Where's the celebratory Sushi?Peters just announced his lawyers. No word on the extension or the halt in filming as a stipulation.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
B) would mean that AP and company have been saying one thing in public and doing something else in private.
And this would surprise you... why exactly?
I don't recall ever hearing that copyright law was dependent upon the media it was created with. Whether it's VR or a hand-made drawing is completely irrelevant; the same rules will apply so far as I'm aware. The issue of "how unique is unique enough" is a different beast, and something I'm interested in.
But I doubt we'll ever have an answer; I don't imagine it could ever be codified. So the answer we end up with is "when the judge and/or jury think it's unique enough."
It's possible, but I don't thnk so. As much as an Unmitigated, Peters has presented himself as, he DID denounce the threat on the Axanar FB page earlier. One would think that his ego would have forced him to take credit if he were responsible.......
And promptly followed it with insulting commentary regarding Mr. Oliva, which completely negates any points he received from it.
Don't see why it matters. I highly doubt any judge or jury is going to say that someone else can use the trademark on the Internet just because the creator never produced a web series. And if they do, you'll be watching as the media lobbies kick it into high gear to get that retconned by legal fiat.
As I understand trademark, the usage lines are based on industry. The industry is not "web series"; it's "video entertainment", or at least that's how I would read it. I have a feeling a competent judge and/or jury is going to say the same. Anything else would be seriously asinine.
Just like all those patents for various processes "with a computer" or "on the Internet".
Oh, wait...
I also wonder how Axanar's digital defense will fly when Paramount/CBS brings up (Axanar had KS and Indegogo tiers with Coffee, T-Shirts, DVDs, Blu-Rays, et. al as items - and they have distributed DVDS and Blu-Ray of "Prelude to Axanar" as well....?
IF Axanar (and Alec) were claiming their work will ONLY be released digitally on the web; maybe they'd have something; but the good folks at Axanar have already made (and touted) their professional quality DVDs/Blu-Rays of "Prelude to Axanar" and have effectively stated on KS they will be doing the same with the Axanar feature (In fact the Blu-Ray tier was the one I backed for at $75.)
Thus, I fail to see any real difference between what they've been doing and what CBS/Paramount have been doing with regards to Star Trek in the internet streaming/digital realm - and I doubt the Judge will either when he looks at Axanar's actions in their totality.
B) would mean that AP and company have been saying one thing in public and doing something else in private.
The Axanar front page leads tonight with reference to a TED talk about what is great leadership... and the first response from a nonbanned human being says, essentially, if you have to say that you are are great leader, you aren't. The second response says great leaders are judged on their actions, not their words.
You may not be the only one noticing that of which you speak.
And that's why I don't like Alec. He says something reining in one of his fans then negates it with hypocrisy filled thought-stopping cliche propaganda.
Helpful clue since you read what's said here, Alec: When you label people with the generality of "haters" while in the same breath mention "hateful rhetoric," you're actually pointing your accusative finger of blame solely at yourself. No doubt the irony escapes you.
Last edited:
If he doesn't know who it was, then how can he rein that fan in?
Looking at AP's past ability to Barney Fife (i.e. shoot himself in the foot), it would not surprise me at all to find that his announcement of "pro bono" representation is not exactly "pro bono."
"You keep using that word ... "
A selfie for the fan group with his new lawyer pals doesn't necessarily mean that he's not paying them.
Also, I'm not entirely convinced that the attorneys know what kind of lunatic* they've taken on as a client. They aren't idiots, but AP has hoodwinked some (otherwise) pretty sharp folks along the way. But I don't think he can keep his fingers off the keyboard for the duration, and he'll pull a Barney again somewhere down the road. If he doesn't, one of the "team" will.
*Not an actual diagnosis. See your doctor for more information.
"You keep using that word ... "
A selfie for the fan group with his new lawyer pals doesn't necessarily mean that he's not paying them.
Also, I'm not entirely convinced that the attorneys know what kind of lunatic* they've taken on as a client. They aren't idiots, but AP has hoodwinked some (otherwise) pretty sharp folks along the way. But I don't think he can keep his fingers off the keyboard for the duration, and he'll pull a Barney again somewhere down the road. If he doesn't, one of the "team" will.
*Not an actual diagnosis. See your doctor for more information.
Im sure they have done their research, and its not like lawyers only represent nice people... and no matter what Axanar have done they hardly even appear on the "naughty" end of the spectrum
I'm going by what Peters wrote, which seems to me to be a general cover thy ass statement on his part. To answer your question, I don't know.
Now there's an interesting question for our resident legal types.
Do lawyers typically perform background checks of any kind on a client before taking them on?
I never even thought about that, and now I'm kinda curious.
I worked for a small family-owned firm for a few years. 'Twas not my cup of tea. They certainly did not. But that might have been a resource thing. The larger firm I worked before that probably did when dealing with individuals but my area of practice was larger corporations where that was not an issue. Now I work directly for a corporation so I don't worry about such things.
I'm going to venture a guess and say that there's about a 60% chance a background check was done on Peters. But as others have said, if this has the potential to shape case law, it's a good reason for them to take Peters case. I just hope for his own sake that Peters doesn't get upset with his new "friends" if they find things he doesn't want them to.
I was more asking just for general knowledge than any relevance to the Axanar case. It's just something I never thought to wonder about.
I do wonder how honest he was with them? Do they know about the coffee?
. It'll all come out.
Well...in any legal movie I've watched....there's always a wrangle in the first scenes as to 'whether we'll take the case'.
With Peters, it'll be pay up front and in cash...please.
With Peters, it'll be pay up front and in cash...please.
And on top of that, what would a background check really reveal on him? His past business ventures? Maybe some parking tickers? He's not a criminal, even if people here don't like him or believe he's shady.
I do wonder how honest he was with them? Do they know about the coffee?
Anything that's generally public knowledge will come out the minute they google search, which i'm sure they did. As far as background checks, it's not like it's going to reveal he has a deep criminal record. Folks here may not like him or think he does shady business, but to my knowledge he's never been convicted of a crime.
I'm sure however that any lawyer worth their salt will do a basic discovery of their own before they take a client, particularly in a complicated case like this, to see his general history, and everything related to Axanar. I'd be surprised if she is unaware of all the activity around it.
A few hours on Trek websites like this one will give her all the background she needs.
I don't think you can copyright a movement. I also don't think you can copyright something as vague as "wrinkly nosed alien" since about every damned sci-fi movie has one.
"Wrinkly nosed aliens who talk about prophets all the time and were recently subjugated" might raise a few pointy eyebrows though.
"Wrinkly nosed aliens who talk about prophets all the time and were recently subjugated" might raise a few pointy eyebrows though.
Sorry if this has been posted before, but I noticed this in another thread that got rezzed recently:
He makes some good points there, so why does Alec Peters not take his own advice?
It might make a fun experiment to post those quotes unattributed to Axanar's facebook page see how long it takes them to get labeled as "hater posts", or deleted altogether...
source: http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/official-star-trek.169732/#post-6119017Alec Peters said:
source: http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/official-star-trek.169732/#post-6121063Alec Peters said:
He makes some good points there, so why does Alec Peters not take his own advice?
It might make a fun experiment to post those quotes unattributed to Axanar's facebook page see how long it takes them to get labeled as "hater posts", or deleted altogether...
Legal eagles...
If you're taking a case pro bono, even one as "high profile" as this one...
How much unmitigated bullshit from your client would you take before you fire him? If he ignores basic logic at every conceivable step and refused to comply with your legal recommendations, is it still worth it?
If you're taking a case pro bono, even one as "high profile" as this one...
How much unmitigated bullshit from your client would you take before you fire him? If he ignores basic logic at every conceivable step and refused to comply with your legal recommendations, is it still worth it?
That's a good question, and I am guessing we'll see a noticeable change in tone now that he has representation. I said earlier, and I still believe, that any communication coming from his camp-- even on social media, twitter, facebook, message boards-- will have to be approved by his attorney now.
But as you say, if they remain defiant and continue to publicly mouth off to critics, there could be internal consequences. But that's just me speculating. What the line is for their legal time-- if there is one-- is anybody's guess.
My question is-- if his followers continue with their belligerent, continue bullying critics -- even threatening them-- would THAT have any affect on their willingness to defend? I would thin not, but if someone is threatened, and they decide to take it to the authorities, and they can connect the person to Axanar's incitement, it makes me wonder.
That's why Axanar has to publicly denounce any behavior like that, to avoid being connected, even by proxy, to it.
- Status