• 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.
muCephi said:
starring the author and executive producer
Click to expand...
Along with the most blatant merchandising campaign since Spaceballs. :lol:

Ion said:
I still feel like this is a slam-dunk and won't change much, unfortunately.

I would love to see the fair use defense fly. It could potentially legitimize entire genres of fan films. I really don't think it's going to, though.

The waiver thing? I'd be very surprised if that flies. It basically amounts to: "But your honor, he let Joe drive his car. That means he'll let anybody drive his car!"
Click to expand...
I don't really agree. I think we, as fans, have it pretty good now. CBS/Paramount looked away, most of the time, and didn't seem to mind as long as no one tried to become their own production company by which to sell that IP. When someone stumbled over the line, a simple C&D got everything back on target. Now we have Axanar, a production that didn't stumble, it sprinted over the line, and in this case I think CBS/Para has every right to trip them up, and toss them back over the line from whence they came.
 
Ion said:
I still feel like this is a slam-dunk and won't change much, unfortunately.

I would love to see the fair use defense fly. It could potentially legitimize entire genres of fan films. I really don't think it's going to, though.

The waiver thing? I'd be very surprised if that flies. It basically amounts to: "But your honor, he let Joe drive his car. That means he'll let anybody drive his car!"
Click to expand...

What does legitimate mean in this case?

Fair use would be a disaster for the studios if Axanar was ruled as fair use.
 
Ion said:
I would love to see the fair use defense fly. It could potentially legitimize entire genres of fan films. I really don't think it's going to, though.
Click to expand...

maybe in addition to being attorneys, they are warp drive engineers, and really CAN make it fly.
 
Dennis said:
Winston & Strawn lawyer to represent moviemaker funded by 'Star Trek' fans
Click to expand...
After reading the article: Lol - for an IP firm they really don't get copyright law. I'm not a lawyer but I do work in a court (and have heard testimony on copyright cases and heard Judges decide them) and a "waiver" defense only is valid for Trademark cases, not copyright infringement cases; and that's why I've said IF Axanar wanted to bring up Trademark issues, they would have to file their own suit against CBS/Paramount to claim Trademark abandonment due to a failure to vigorously defend said Trademarks. Earlier in this very thread, I did say that in relation to Star Trek TMs, Axanar might have a case; but it was then pointed out to me the lawsuit was strictly a copyright infringement suit - and Trademarks are not at issue in such a suit..

TLDR: A "waiver" defense won't work for a Copyright infringement case; and I doubt a Judge would consider or even allow it.
 
Professor Zoom said:
Fair use would be a disaster for the studios if Axanar was ruled as fair use.
Click to expand...

Bingo. It would be bad for the owners, bad for the brands, and to some extent bad for the fans. It would essentially make all IP public domain-- because what would the line be between fan-made and professionally made? Axanar is at or past it already, and if it could pass muster, than where does it end?

And when IP goes public domain it is essentially dead when it's driven into the ground, and only re-emerges later when someone develops their own transformed version (Disney's Alice in Wonderland, for example).
 
Noname Given said:
A "waiver" defense won't work for a Copyright infringement case; and I doubt a Judge would consider or even allow it.
Click to expand...

Why do you suppose an apparently competent IP attorney is making public statements to the effect that it's part of their defense, then?
 
Dennis said:
Why do you suppose an apparently competent IP attorney is making public statements to the effect that it's part of their defense, then?
Click to expand...

why are they saying ANYTHING in advance of the filing? If I were a client in this situation that would make me concerned with my case being driven by agendas other than my own.
 
Albinator said:
Man, where's OSWriter when you need him...
Click to expand...
In his bunker, hopefully. Poor guy :(
muCephi said:
why are they saying ANYTHING in advance of the filing? If I were a client in this situation that would make me concerned with my case being driven by agendas other than my own.
Click to expand...
I think there are multiple agendas at play here, especially with the firm taking it on as pro bono. I mean, it seems cut and dry, but they must think this will be a landmark case in some way to take that on.
 
jespah said:
This is an issue. I had suggested this in a blog post, to implead IGG. CBS/Paramount may very well be either waiting on Axanar to do this or waiting until the case is done. It does put Axanar into a kind of rock and a hard place. Do you implead IGG (possibly also KS, but the theory stronger against IGG is stronger)? The IP infringement lawsuit is a known, real quantity, whereas possible future crowdfunding ventures are nebulous at best. It's matter for AP and his defense team to consider.
Click to expand...
As I alluded to earlier, I'm wondering that maybe CBS going after Axanar is also going to be a shot across the bow of KS/IGG as way of potentially preventing future fan productions from easily raising large sums of money.
 
Dennis said:
Noname Given said:
A "waiver" defense won't work for a Copyright infringement case; and I doubt a Judge would consider or even allow it.
Click to expand...
Why do you suppose an apparently competent IP attorney is making public statements to the effect that it's part of their defense, then?
Click to expand...
I really don't know. maybe they think if they hit the Judge with, "but it's the internet..."; they think they can get the Judge to make some case law effectively merging (or not seeing a distinction) between Copyright and/or Trademark enforcement. That said, I really don't think a Judge WILL go that far (you can be sure that if that was the case and the Judge then ruled in Axanar's favor, an appeal would be filed by Paramount/CBS faster than Warp 13 - and I think a judgement like that would be pretty quickly vacated/overturned on appeal.) I don't think any Judge would try to merge Copyright and Trademark law in that way.

If I'm wrong, and that did happen, and was upheld; you can be pretty sure every Media company with an active/lucrative IP would be leveling C&D's as fast as their paralegals could type them. ;)

ETC: Somehow I had the wrong post from Dennis quoted - that is now corrected
 
Last edited:
drt said:
As I alluded to earlier, I'm wondering that maybe CBS going after Axanar is also going to be a shot across the bow of KS/IGG as way of potentially preventing future fan productions from easily raising large sums of money.
Click to expand...

Possibly. This could be a push to get people interested in writing their local elected officials to try to get more oversight in the crowdfunding arena (although that would probably be something the corporate plaintiffs would be more in favor of).
 
They could be trying to set new precedent. Use the trademark law as part of a persuasive argument.

Or there might be cases where people have tried to use the same argument before (re. applying trademark standards to Copyright), and even if the prior case didn't succeed, there might have been some judges comment or consideration that they think will support them in...whatever they're trying to do. If it's an attempt to mitigate the sentencing (as opposed to just fighting off the case), then that would also be different.

Admittedly, copyright and trademark aren't my area of expertise. There's probably common law loopholes that people more well-versed in that area would know about.
 
muCephi said:
why are they saying ANYTHING in advance of the filing? If I were a client in this situation that would make me concerned with my case being driven by agendas other than my own.
Click to expand...

1. Because they don't want to get to court. They want to settle so they are putting it out there that they have a few defenses.

2. Perhaps they are trying to establish that even if their clients broke the law, they didn't think they were, for that to work they need to put forward some reasoning that could have existed that made them think it was ok.
 
TribbleTrouble1 said:
With regard to Indigogo, as I understand it they actively pursued Axanar's business away from KS knowing full well that Axanar did not own or have proper license to the copyrights for their project.
Click to expand...
Axanar possibly went to Indiegogo for more money because Kickstarter won't let you do another round of fundraising if you haven't finish your original project. So, maybe Axanar wanted you to think IGG was pursuing them but I'm guessing that was not the case.
 
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