3 ms·
So if I understand correctly the history here, Righthaven doesn't actually purchase the IP from the copyright holders. They obtain the rights to sue in the cop
by mikeryan 15y ago
So if I understand correctly the history here, Righthaven doesn't actually purchase the IP from the copyright holders. They obtain the rights to sue in the copyright holders name (and take part of the proceeds).
I believe in this case the judge found that there's no legal ability for Righthaven to be a plaintiff in a copyright case where they don't own the rights to the actual IP.
- monochromatic 15y agoYeah. It's basically a problem of who has standing to sue.
- _delirium 15y agoIn particular, the reasoning that other court cases have adopted is that the Copyright Act only allows suits by "the legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright", and then goes on to list six exclusive rights: reproduction, production of derivative works, distribution, and three kinds of public-performance rights (e.g. of audio transmissions, of public film showings, etc.). So, Righthaven would need to own at least one of those six rights regarding a work to sue over it, which it doesn't.
- pavel_lishin 15y agoWait, that's only five.
- _delirium 15y agoOops, I had muddled some of the three variants of the public-performance right; edited.