Newspaper Publisher Sues Guy For Posting Article Based On Research He Gave The Paper For Free
from the going-a-bit-far? dept
Earlier this year, we wrote about the company Righthaven, which has some sort of connection to the Las Vegas Journal Review (or, at least, its lawyer), who is now going around suing lots of sites for reposting LVJR content. What was interesting about the lawsuits is that Righthaven never sent any cease-and-desists or DMCA takedowns or anything. It just went straight to suing. That’s allowed… but odd. On top of that, many of the repostings weren’t competitors or sites that were trying to take business away from the LVJR. In fact, in many cases, it involved organizations mentioned in the LVJR who were trying to promote the LVJR.
Apparently, Righthaven and LVJR continue to file these kinds of lawsuits, and they just keep getting more ridiculous. Michael Scott points us to to the fact that Righthaven has sued a guy named Anthony Curtis, who reposted an article from the LVJR that talked about research Curtis had done on ticket prices for entertainment shows in Vegas.
If you’re playing along at home, the LVJR published an article based on research — which it got for free — from Curtis, and when he then tries to highlight that article, the LVJR sues him. As the MediaPost story notes, the LVJR article about Curtis’ research even notes that his annual survey is a “thankless task.” Thankless, indeed.
Filed Under: copyright, lawsuits
Companies: las vegas journal-review, righthaven
Comments on “Newspaper Publisher Sues Guy For Posting Article Based On Research He Gave The Paper For Free”
Licence
Next time Curtis should publish his research on a CC “Share Alike” Licence.
Re: Licence
Miss appropriating others work is actually a crime can he make the general attorney sue the paper for that?
I don’t understand how we got here.
Is it possible that it’s cheaper for these people to file lawsuits than to actually look at the content of the case?
There has to be some backlash on all this suing eventually.
No good deed goes unpunished
Re: Re:
No ridiculous law suit goes unpublished on Tech Dirt.
Re: Re: Re:
Your point?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
and I’m sure that many ridiculous lawsuits go unpunished being that the mere volume of ridiculous lawsuits is too enumerating for anyone to keep up.
the difference is how each came to have the others work product. if curtis actively and willingly gave them permission to use his work (or publishes it under one of those confusing creative commons licenses) then he would have not issue with the paper.
his mistake is taking an entire article, based in part of his work, and republishing it without permission. there is no share and share alike rule in the game. he needed to ask permission (which he likely would have received).
you see, the issue isnt permission culture, its people who think they have rights to things and dont.
Re: Re:
“you see, the issue isnt permission culture, its people who think they have rights to things and dont.”
Everyone should require a contract which clearly defines the terms of reciprocity before allowing their content to be published.
Re: Re: Re:
Re “Everyone should require a contract which clearly defines the terms of reciprocity before allowing their content to be published.”
More work for lawyers and total blocks on bothering to produce any content, could this be any more stifling to creativity?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
you dont need a lawyer for that. gee. “i give you access to my work provided i republish and lvrj article that cites it for the next 2 years”. how freaking hard is that?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
There aren’t any “wherefore” and “whereas” clauses there so it’s obviously unenforceable in any law court on the planet.
Plain English is a pleasant pipe dream but it’s not the best way to write a legal document with all these ambulance chasing lawyers running around.
A Creative Commons license would have done the job just as well and with far less fuss.
Re: Re:
which creative commons license is confusing?
Re: Re: Re:
The one that requires me to pet my dogs backwards three times and do the truffle shuffle before I’m allowed to use it…
Re: Re: Re:
“which creative commons license is confusing?”
none of them are confusing, but it could be a slam at me for saying …
“There is a confusing set of rules and self entitled organizations, their hands out stretched, reaching for your wallet. As is discussed here convinience and simplicity, oft-trumps bother and complexity. Or … in the end the simplest and cheapest system tends to win.”.
Re: Re:
“which he likely would have received”
If this is the case then why are they suing? If they would have gave permission anyways there is little point in suing.
Do you have evidence that he likely would have received permission or are you basing this on your psychic powers again?
in my opinion
in my opinion
there are too many lawyers in the world, clamouring for work. Perhaps there should be a curb on the profession?
Re: in my opinion
A long time ago I read “The Number of the Beast” by Robert Heinlein. In one of his universes, he wrote about how our society rose up and killed all the lawyers…
http://www.heinleinsociety.org/concordance/books/nb_hc.htm
Year They Hanged the Lawyers
In Beulahland, this momentous event occurred in 1965. It is never mentioned in the history books, and information about it is restricted.
That’s starting to sound like a great idea to me…
“never sent and cease-and-desists” should be “never sent any cease-and-desists”?
Re: Re:
Oops. Yes. Fixed.