Caveat Emptor is a registered trademark of CBS Studios. Used with permission.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Wait, did I click on a Trump thread?
You know, that's possibly correct, I stand corrected!
However, as the probable source from Ford is either the Trek novel "The Final Reflection" or the first edition of the FASA sourcebook "The Klingons" (I believe Ford helped write it, or they cross pollinated each other to be in continuity with each other), both CBS/Paramount sanctioned books, Axanar and Peters are still screwed on the infringement front!
Last edited:
Sorry, but what a pompous jackass that man is! Just hearing him talk gives me the creeps. “If Axanar comes out next year, we probably should sponsor these [independent Star Trek fan film awards], instead of being in them.” I just had to turn that video off.
Also, he literally says “We're not a fan film” in this. This guy is like freakin' Jeckyll and Hyde.
Star Trek Axanar's Robert Meyer Burnett can't tell the difference between books and movies. And maybe the difference between authorized works and unauthorized works.
When I talked to Mr. Burnett, he seemed very intelligent. I just don't understand the hold Peters has on him.
Financials for the Axanar Indiegogo were promised in Q1 2016. Still waiting.
Interesting article about non profits (not that Axanar is, was or ever will be a non profit) just...thought it was interesting
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-mariotti/how-to-spot-financial-fra_b_5675873.html
Interesting article about non profits (not that Axanar is, was or ever will be a non profit) just...thought it was interesting
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-mariotti/how-to-spot-financial-fra_b_5675873.html
But according to the Axanar report, Burnett has only made $5,000 for his work thus far.
When I talked to him, it sounded like I should've waited until he was sober.
At this point CBS isn't going to let him within 12 parsecs of Trek so desperately clinging to Peters (snicker) is his best option to live his dream.
Which is good, because Han Solo can get there faster than 12 parsecs ... that still sounds wrong.
It's not Peters, who provided a means to an end. IMO, RMB can't let go of what he hoped to attain here.
Burnett's argument is that Paramount (through its licensee, Pocket Books) was inducing people to write Star Trek stories because of Strange New Worlds, which he interprets to mean they were encouraging fan fiction. Strange New Worlds wasn't fan fiction. Strange New Worlds was, essentially, an open call anthology for unpublished authors. Most anthologies, especially open call anthologies, don't involve licenses because there are more layers of work due to corporate ownership and approvals. Pocket decided to give it a try, they received Paramount's permission to give it a try, they developed answers to the various problems a project like this would engender. There were submission guidelines, things that could and could not be done, just as you'd expect for any anthology. For the stories selected for the anthology, the writers signed contracts and were paid. It was a professional market that paid a decent rate (10 cents a word) to writers.
The difference between what the writers of Strange New Worlds did, both the published and the unpublished (and I was one of the unpublished) and what Axanar is doing is that the Strange New Worlds writers had permission of the copyright holder to write their stories, while Axanar has no permission at all. Notice I said "to write their stories"; I said nothing about permission to publish or distribute or monetize their stories. It was Pocket who held the rights to publishing and distributing and monetizing the stories. The rejected stories that didn't make the cut for the published anthology sometimes ended up online, violating copyrights in the same way any other fan fiction story does, but that doesn't mean they were were written as fan fiction as Burnett implies.
I can't even imagine how a "Strange New Worlds, but for film" would function.
Yes. When it clearly is not. A documentary, according to the same source his lawyer used for the definition of mockumentary, is "Based on or recreating an actual event, era, life story, etc. that purports to be factually accurate and contains no fictional elements." However, the definition of mockumentary that his lawyer put before the judge says it's simply "depicting fictional events but presented as a documentary." But I think her choice of definition, if it works, is sly like a fox.
By the definition she uses, a perfectly serious and scholarly presentation of the life of U.S. Grant would be a documentary. A perfectly serious and scholarly-style presentation of the life of James T. Kirk would be a mockumentary. The only difference is the latter is completely fictional. Her definition doesn't contain the bits about a mockumentary being parody or satire (that are common in about 19 of 20 definitions of the term). If the judge accepts her definition, "Prelude" is merely a "fictional documentary." In a defense later, it would raise the question of whether or not a seriously produced (not parody and not satire) fictional documentary over a fictional event is afforded the same IP protections as a factual documentary over factual events is. Where I was jumping ahead before is I think that's where this is all going if it goes to trial and the judge had no problem with her definition.
Interesting article by a filmmaker who's Kickstarter blew the doors off the initial fundraising goal. He discusses tax implications, including sales tax. Seems like with the right structure and accounting methods your project could legally avoid paying taxes until the project is completed and final accounting done. Also, Kickstarter, and possibly the State of California are not considering giving money for perks to be a "sale" - at least at this point in time.
However, one would think that any item, including digital items sold through Axanar's "Donor Store" would be subject to California state and district sales tax if sold and shipped to a California resident. Didn't see a line item expense for "Sales Tax" on the Axanar Annual Report. Sales taxes are due monthly, so it's not something an entity can delay until the project is finished.
http://nofilmschool.com/2014/04/crowdfunding-taxes-kick-starters-hidden-bite-stop-the-bleeding
However, one would think that any item, including digital items sold through Axanar's "Donor Store" would be subject to California state and district sales tax if sold and shipped to a California resident. Didn't see a line item expense for "Sales Tax" on the Axanar Annual Report. Sales taxes are due monthly, so it's not something an entity can delay until the project is finished.
http://nofilmschool.com/2014/04/crowdfunding-taxes-kick-starters-hidden-bite-stop-the-bleeding
All this talk of nitpicky legalese definitions and technical interpretations of certain phrases reminds me of something that happened in the '90s with a certain high-profile national leader.
Kor
Maybe he's broke too.But according to the Axanar report, Burnett has only made $5,000 for his work thus far.
Kor
Last edited:
- Status