EFF wants Righthaven to pay for its own ass-kicking

Discuss

3 Responses to “EFF wants Righthaven to pay for its own ass-kicking”

  1. spocko says:

    I hope this works. When the EFF defended me, I wish that I would have had some way to go back to ABC/Disney and make them pay for their bogus threat that I was infringing on the copyright of the K S F O radio hosts. I had very clearly (with the help of the EFF) set up my use as classic fair use. But at the time there was nothing that we could do to make them pay for their bullying because the C&D letter that ABC sent to the web host 1&1 hosting was baseless saber rattling, nonetheless 1&1 caved.

    Later I advised a group called HateHurtsAmerica on the same techniques I used to convince 18 advertisers to pull their ads from the Michael Savage show. This cost 1 million dollars in lost revenue by Savage’s own admission. Savage sued one of the founding members of the group, CAIR. The EFF defended them. Savage lost. My lawyer from EFF was also trying to get Savage to pay for court cost for bring the bogus case to court. I don’t know if they won.

    One thing that I have been paying attention to in the WikiLeaks case is how the US government have been pressuring corporations to shut off support methods (hosting, payment, DNS) using the Terms of Service and Acceptable Use policies. These are the same policies that ABC/Disney used on me to get my blog shut down.

    Like Wikileaks, we were able to replicate the clips around the world. My experience has taught me to read TOS and AUPs. If you are going to challenge the government or corporations you would be wise to read those. And if you donate money to one of the finest Non-profits in the country who is doing some great work, consider donating to the EFF.

  2. jjsaul says:

    In law school I was sure that Rule 11(b) should be the savior of our legal system. After all, it requires not only honesty in legal filings, but due diligence of investigation and research to support factual and legal positions put forward.

    Experience soon convinced me that the legal community would never take such a standard seriously.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule11.htm

  3. Anonymous says:

    I’ve never really understood why “loser pays all” isn’t the default in the legal system.

    I know that it’s not always cut and dry, but it’s so rare in the states to have the loser pay that I’ve heard this type of thing referred to as “English Law.”

Leave a Reply