CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[muCephi]

This, minus the deleted text, is the definition of derivative copyright, is it not? People can claim all they want until they're blue in the face that it's not subject to copyright protection, but black-letter law says they are wrong Wrong WRONG.

Good point... the fannish Klingon may be derived work in the copyright context.

Most unfortunately, but perhaps inevitably, if the Klingon speakers do not seek an accommodation with the studios then they will probably be faced with any future published works being challenged for trademark on Klingon, and for copyright on the dictionary and movie and related licensed works content.

All of which would put Klingon speakers in the same place as Trek fan film makers have arrived at, also pushed there by Axanar. They will be left that they can speak what they want without calling it Klingon or using the core vocabulary (or scripts too?) -- make an off-brand embodiment of the unique spirit they claim is the virtue of the language they defend.

Then we would see if it could stand up on its own, like fan film producers offering to make non-Trek films. Which of course it won't, since Klingon is inextricably tied in with the speakers fanatasizing that they are part of the specific character type and back story created by the studio, not their as yet undiscovered Romulan cousins, or descendendents of the virus that forced amenesia that lost the vocabulary of dictionary, or the like.

And serious do-it-anyway Klingon speakers, while probably never stopped from their hobby, yet being constrained not to publish, would probably fall off the novelty list after a while and face the long (but glorious ) tail of ever diminishing numbers.

The AC filing, for all its enthusiasm, may have pulled the plug on an accomodation, even while forcing the studio to clarify that they are not claiming everything everyone has derived. The studio just needs to hold the core of the language and the name, and that I believe they can do.

 

[KennyB]

That's not clever and it's unwarranted.

Not many people in this topic like Peters. Your continual self-dramatizing, grudge-bearing attempt to demonstrate that you're the Greatest Axanar Opponent of them all is tiresome.

Yes it does tend to get old...........

 

[Mudd]

This would have closed any other thread a long time ago.

Nope.

Bad posts result in warned posters rather than closed topics, as you have reason to know.

 

[Sgt_G]

Oh, SNAP!!!

 

[steam235]

This would have closed any other thread a long time ago. But at 773 pages it's apparently too big to fail.

Does your avatar mean you really dislike the Kelvin?

 

[jespah]

...

The AC filing, for all its enthusiasm, may have pulled the plug on an accomodation, even while forcing the studio to clarify that they are not claiming everything everyone has derived. The studio just needs to hold the core of the language and the name, and that I believe they can do.

What is concerning is that speaking Klingon, outside of productions, could almost (almost) be analogized to cosplaying. It's certainly not official, it pays homage, and it is a direct derivation of copyrighted IP.

Force CBS/Paramount (and others) to push back on conlangs (e. g. Tolkein Elvish and Na'avi in Avatar and Dothraki in Game of Thrones to name but three), and perhaps there will have to be a push-back here as well.

Make no mistake, such a push-back, if it were to happen, is directly traceable to Axa and its shenanigans. Look to them for the end (or drastic alteration) of the party, if it comes.

It's not the parents who call the cops who end the party, and it's not the cops, either - it's the drunken teenager who poops in the punch bowl who ends it. The others are just reacting to same.

 

[Ryan F]

Hi, I'm a newbie here (1st post), but I've been reading and following this particular thread with interest. Thanks everyone for making such a difficult subject so enjoyable and easy to understand for this layman!

This is where I stand:

I'm not an Axanar backer; although I like the idea of fan films, I'd never actually seen one until all this kicked off. I watched the prelude with interest. Thought the special effects were really well done, and most of the actors gave it their all. The 'interview' angle is a bit of a sci-fi cliché (Babylon 5 and nu-BSG have both done similar newsreel-type episodes, far better), and its talking-heads nature doesn't really allow the Axanar team to demonstrate the aptitude for camerawork, framing, tracking and editing that would be required in a more ambitious shoot.

As I'm from the UK, the legal processes of the US are pretty alien to me, so I appreciate those people explaining what's going on (from someone whose only experience of the US court system is via TV shows such as Murder One and Judge Judy).

With regard to the Klingon language and the debate over its ownership, I'm reminded of certain brand names such as Aspirin, Thermos and Yo-Yo which were once trademarked terms, but have since become genericised. Whilst Star Trek, its designs, ships and characters should rightly remain under the control of CBS/P, claims of ownership over a word or a series of words don't sit well with me.

It was Richard Dawkins who first came up with the word 'meme'. Reductio ad absurdum time: what if Dawkins were to claim ownership of that word? What if he sued everyone who used it in commercial media? The names Fiona, Wendy, Lorna, Olivia and Vanessa were all invented by authors - should people have to pay to use those names?

Star Trek isn't just a bunch of words, it's a combination of ideas, thoughts, notions. The word 'Romulus' on its own isn't Star Trek (or even originated by Trek), but in conjunction with a devious pointy-eared guy in a quilted tunic it becomes a concept. No matter how you dress it up, the word Qapla' doesn't mean anything beyond 'success' or 'good luck'. There's no deeper idea or meaning behind it, it's just a word that someone invented - just like 'meme', 'app' and 'escalator'.

PS: Go easy on me!

 

[steam235]

the word Qapla' doesn't mean anything beyond 'success' or 'good luck'. There's no deeper idea or meaning behind it, it's just a word that someone invented - just like 'meme', 'app' and 'escalator'.

I was thinking the other day that while the language can't be copyrighted. Something like Qapla could be trade marked like a catch phrase.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Does your avatar mean you really dislike the Kelvin?

He must do...

Let us burn him

 

[KennyB]

Hi, I'm a newbie here (1st post), but I've been reading and following this particular thread with interest. Thanks everyone for making such a difficult subject so enjoyable and easy to understand for this layman!

This is where I stand:

I'm not an Axanar backer; although I like the idea of fan films, I'd never actually seen one until all this kicked off. I watched the prelude with interest. Thought the special effects were really well done, and most of the actors gave it their all. The 'interview' angle is a bit of a sci-fi cliché (Babylon 5 and nu-BSG have both done similar newsreel-type episodes, far better), and its talking-heads nature doesn't really allow the Axanar team to demonstrate the aptitude for camerawork, framing, tracking and editing that would be required in a more ambitious shoot.

As I'm from the UK, the legal processes of the US are pretty alien to me, so I appreciate those people explaining what's going on (from someone whose only experience of the US court system is via TV shows such as Murder One and Judge Judy).

With regard to the Klingon language and the debate over its ownership, I'm reminded of certain brand names such as Aspirin, Thermos and Yo-Yo which were once trademarked terms, but have since become genericised. Whilst Star Trek, its designs, ships and characters should rightly remain under the control of CBS/P, claims of ownership over a word or a series of words don't sit well with me.

It was Richard Dawkins who first came up with the word 'meme'. Reductio ad absurdum time: what if Dawkins were to claim ownership of that word? What if he sued everyone who used it in commercial media? The names Fiona, Wendy, Lorna, Olivia and Vanessa were all invented by authors - should people have to pay to use those names?

Star Trek isn't just a bunch of words, it's a combination of ideas, thoughts, notions. The word 'Romulus' on its own isn't Star Trek (or even originated by Trek), but in conjunction with a devious pointy-eared guy in a quilted tunic it becomes a concept. No matter how you dress it up, the word Qapla' doesn't mean anything beyond 'success' or 'good luck'. There's no deeper idea or meaning behind it, it's just a word that someone invented - just like 'meme', 'app' and 'escalator'.

PS: Go easy on me!

Ryan, welcome............from Cambridgeshire. Buckle up.

 

[JWPlatt]

Does your avatar mean you really dislike the Kelvin?

No, but I'm curious about how you made that association.

Nope.

Bad posts result in warned posters rather than closed topics, as you have reason to know.

Heh. Okay, I admit that was funny.

 

[Noname Given]

To be fair I'm not sure what he means by 'I moved all of the hardware to a new location.' I do highly doubt he owns all that gear, but who knows.

The media serving does get chunky, but that's why I use YouTube and Vimeo.

Most likely - it looks good on a resume; and if he was looking for a position and had references (like Peters) to say "Oh yes, he's been doing this for us..." - helps get a job.

Also as someone who's worked in IT since the 1980ies - I too think it's B.S. IF they actually had such a setup and were paying $250.00 a month - they're NOT getting any value for the money. I seriously doubt the Axanar site is seeing that level of traffic. As for 'hosting' Prelude to Axanar - YouTube doesn't cost them a thing.

 

[Karzak]

Seconded.

Thirded.

@HMS Ark Royal , your uncouth and insulting comments of this nature have become something of a regular and disgusting habit. Despite the general objections we share regarding Alec Peters' (mis)conduct, I find these comments of yours reprehensible and have come to a point that I have absolutely no respect for you yourself because you continue to make these flagrant and despicable remarks, despite many of us asking you to stop.

Why? I really wish you would desist in making these comments as they only serve to make all of us with legitimate concerns and grievances against Alec Peters and Axanar look bad. It's fuel for the Peters and his default defense that we are all "haters" and further justification of his fascist censorship on his various social media outlets.

For the last fucking time. STOP DOING THIS SHIT.

It's not funny.

It's not impressive.

It's not witty.

It's pathetic, unnecessary, rude, and it's degrading to all women, including someone who has nothing to do with the reasons why we are all here - the conduct of the Axanar production.

Be the better person and refrain from making these comments. Don't have your friends make stalker-drive-bys of Ares Studios. Stop posting these kinds of comments and distracting from the discussion at hand.

Thank you.

 

[Ion]

That's the thing ... everyone is talking about huge sever loads for Axanar, but I don't see it.

The only huge load they have is...

Nah, not gonna finish that thought.

On a more serious note, I don't think they have anything approaching a level traffic that could be considered "huge" -- but it's enough that there is visibility, and far and away more than most peoples' blogs get. If they were serving things like the silent auto-play header video, it would be significant. Currently, it's coming from Amazon S3; I wonder if McIntosh pays that bill too, or if donor money is covering it?

I wouldn't be surprised if they're pulling in ten thousand uniques a day, perhaps even a hundred thousand. Not sure how big the swath of the fan base is that follows them, but it's almost certainly higher than average.

Isn't normal good service for a server to be up something like 99.xxxx% of the time? As in, three days offline in a year is considered to be horrible performance?

The typical standard of "three nines", or "99.9% uptime", was established (or at least popularized) back in the first dot com boom. It's something like 9 hours of downtime per year. The common conception tends to be that each nine you add, exponentially multiplies the cost involved. Cost factors for high reliability have probably changed since then, however; "the cloud" has changed a lot of things.

Of course, even more things have stayed the same, but that's off-topic.

Five nines used to be a gold standard, down a few minutes per year. I would think it would be hard to do at home. Who could rely on FIOS or cable to be up five nines without glitching?

Five nines is quite unrealistic for the vast majority of web properties. It amounts to less than 30 seconds of downtime per month. Very few organizations have the knowledge, talent, and budget required to keep within that. More applies as an actual criteria to phone companies than Internet sites if memory serves.

As for home connections... Yeah, the pipe matters. Anyone going for that level of reliability tend to have multiple inbound fiber trunks, and multiple inbound power feeds to different grids, each coming in from a different direction so a backhoe can't take the whole place down.

This would have closed any other thread a long time ago. But at 773 pages it's apparently too big to fail.

Some people here are members of the fan film community, concerned over what this case represents.
Some people here are fans of the fan films, concerned over what this case represents.
Some people here are interested in becoming members of the fan film community, concerned over what this case represents.
Some people here are concerned that Axanar may be a scam leeching off the fan community.
Some people here are donors who are concerned about where their money went.
Some people here are fans of Axanar who want to keep abreast of the situation, and hope to see the movie made. Well, okay, there's only, like, two of those; most have given up hope by now.
Some people here are people who have been wronged by Peters and co., and don't like them.
Some people here are just petty and enjoy the spectacle.
Some people here like to fan the flames.

All but the last two are good reasons to keep the thread open. Also keep in mind that we're (impatiently) waiting for the next shoe to drop, so to speak. Fortunately, Peters and company keep us endlessly entertained in the mean time. Hence the snark.

If this isn't your thing, may I politely suggest you check out another thread instead?

As to "schoolyard bully", I actually think Alec Peters is quite likely to have fit that description when he was in school.

 

[muCephi]

What is concerning is that speaking Klingon, outside of productions, could almost (almost) be analogized to cosplaying. It's certainly not official, it pays homage, and it is a direct derivation of copyrighted IP.

Force CBS/Paramount (and others) to push back on conlangs (e. g. Tolkein Elvish and Na'avi in Avatar and Dothraki in Game of Thrones to name but three), and perhaps there will have to be a push-back here as well.

Make no mistake, such a push-back, if it were to happen, is directly traceable to Axa and its shenanigans. Look to them for the end (or drastic alteration) of the party, if it comes.

It's not the parents who call the cops who end the party, and it's not the cops, either - it's the drunken teenager who poops in the punch bowl who ends it. The others are just reacting to same.

I share this concern and analysis 100%. And it might not happen overnight, but damage has probably already been done as corporations start to look at the cost and media exposure that this case has created. It may depend on the culture, though. In Japan they may consider their cosplayers as people who would never try to make a business off of unlicensed IP and as consumers of a lucrative industry. And as too dedicated to disappoint. They would all reach a consensus never to アクスアナル・ピーターズ each other.

Hi, I'm a newbie here (1st post), but I've been reading and following this particular thread with interest. Thanks everyone for making such a difficult subject so enjoyable and easy to understand for this layman!

This is where I stand:

I'm not an Axanar backer; although I like the idea of fan films, I'd never actually seen one until all this kicked off. I watched the prelude with interest. Thought the special effects were really well done, and most of the actors gave it their all. The 'interview' angle is a bit of a sci-fi cliché (Babylon 5 and nu-BSG have both done similar newsreel-type episodes, far better), and its talking-heads nature doesn't really allow the Axanar team to demonstrate the aptitude for camerawork, framing, tracking and editing that would be required in a more ambitious shoot.

As I'm from the UK, the legal processes of the US are pretty alien to me, so I appreciate those people explaining what's going on (from someone whose only experience of the US court system is via TV shows such as Murder One and Judge Judy).

With regard to the Klingon language and the debate over its ownership, I'm reminded of certain brand names such as Aspirin, Thermos and Yo-Yo which were once trademarked terms, but have since become genericised. Whilst Star Trek, its designs, ships and characters should rightly remain under the control of CBS/P, claims of ownership over a word or a series of words don't sit well with me.

It was Richard Dawkins who first came up with the word 'meme'. Reductio ad absurdum time: what if Dawkins were to claim ownership of that word? What if he sued everyone who used it in commercial media? The names Fiona, Wendy, Lorna, Olivia and Vanessa were all invented by authors - should people have to pay to use those names?

Star Trek isn't just a bunch of words, it's a combination of ideas, thoughts, notions. The word 'Romulus' on its own isn't Star Trek (or even originated by Trek), but in conjunction with a devious pointy-eared guy in a quilted tunic it becomes a concept. No matter how you dress it up, the word Qapla' doesn't mean anything beyond 'success' or 'good luck'. There's no deeper idea or meaning behind it, it's just a word that someone invented - just like 'meme', 'app' and 'escalator'.

PS: Go easy on me!

Welcome Ryan. Thanks for the interesting thoughts.

The thing that strikes me most about constructed language and copyright is that if you take the possible combinations of phonemes humans can speak, the number of combinations that could be made into "words", the number of permutations of meanings that could be attached to each word or or small phrase of such words, and roll in the various major grammatical frameworks for gratuitous overkill, then the number of possible "languages" available is in human terms essentially infinite.

So why, when there are an essentially infinite number of "languages" available to a group of fans, do these fans insist that they must attach to one slice out of that infinite set? What is it about this particular slice which makes it meaningful? And does that meaning then justify that slice having its own life as an exempt from copyright "language"?

What makes it meaningful in the case of Klingon is not an historical culture of Earth. What makes it meaningful is the set of ideas put down by writers, dramatized by actors, and produced and broadcast by a media company, all layers of which are creations from them, protected by IP law.

If it comes to fighting (in court ) about Klingon as a language, I think this is what will decide it. Even the AC brief shows this, as it repeatedly notes how Klingon is particularly expressive in matters like honor. Where did that feature come from? It came from the heads of Trek-contracted writers and their creation of a character profile for the Klingons in Trek. It didn't come from ancient history of Earth, it came from an expression of work covered by IP law. That origin story does not then circle back around and become part of the meta of Klingon which lifts it above being IP... unless you tell the jury that Klingons actually exist.

As for the argument that language is a system of conveying meaning and all instances of such a system are exempt from copyright because in essence they are a utility that has to be kept free as an "idea of language" rather than an an instance of artistic expression, I tend to think that the infinity of available languages argument also may pertain. Clearly, no one wants historical languages or their evolution to compete with copyright. But if someone creates a language from scratch out of the infinite possibilities, what possible argument could there be that this has no protection as an artistic expression?

 

[BillJ]

With regard to the Klingon language and the debate over its ownership, I'm reminded of certain brand names such as Aspirin, Thermos and Yo-Yo which were once trademarked terms, but have since become genericised. Whilst Star Trek, its designs, ships and characters should rightly remain under the control of CBS/P, claims of ownership over a word or a series of words don't sit well with me.

I think the difference here is that it was paid to be developed by Paramount and CBS for use in their properties, and it is a characteristic of another piece of their property (Klingons).

I do tend to think there is a difference between people personally using Klingon and people using Klingon in an independent, commercial Star Trek venture.

Welcome to the nut house!

 

[muCephi]

No, but I'm curious about how you made that association.

I think it was this:

 

[Ryan F]

Welcome Ryan. Thanks for the interesting thoughts.

The thing that strikes me most about constructed language and copyright is that if you take the possible combinations of phonemes humans can speak, the number of combinations that could be made into "words", the number of permutations of meanings that could be attached to each word or or small phrase of such words, and roll in the various major grammatical frameworks for gratuitous overkill, then the number of possible "languages" available is in human terms essentially infinite.

So why, when there are an essentially infinite number of "languages" available to a group of fans, do they insist that they must attach to one slice out of that infinite set? What is it about that particular slice which makes it meaningful? And does that meaning then justify that slice as having it own life as a protected "language"?

What makes it meaningful in the case of Klingon is not an historical culture of Earth. What makes it meaningful is the set of ideas put down by writers, dramatized by actors, and produced and broadcast by a media company, all layers of which are creations from them, protected by IP law.

If it comes to fighting about Klingon as a language, I think this is what will decide it. Even the AC brief shows this, as it repeatedly notes how Klingon is particularly expressive in matters like honor. Where did that feature come from? It came from the heads of Trek-contracted writers and their creation of a character profile for the Klingons in Trek. It didn't come from ancient history of Earth, it came from an expression of work covered by IP law.

Cheers, muCephi

Star Trek isn't my 'main' fandom; I'm actually quite big into the Transformers franchise, and there's an example from that brand where a company is trying to put a trademark on words and language.

Hasbro has trademarked the word 'Transformers' when applied to plastic changeable robot toys, but they can't put a marker down on the word 'transform' - i.e. the act of switching the toy from one form to another. This is a bit of a bugbear for them - at present they're unable to stop somebody else making their own robot toy and putting language on the packaging about the figure 'transforming' from one mode to another - Hasbro don't own the English language, they don't have rights over the word 'transform'.

Except...

If you look on Transformers packaging, there's nothing on the box or card stating that the figure within 'transforms'. Indeed, they the word is actively avoided. Hasbro instead uses synonyms, such as 'change' or 'convert'. The only use of the word 'transform' is within the Transformers brand-name itself. The reason? It looks for all the world like they want to move the goalpost. Robot toys don't transform, they convert. By manipulating the language so that 'transform' is the brand rather than the act of going from robot to vehicle, the aim is that, somewhere down the line, they will have the power to prevent other toys from using the word 'transform' on their packaging. This to me is troubling - that a brand could attempt to co-opt a regular word, try to gain ownership of it somehow...

If CBS/P wanted to trademark the word Qapla', then they should have done so already, just as Hasbro trademarked Optimus Prime and Megatron. When a Transformer has a generic, untrademarkable name (such as Jazz), the packaging calls the figure 'Autobot Jazz': Hasbro registers combinations of names in cases when they can't get control of the individual words. Indeed, Hasbro have lost the rights to some well-known Transformer names down the years (including Hot Rod), because they weren't on the ball.

How all this relates to Axanar and Klingon I'm not really sure, I mention it in passing only because the relationship between words and law is one that interests me. But just as Hasbro can't register public-domain, generic words like 'Jazz', 'Hound' and 'transform', I don't think CBS/P should be able to suddenly gain control of a language years after putting it out there.

 

[BillJ]

...I don't think CBS/P should be able to suddenly gain control of a language years after putting it out there.

How did they lose control of it? That they didn't sue people using it in non-commercial ventures would seem to be consistent with how they handled fan films up until the Axanar debacle.

 

[muCephi]

Cheers, muCephi

Star Trek isn't my 'main' fandom; I'm actually quite big into the Transformers franchise, and there's an example from that brand where a company is trying to put a trademark on words and language.

Hasbro has trademarked the word 'Transformers' when applied to plastic changeable robot toys, but they can't put a marker down on the word 'transform' - i.e. the act of switching the toy from one form to another. This is a bit of a bugbear for them - at present they're unable to stop somebody else making their own robot toy and putting language on the packaging about the figure 'transforming' from one mode to another - Hasbro don't own the English language, they don't have rights over the word 'transform'.

Except...

If you look on Transformers packaging, there's nothing on the box or card stating that the figure within 'transforms'. Indeed, they the word is actively avoided. Hasbro instead uses synonyms, such as 'change' or 'convert'. The only use of the word 'transform' is within the Transformers brand-name itself. The reason? It looks for all the world like they want to move the goalpost. Robot toys don't transform, they convert. By manipulating the language so that 'transform' is the brand rather than the act of going from robot to vehicle, the aim is that, somewhere down the line, they will have the power to prevent other toys from using the word 'transform' on their packaging. This to me is troubling - that a brand could attempt to co-opt a regular word, try to gain ownership of it somehow...

I wouldn't have any fly on the wall access to what a toy company might be thinking in their attorney aerie [hey, there's a toy for grown-ups], but I do think the world of trademark is different from copyright.

Trademarks are knocked down if the term can be found in common use unless it can be shown the word has acquired a distinctive meaning in the trademarked use, so If I had to guess, this is probably why they avoid mixing the word transform into their packaging along with their Transformers brand name. It might invite challenges to their trademark.

Generally, trademarks are narrowly scoped to the market of the product. So any threat of impinging the language probably would only extend to that shelf of the toy store. But I could be wrong.

If CBS/P wanted to trademark the word Qapla', then they should have done so already, just as Hasbro trademarked Optimus Prime and Megatron. When a Transformer has a generic, untrademarkable name (such as Jazz), the packaging calls the figure 'Autobot Jazz': Hasbro registers combinations of names in cases when they can't get control of the individual words. Indeed, Hasbro have lost the rights to some well-known Transformer names down the years (including Hot Rod), because they weren't on the ball.

How all this relates to Axanar and Klingon I'm not really sure, I mention it in passing only because the relationship between words and law is one that interests me. But just as Hasbro can't register public-domain, generic words like 'Jazz', 'Hound' and 'transform', I don't think CBS/P should be able to suddenly gain control of a language years after putting it out there.

Copyright I believe is about elements like words used in a context like phrases and (perhaps) the meanings attached to the words, and of course works of art made from the words. Trademark is kinda like "dba (doing business as)" or a product name ("Kleenex"). They cover different uses of language I think. Klingon is probably trademarked as a 'product'. I suppose one could trademark every invented word of a language, but I have a suspicion you'd have to defend each infringement separately, which could get pretty expensive. And you have to defend all cases of trademark infringement, whereas you can pick and choose which copyright violations you object to. I can't really imagine anyone trying to defend a language by trademarking its words.

I get that the argument for no copyright of languages is that a language can be called a bag full of words. But that bag contains specific phoneme combinations not just random ones, it contains meanings attached to the words, and grammar choices too. So my suspicion is that copyright may end up covering these as an artistic expression, when the language as a whole is a construct to start with.

I'm not an attorney, so this is based only on my understanding from my reading.