• 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.
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint or Strike Plaintiffs' Complaint In Part filed by Defendants Axanar Productions, Inc., Alec Peters. Motion set for hearing on 3/21/2016 at 09:00 AM before Judge R. Gary Klausner. (Attorney Andrew S Jick added to party Axanar Productions, Inc.(pty:dft), Attorney Andrew S Jick added to party Alec Peters(pty:dft)) (Jick, Andrew)

CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants Axanar Productions, Inc., Alec Peters, (Jick, Andrew)

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public...oration_et_al_v_Axanar_Productions,_Inc_et_al

Neil
 
Indysolo said:
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint or Strike Plaintiffs' Complaint In Part filed by Defendants Axanar Productions, Inc., Alec Peters. Motion set for hearing on 3/21/2016 at 09:00 AM before Judge R. Gary Klausner. (Attorney Andrew S Jick added to party Axanar Productions, Inc.(pty:dft), Attorney Andrew S Jick added to party Alec Peters(pty:dft)) (Jick, Andrew)

CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants Axanar Productions, Inc., Alec Peters, (Jick, Andrew)

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public...oration_et_al_v_Axanar_Productions,_Inc_et_al

Neil
Click to expand...
Yep - they're going to use all the standard lawyer maneuvers (IE Motion for dismissal/motion to strike). It's the first thing you do in any civil lawsuit. Hopefully Paramount/CBS dotted their i's and crossed their t's an d their isn't some technicality that will force them to re-file/re-serve (that's the interesting thing about Civil actions, there is no 'double-jeopardy' like clause in Civil law. if this gets dismissed on some technicality - Paramount/CBS are free to appeal the Judge's ruling or re-file (correcting whatever technicality - if there was any.)

I'm actually interested to see that no hearing date was set for the Paramount/CBS request for an injunction against Axanar continuing production (unless they didn't file such a request and just had the stipulated 'no production' agreement that gave Axanar another month to file the response. I don't have pacer access to actually read the motion to dismiss; but in addition of any technicalities; here's where they are probably going to attempt the "We're just like every other Star Trek Fan Film Group and none of them are being sued..." <--- Which ISN'T a valid defense for a copyright infringement case; but they probably just included it in case the Judge forgot that aspect (again, never hurts as you never know what a Judge will do until he does it) of copyright law. However if he did dismiss on that basis, it would DEFINITELY be overturned on appeal.

TLDR: Unless Paramount/CBS did some major technical/legal mistake in their filing - this won't get dismissed/stricken; but a defense attorney will try anything and everything to mjake the case go away.
 
carlosp said:
TONY TODD: "SOMETHING'S NOT RIGHT" with Axanar.
In an interview on the MORTIS podcast, the former Axanar actor says production delays and loss of director Christian Gosset were among the reasons he left. And he's on the short list for the new Star Trek series. http://bit.ly/axatodd
Click to expand...


I liked him very much as Worf's brother!

A possibly/probably stupid question: Would Mr. Todd's continued participation have hampered his potential chances at getting cast in the upcoming TV series?
 
Tony Todd left Axanar long before the drama started, I would hope filmmakers would see his leaving and subsequent public statements as proof he definitely doesn't condone IP theft.

What's that Peters posted in the Axanar Group about stalkers and details of their dating lives? Because the only thing I've seen that comes anywhere close to that is that parody twitter, where Alec is worried that Terry has secretly fallen in love with him.
 
Noname Given said:
Yep - they're going to use all the standard lawyer maneuvers (IE Motion for dismissal/motion to strike).....
Click to expand...

I have the documents.

I have only skimmed them as I just woke up. I need coffee and I have homework to do before I go in depth.

Currently, from the quick, cursory glance I took, these are mainly technical defenses. One refers to the complaint against the full-length film as being 'unripe' because the film is not yet completed. However, this seems to have ignored the existence of the Vulcan scene. It may have been taken down by Axa but it is far from gone from the Internet.

Anyway, hang loose, I'll try to get back to this today but, like I said, I have schoolwork and that comes first.

Many thanks for your patience and I'm sorry for the delay.
 
jespah said:
I have the documents.

I have only skimmed them as I just woke up. I need coffee and I have homework to do before I go in depth.

Currently, from the quick, cursory glance I took, these are mainly technical defenses. One refers to the complaint against the full-length film as being 'unripe' because the film is not yet completed. However, this seems to have ignored the existence of the Vulcan scene. It may have been taken down by Axa but it is far from gone from the Internet.

Anyway, hang loose, I'll try to get back to this today but, like I said, I have schoolwork and that comes first.

Many thanks for your patience and I'm sorry for the delay.
Click to expand...
Sleep is for the weak. Yet coffee is for the strong. We'll be waiting, take your time. :D
 
jespah said:
I have the documents.

I have only skimmed them as I just woke up. I need coffee and I have homework to do before I go in depth.

Currently, from the quick, cursory glance I took, these are mainly technical defenses. One refers to the complaint against the full-length film as being 'unripe' because the film is not yet completed. However, this seems to have ignored the existence of the Vulcan scene. It may have been taken down by Axa but it is far from gone from the Internet.

Anyway, hang loose, I'll try to get back to this today but, like I said, I have schoolwork and that comes first.

Many thanks for your patience and I'm sorry for the delay.
Click to expand...

I knew we'd be able to tell the moment you woke up! :-) I know this is all just a legal waltz at this point but I kinda hope CBS's legal team takes the " OH NO YOU DIDN'T" approach and unleashes their full arsenal now.
 
KennyB said:
I knew we'd be able to tell the moment you woke up! :-) I know this is all just a legal waltz at this point but I kinda hope CBS's legal team takes the " OH NO YOU DIDN'T" approach and unleashes their full arsenal now.
Click to expand...
Same here. I don't want donors to feel any more pain, but I would like to see Alec knocked down a peg or twelve. Their hubris, their treatment of their donors, the zeal surrounding their cultish personalities, their shameless profiteering, that shit needs to be smacked down hard.
 
Where in that quote does Todd ever imply that he is on any kind of "short list" for the new Star Trek series? He mentions that the show is coming, he's looking at various parts in a multitude of places.

Typical click bait.
 
A motion to dismiss is kind of a ballsy move, but also high risk. A motion to dismiss what a judge can see is a fundamentally meritorious legal complaint may not be worth the price of the motion and of the defense’s credibility with the judge. Especially this judge. Judge Klausner doesn't like motions filed just to extend time. Learn more about the judge at AxaMonitor » http://bit.ly/axajudge

There's always the danger the judge will see this motion as a move by the defense simply to try to avoid a potentially expensive and controversial trial.

Most importantly, it appears to be a way to stave off the injunction you know CBS/Paramount clearly want. The longer Axanar can delay that, the easier they can continue to spend money on the production.

What Axanar may be actually aiming for is that the judge grants a partial dismissal, wearing away at the plaintiffs' case. Or they may be angling for converting the motion to dismiss into a summary judgment motion, but this can backfire, too, with most judges seeking to avoid a full summary judgment motion, and then denying summary judgment until the record is developed.
 
Albinator said:
Where in that quote does Todd ever imply that he is on any kind of "short list" for the new Star Trek series? He mentions that the show is coming, he's looking at various parts in a multitude of places.

Typical click bait.
Click to expand...
Here's his actual quote, transcribed from the podcast:

Todd: You know, CBS is doing its own series again. I think we mentioned the other day that we're on a very short list...
Interviewer: So you're actually on the list for the series.
Todd: I'm actually on the short list for a couple...
 
Think of it this way, if CBS loses, then it can come back and file for the copyright infringement for the online donor store. This current lawsuit is only for the film, right? Maybe those Trekkie lawyers from all over the country will stay on pro-bono for that too.


carlosp said:
I live-tweeted my reactions to the various elements in Axanar's motion to dismiss while I read through it early Tuesday morning. If you're interested you can follow the tweets by starting here »

I'll be posting fuller analyses by myself and others over the next couple of days on the AxaMonitor wiki.
Click to expand...
 
Albinator said:
Where in that quote does Todd ever imply that he is on any kind of "short list" for the new Star Trek series? He mentions that the show is coming, he's looking at various parts in a multitude of places.

Typical click bait.
Click to expand...
Nope---I listened to the podcast--it is one of the last things they talk about.
 
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