You wanted to pay ball in the big courts, and now that you're getting beat, you want to quit?

    Yeah, no. Life isn't fair. Deal with it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Sep 28th, 2011 @ 11:03pm

    Re: Re: Simply said

    Oh, come on! At least set the Bear-Riding Time-Travelling Thomas Jefferson on them first!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Prisoner 201, Sep 29th, 2011 @ 12:11am

    Re:

    I think it's a buffer overflow attack. Pretty soon the Judge's memory allocation for bullshit is going to be be full, and the next legal document sent by Righthaven will overwrite into reasonable memory, potentially executing arbitrary judgement with root privileges.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    icon
    Tor (profile), Sep 29th, 2011 @ 1:13am

    Re: No winners

    If you by "Righthaven has lost" mean that they will eventually need to file for a bankruptcy and that they are aware of that, wouldn't wasting money in such a situation be illegal? (since there is ground to believe that the money is actually not theirs to waste)
    Or maybe you just meant incurring costs upon the other party in this specific trial.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    icon
    Tor (profile), Sep 29th, 2011 @ 1:22am

    Public interest

    Here are three more quotes that I found funny/interesting:

    "Consideration should also be given to where the public interest lies."

    "Righthaven must further show that issuing the requested stay would further the public interest. "

    "Denying stay relief, however, necessarily raises the possibility that Righthaven may be forced to file bankcruptcy and liquidation (...). This would deprive the public of this Court's analysis on a host of complex issues concerning the enforcement of copyright protected material displayed without authorization on the Internet."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    surfer (profile), Sep 29th, 2011 @ 3:20am

    Re: Public interest

    in other words, The court has not allowed us to set precedent that would allow us to further fuck the public

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    punisher, Sep 29th, 2011 @ 5:50am

    beat them

    It is high times to beat the shit out these righthaven faggots. I do not mean kill them, but i do mean cause serious body harm to them, break a leg, hit their families and everything they hold dear, burn their cars, scare the shit outta them, and whatever else comes to mind.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 29th, 2011 @ 6:33am

    What's so annoying about all of this is that if Righthaven had gotten away with what it wanted to do they would have no patience, or sympathy for someone they were suing not paying up. Once the shoe is on the other foot though it's stall and lie. Such a rotten company.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 29th, 2011 @ 7:55am

    Rearranging the deck chairs?

    Sounds like they are re-arranging the deck chairs (and offloading the gold onto the nearest submarine) before the ship goes down...

    I didn't see a renegade cook or stripper anywhere in the mix, but it would make for a better story when they sell the rights to their story to the movie makers (it will be the only thing they have left when the judge gets done with them if we are lucky).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 29th, 2011 @ 9:24am

    Re: Re:

    "This is closer to you going in front of the judge, contesting the ticket, going to court, losing, being given the fine, then appealing the ruling."

    In fairness, it's more like getting a large fine you are unable to pay and having your car seized and sold to pay it off while you appeal. Even if you win on appeal, the car is gone and you just lost your method of getting to work.

    (Not saying Righthaven is right overall, just saying they might win this particular motion.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 29th, 2011 @ 1:47pm

    Re: beat them

    So the RH weenies are setting up a strawman to point to: "Look, people are physically threatening us!"

    Of course, there would probably be a misspelled word or two in their calling out "the threats".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    Marc John Randazza (profile), Sep 29th, 2011 @ 7:59pm

    Re: beat them

    That's really un-cool. I despise Righthaven as much as anyone, but dude... that's not even cool as a joke.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This