4 ms·
Quoting: A filing in the case shows that Randazza wants the court to “authorize the U.S. Marshalls to execute Hoehn’s judgment through seizure of Righthaven’s
by athom 15y ago
Quoting:
A filing in the case shows that Randazza wants the court to “authorize the U.S. Marshalls to execute Hoehn’s judgment through seizure of Righthaven’s bank accounts, real and personal property, and intangible intellectual property rights [my emphasis] for levy, lien, auction or other treatment appropriate for satisfaction of Hoehn’s judgment.”
I hope this isn't a spurious question, but could this end with Hoehn owning copyrights entrusted to Righthaven?
- nash 15y agoRighthaven never had any copyrights to begin with. Which is why they keep getting absolutely slaughtered in cases (no standing). So unfortunately Randazza won't get those copyrights.
- stan_rogers 15y agoI believe the rights being referred to are things like Righthaven's own name, trademarks, copyrights and so forth, not just what they may have acquired from other parties.
- nash 15y agoProbably. Still, I can't imagine the trademark "Righthaven" has a lot of value any more.
- Natsu 15y agoI thought they lost because they did not own proper copyrights to the works they sued over, but rather had contracts which assigned a "right to sue" which the judge could find nowhere in the statutes. That said, I suppose they might actually own some copyrights to other things. It would be poetic justice if, as a result of trying to protect their other cases, they had acquired copyrights only to lose them in litigation.
- URSpider94 15y agoAs others have said, Righthaven appears not to have had any ownership of the copyrights to begin with. However, we do know that Righthaven has of late been maneuvering to attempt to solve this problem -- it seems possible that they did actually transfer some meaningful rights to at least some of the materials they are suing on. I only mention this because I'm rooting for it, as the ultimate poetic justice.