CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
With the recent trumpeting by Axanar Productions and their supporters about all of the awards that had been won at various festivals, I was curious as to whether these festivals had any sort of position on the use of copyrighted material. As it was one of the more recent festivals, I started by looking at the Creative Arts Film Festival.
I was particularly drawn to the portion of their Terms and Conditions which reads as follows:
"To be eligible to screen, your film does not have to be a World Premiere or a USA Premiere. Films can be original or adapted works. However, ALL non-original portions of your film MUST be cleared and You must have permission to use someone else's work. If you submit a film with copyrighted or trademarked materials included and you do not have written permission to use them, you will not be eligible to screen at CAFF. This festival takes place on the internet, so it is VERY easy for owners of copyrighted work to find illegal uses. And we have no interest in getting sued. So, you must be legally authorized to represent the entire work, in writing. Also, you should copyright your film with the proper agency (in the USA, its the Library of Congress). It is not required for screening at CAFF, but it is smart on your part to protect your work."
Curious as to what the position of such a festival would be once made aware of the pending lawsuit, I decided to ask. Here is the response I received:
"Well, this is certainly very interesting. However, to our knowledge, the film "Prelude to Axanar" does not contain any copyrighted footage that belongs to CBS or Paramount. And while they may, or may not, be in use of terminology which may, or may not, have origins from another vehicle, that in itself is not infringement. It could easily be argued as homage or parody. As far as we can see, there is no justifiable action that we could make a call on either way. And quite honestly, for us to make any call before any court has made any ruling would be down right capricious on our part. Even if a court does decide that it is infringement, and even if producer Peters posts on his website that he is directly infringing on the materials, that doesn't mean it's infringement. Simply put, fan films just can't be infringement. They are made purely for the love of the idol and no one is making money off of it. However, if the producers begin to make money off of the film, then, well, that is no longer a fan film. That is a business enterprise. And that, is actionable. But, as of right now, "You must be legally authorized to represent the entire work, in writing."...well, they are. At the very least, without a court judgement in place, there is nothing to even discuss.
But, I have to be honest with you, my curiosity on this matter tends to lean more toward why you are so interested in it. What is your stake in this matter?"
On the one hand, they do make a good point that until the results of the lawsuit are settled, there is no reason to act. I think they are very mistaken about whether or not this actually is a 'fan film' given that Axanar Productions has gone out of their way to separate themselves from that label. However, in any case, this particular festival seems to be blissfully unaware of the law in such matters, and the state bluntly that "fan film just can't be infringement" is 100% wrong.
Anyway, I have not responded, and to be honest, I don't really see a point in pursuing this further until we have a ruling on the lawsuit. I merely wanted to know whether awards presented to a film in violation of copyright would be rescinded or not, and that key part of my question was left unanswered. Nonetheless, they are under no obligation to make a statement at this time, I was just curious.
Also curious that they seem to be somewhat defensive and curious about who the hell I was to even broach the subject in the final line of the email sent to me...
I was particularly drawn to the portion of their Terms and Conditions which reads as follows:
"To be eligible to screen, your film does not have to be a World Premiere or a USA Premiere. Films can be original or adapted works. However, ALL non-original portions of your film MUST be cleared and You must have permission to use someone else's work. If you submit a film with copyrighted or trademarked materials included and you do not have written permission to use them, you will not be eligible to screen at CAFF. This festival takes place on the internet, so it is VERY easy for owners of copyrighted work to find illegal uses. And we have no interest in getting sued. So, you must be legally authorized to represent the entire work, in writing. Also, you should copyright your film with the proper agency (in the USA, its the Library of Congress). It is not required for screening at CAFF, but it is smart on your part to protect your work."
Curious as to what the position of such a festival would be once made aware of the pending lawsuit, I decided to ask. Here is the response I received:
"Well, this is certainly very interesting. However, to our knowledge, the film "Prelude to Axanar" does not contain any copyrighted footage that belongs to CBS or Paramount. And while they may, or may not, be in use of terminology which may, or may not, have origins from another vehicle, that in itself is not infringement. It could easily be argued as homage or parody. As far as we can see, there is no justifiable action that we could make a call on either way. And quite honestly, for us to make any call before any court has made any ruling would be down right capricious on our part. Even if a court does decide that it is infringement, and even if producer Peters posts on his website that he is directly infringing on the materials, that doesn't mean it's infringement. Simply put, fan films just can't be infringement. They are made purely for the love of the idol and no one is making money off of it. However, if the producers begin to make money off of the film, then, well, that is no longer a fan film. That is a business enterprise. And that, is actionable. But, as of right now, "You must be legally authorized to represent the entire work, in writing."...well, they are. At the very least, without a court judgement in place, there is nothing to even discuss.
But, I have to be honest with you, my curiosity on this matter tends to lean more toward why you are so interested in it. What is your stake in this matter?"
On the one hand, they do make a good point that until the results of the lawsuit are settled, there is no reason to act. I think they are very mistaken about whether or not this actually is a 'fan film' given that Axanar Productions has gone out of their way to separate themselves from that label. However, in any case, this particular festival seems to be blissfully unaware of the law in such matters, and the state bluntly that "fan film just can't be infringement" is 100% wrong.
Anyway, I have not responded, and to be honest, I don't really see a point in pursuing this further until we have a ruling on the lawsuit. I merely wanted to know whether awards presented to a film in violation of copyright would be rescinded or not, and that key part of my question was left unanswered. Nonetheless, they are under no obligation to make a statement at this time, I was just curious.
Also curious that they seem to be somewhat defensive and curious about who the hell I was to even broach the subject in the final line of the email sent to me...
I can't recall (sorry!) who mentioned above that this is a lot like the head of an untenable startup.
The startup is Ares Digital, the competitor to the previously existing crowdfunding fulfillment company (and I've forgotten their name as well). A crowdfunding fulfillment company is certainly a legitimate business interest, although a quick Google revealed there are a bunch of companies out there already. It's not exactly an empty maw waiting for customers.
The issue with Ares Digital, as well as with Axanar, is the $$ doesn't come in except as having been piggybacked to interest in a protected IP owned by another, used without permission.
BTW, are donors calling for an accounting by an independent, reputable firm? After all, there are #s which don't add up. Yes, yes, I know the donors aren't technically investors. They can make noise about that anyway. Even donors are entitled to know their $$ isn't going into a black hole.
The startup is Ares Digital, the competitor to the previously existing crowdfunding fulfillment company (and I've forgotten their name as well). A crowdfunding fulfillment company is certainly a legitimate business interest, although a quick Google revealed there are a bunch of companies out there already. It's not exactly an empty maw waiting for customers.
The issue with Ares Digital, as well as with Axanar, is the $$ doesn't come in except as having been piggybacked to interest in a protected IP owned by another, used without permission.
BTW, are donors calling for an accounting by an independent, reputable firm? After all, there are #s which don't add up. Yes, yes, I know the donors aren't technically investors. They can make noise about that anyway. Even donors are entitled to know their $$ isn't going into a black hole.
I figured it could easily be explained as Alec the Trek Fan wanted to be the bestest Trek Fan evar! and so he wanted to make the bestest Trek Film evar! - then reality hit him over the head with a clue-by-four, which he promptly ignored.
Maybe I'm not paying enough attention, but all I've seen is half done wood structures. It seems like they're doing just enough to get them to the next funding round.
Except that this is Kickstarter money. There is no contractual obligation to produce anything. You just have to show you tried. If it's a failure it's a failure. Donors have to live with it. Most of them are getting their patches, which is about all that was promised.
What?
SMH. If there is a court order in place saying it is infringement, then it is infringement. If the festival wants to argue this, then they can file an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief arguing the point.
It works for me, though I put Quinto as second. (Simon Pegg comes a distant last in my book.)
The $7,000 phone bill was a huge red flag for me. Were they calling the Small Megallanic Cloud?
Business land-line system, I'd guess. Seems about right.
Why they're spending money on that is another question.
As I said, photos indicate that the bridge set and transporter are at least 90 percent done, the captain's quarters are mostly done, various consoles, doorways etc for the Klingon set have been built. The only electronic work I've seen is for the Bridge, but all of this requires a lot of effort over a period of months to get to this point. I've worked on several of these and none of this stuff is easy.
Why they're spending money on that is another question.
As I said, photos indicate that the bridge set and transporter are at least 90 percent done, the captain's quarters are mostly done, various consoles, doorways etc for the Klingon set have been built. The only electronic work I've seen is for the Bridge, but all of this requires a lot of effort over a period of months to get to this point. I've worked on several of these and none of this stuff is easy.
I have a new blog post up, which mostly addresses Alec Peters' comment there is "unsettled law" which may help Axanar's cause.
My wife works in telecommunications and her company offers basic business phone and internet bundled for $99 a month. Which is why it was a red flag from my perspective. It might be a bit more expensive on the West Coast, but nearly six times that?
They definitely didn't shop around!
As I suggested the other day, while donors may not be investors, they could still bring an "unfair competition" claim against Axanar under California law, where basically anything a business says or does that's even a tad misleading can get you intro trouble.
Well, Alec is at PF Chiangs in Burbank waiting for his costume designer so they can make more Axanar costumes. I'm struck by two things in this update.
1) The idiocy of the one Axanerd asking if Peters is still taking donations
2) Later in the comments, Peters posts a photo of his waitress, who looks like a poor deer stuck in headlights, saying "hi" to Axanar fans (according to Peters.
Also: As someone pointed out on the I Stand with CBS page, note how Peters doesn't go out of his way to say he WON'T use Kickstarter money to fund his legal team.
Just make checks payable to "Cash"!
I believe it covered the equipment. But since the warehouse was home to a prior computer business, installation shouldn't have been too expensive.
For what they were doing, they should've just been able to get by using their personal cell phones.
As I just commented on Facebook, it amazes me they still don't have their legal ducks in a row. It's been two weeks since the complaint was filed and served. They have a week to go before there is the possibility (and the likelihood) that CBS' counsel will apply for a default judgment. He's going to have to drop some coin. That's just how it is. Apparently this "top 20 IP firm" didn't want to have anything to do with the case. Hiring counsel would have been the first thing most people would do in that situation. I certainly would be taking time away from set building and meeting with costumers at PF Chang's.
But yes, there is certainly a change in his demeanor as well in this latest post. Very interesting.
But yes, there is certainly a change in his demeanor as well in this latest post. Very interesting.
Of course it's not like he has unlimited donor funds. I actually take him at his word when he says he doesn't want to spend any donor money on the case. After all, he doesn't have enough money to even finish the movie at this point. And he can always pay lawyers out of his own pocket. I continue to doubt that any established firm would represent a corporation "pro bono."
The possibility exists that they are pretty much broke and no one is going to take this on pro bono.
- Status