• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's three types of people.

Type one are criminals by choice. They'll break the law without much thought. Bad people.

Type two generally view rules and the law as boundaries and observe them, either because it's the right thing to do, or because of the consequences. Good (or frightened) people.

Type three do pretty much what they like until they're stopped. They view being stopped as something to challenge - they tend not to let things stop them. They'll be bankrupt and set up again, they'll be sued and carry on doing whatever it was anyway. They'll continually butt up against disgruntled people and companies, lawsuits, whatever.

Where most people would be mortified, it's like water off a ducks back with them. They'll push it to the limits and move on. Law and 'right' are determined by whether you win or lose the case. Morals don't come into it.

These people are over represented in government, business ownership, senior management. And fan-films...
 
Hope this comes out alright - here is a claim somebody has on the "We Stand With Axanar facebook page


That assumes that there was a gentlemens agreement, which if you read the CBS and Axanar blog post on the Axanar website from August, they all but say that's not the case....
 
There's three types of people.

Type one are criminals by choice. They'll break the law without much thought. Bad people.

Type two generally view rules and the law as boundaries and observe them, either because it's the right thing to do, or because of the consequences. Good (or frightened) people.

Type three do pretty much what they like until they're stopped. They view being stopped as something to challenge - they tend not to let things stop them. They'll be bankrupt and set up again, they'll be sued and carry on doing whatever it was anyway. They'll continually butt up against disgruntled people and companies, lawsuits, whatever.

Where most people would be mortified, it's like water off a ducks back with them. They'll push it to the limits and move on. Morals and 'right' don't come into it and the law is determined by whether you win or lose the case. These people are over represented in government, big business, senior management. And fan-films...

So going by that Alac Peters is a type three personality ?
 
There's three types of people.

Type one are criminals by choice. They'll break the law without much thought. Bad people.

Type two generally view rules and the law as boundaries and observe them, either because it's the right thing to do, or because of the consequences. Good (or frightened) people.

Type three do pretty much what they like until they're stopped. They view being stopped as something to challenge - they tend not to let things stop them. They'll be bankrupt and set up again, they'll be sued and carry on doing whatever it was anyway. They'll continually butt up against disgruntled people and companies, lawsuits, whatever.

Where most people would be mortified, it's like water off a ducks back with them. They'll push it to the limits and move on. Morals and 'right' don't come into it and the law is determined by whether you win or lose the case. These people are over represented in government, big business, senior management. And fan-films...

So going by that Alac Peters is a type three personality ?
I would have thought so, wouldn't you? ;)
 
There's three types of people.

Type one are criminals by choice. They'll break the law without much thought. Bad people.

Type two generally view rules and the law as boundaries and observe them, either because it's the right thing to do, or because of the consequences. Good (or frightened) people.

Type three do pretty much what they like until they're stopped. They view being stopped as something to challenge - they tend not to let things stop them. They'll be bankrupt and set up again, they'll be sued and carry on doing whatever it was anyway. They'll continually butt up against disgruntled people and companies, lawsuits, whatever.

Where most people would be mortified, it's like water off a ducks back with them. They'll push it to the limits and move on. Morals and 'right' don't come into it and the law is determined by whether you win or lose the case. These people are over represented in government, big business, senior management. And fan-films...

So going by that Alac Peters is a type three personality ?

You may very well believe that. I, of course, could not possibly comment...
 
Hi everyone,

It's been many years since I've come to the Trek BBS, but the recent Axanar litigation peaked my interest. I am not an attorney, but I have written and reported on legal matters for over 15 years and I've already posted my first impressions of the CBS/Paramount complaint on my personal website.

The item that stood out to me in the complaint was the citation of four specific characters used by Axanar from the "copyrighted works": Sarek, Richard Robau, Soval, and Robert April. As I noted in my blog, the use of Gary Graham as Soval in "Prelude to Axanar" may be enough to sink Peters & Axanar Productions on a summary judgment motion (meaning this case will never even get to a jury).

Robau is also notable because he is a character exclusively from JJ-trek. As others have commented here, while CBS has generally taken a permissive stance towards fan films, Paramount has not, and I tend to agree with those who have argued Axanar's incorporation of JJ-trek elements (which I believe all the other fan films avoid) may have been a key factor prompting this lawsuit.

(On a side note, I laughed when the complaint cited April, a character who only appeared in TAS; I guess the Animated Series is back in the canon now. Hooray!)

The big question I have is why CBS and Paramount waited this long to put a stop to Axanar. I understand corporate legal departments can be slow to respond, but Peters has been operating out in the open for more than two years now. Once "Prelude" was released, CBS and Paramount had all the reason they needed to pounce. I respect their right to enforce their IP, but I wish they had done so before thousands of donors gave money to a legally doomed project.
 
Even with my non-existent knowledge of IP law, I don't see any way CBS doesn't win.

Big time.

Trek licensees have been producing new material for decades. Just in the last 6 years Paramount has released two films and another is scheduled for summer. CBS announced a new series for 2017. There's no way a trademark claim could succeed.

CBS/Paramount having basically looked the other way with fan productions doesn't mean that they have relinquished copyright. It means that they have allowed fans to play in the sandbox, because there was no direct competition.

When Axanar started talking about outdoing the big boys using unlicensed IP, the alarms sounded. I'm sure a C&D came down somewhere in the timeline, because it's (probably) standard procedure.

For a lawsuit to be filed, there had to be some serious nose-thumbing on Axanar's part.

Personally, I have no sympathy for Mr. Peters. I have to assume that he knew exactly what he was getting into, and went ahead anyway.
 
Hi everyone,

It's been many years since I've come to the Trek BBS, but the recent Axanar litigation peaked my interest. I am not an attorney, but I have written and reported on legal matters for over 15 years and I've already posted my first impressions of the CBS/Paramount complaint on my personal website.

The item that stood out to me in the complaint was the citation of four specific characters used by Axanar from the "copyrighted works": Sarek, Richard Robau, Soval, and Robert April. As I noted in my blog, the use of Gary Graham as Soval in "Prelude to Axanar" may be enough to sink Peters & Axanar Productions on a summary judgment motion (meaning this case will never even get to a jury).

Robau is also notable because he is a character exclusively from JJ-trek. As others have commented here, while CBS has generally taken a permissive stance towards fan films, Paramount has not, and I tend to agree with those who have argued Axanar's incorporation of JJ-trek elements (which I believe all the other fan films avoid) may have been a key factor prompting this lawsuit.

(On a side note, I laughed when the complaint cited April, a character who only appeared in TAS; I guess the Animated Series is back in the canon now. Hooray!)

The big question I have is why CBS and Paramount waited this long to put a stop to Axanar. I understand corporate legal departments can be slow to respond, but Peters has been operating out in the open for more than two years now. Once "Prelude" was released, CBS and Paramount had all the reason they needed to pounce. I respect their right to enforce their IP, but I wish they had done so before thousands of donors gave money to a legally doomed project.
I suspect the studio waited until it was clearly a back door profit making exercise.

I reas your erudite blog piece with interest and generally agree with it's conclusions,
 
Hope this comes out alright - here is a claim somebody has on the "We Stand With Axanar facebook page


It's bollocks.

Yep. Allow me to quote Samuel Goldwyn.

"A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on."

Even if there was a so-called "gentlemen's agreement", that doesn't mean doodly.

And the poster might (just might!) want to look up what precedent means in the legal field. This is pretty much what it is.

Off the cuff verbal agreements aren't precedents - which can be changed anyway.

Y'know, the thing I find most interesting is that it feels like any conversation of any sort with anyone even remotely concerned with CBS and/or Paramount is touted as being ironclad binding stuff.

It's not.
 
(In the event CBS/Paramount somehow fails to prevail; and loses the ability to enforce/license a portion or all of the Star Trek trademarks, etc. - Fan Film groups will be able to do pretty much as they like going forward.)
Correction: Star Trek fan film groups would be able to do as they like. Other studios would immediately start cracking down on fan films of their properties (Batman, Star Wars, etc) in an effort to prevent what happed to CBS from happening to them.

In short, whether Alec Peters were to win or lose with such a defense, he would greatly endanger the fan film community.
 
Con: If 100% of their fans boycott Beyond we'll lose 780,000.

They can easily pick that up by winning the lawsuit. Plus, most will end up watching Beyond anyway.

Well, yeah. And that $780,000 loss isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to what Beyond is likely to generate.

Also, since the Axanards are posting random things...feel free to use this as counter:

ISTAND_zpsdylzzwob.jpg
 
So Mr. Peters might think he has leverage to make them want to avoid actually going before a Judge; and thus will somehow get CBS/Paramount to settle out of court (which is what happens in 90%+ of civil cases); and get a settlement that allows his group to complete Axanar in some fashion.

If that's what Peters thinks, he needs a mental health examination, stat.

The only reason CBS would settle on terms like that would be if they thought they would lose. But they're the ones who filed this lawsuit. They want to go in front of a judge and jury. Remember, the legal complaint asks for a jury trial. They expect to win.

A settlement instigated by CBS would be a defensive maneuver, but they have no reason to be defensive. They're in the driver's seat here, not Peters and Axanar.
 
I suspect the studio waited until it was clearly a back door profit making exercise.

That is certainly a good theory. I need to go back and review the timeline of when Peters started talking about building Ares Studios. To me, that is the point when CBS/Paramount should have known what was up.

I reas your erudite blog piece with interest and generally agree with it's conclusions,

Many thanks. I may write more depending on how this litigation unfolds over the coming weeks.
 
Con: If 100% of their fans boycott Beyond we'll lose 780,000.

They can easily pick that up by winning the lawsuit. Plus, most will end up watching Beyond anyway.

Well, yeah. And that $780,000 loss isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to what Beyond is likely to generate.

Also, since the Axanards are posting random things...feel free to use this as counter:

ISTAND_zpsdylzzwob.jpg

I saved and then posted to Alec himself and posted on the "official" Axanar page
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top