CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[BoredShipCapt'n]

Made short work of their arguments. Particularly, whatever has been fixed in a tangible medium can be an infringing work, even if it's still subject to revision.

But failure to state a claim is an easy hurdle to overcome. This was a predictable outcome.

 

[Squiggy]

This explains Alec's random lashing out the other day. I guess someone gave him a heads up that their entire argument was getting smacked down.

 

[Lynsioux]

"Shoot, I just landed on 'Star Trek'. Who owns that?"

Neil

I laughed and laughed. You really touched my funny bone. Thanks to you and all the Monopoly joke makers.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Best line?

"Although the Court declines to address whether Plaintiffs’ Claims will prosper at this time, the Court does find Plaintiffs’ claims will live long enough to survive Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss."

Also indicating that Peters and team will be taken out the back of the courthouse and General order 7'd

 

[JD]

I can't wait to see Peters and his worshipers' reactions to the motion to dismiss being denied.

 

[muCephi]

Best line?

"Although the Court declines to address whether Plaintiffs’ Claims will prosper at this time, the Court does find Plaintiffs’ claims will live long enough to survive Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss."

A literal mocking from the judge. That's gotta hurt egos that just bragged to their hothouse occupants about how they are winning. How irritated does a judge have to be to mock in a decision? And how chagrined will W&S management be at seeing themselves mocked for low quality work?

 

[Noname Given]

This just in. Axanar lost on every item in their Motion to Dismiss.

""When viewed in a vacuum, each of these elements may not individually be protectable by copyright. Plaintiffs, however, do not seek to enforce their copyright in each of these elements individually. Rather, Plaintiffs’ copyright infringement claims are based on the Star Trek Copyrighted Works as a whole. … The Court finds it unnecessary to analyze whether the allegedly non-protectable elements of the Star Trek Copyrighted Works are eligible for copyright protection because Plaintiff describes these elements in the Complaint solely in an effort to demonstrate how the Axanar Works are substantially similar to the Star Trek Copyrighted Works. (p. 5)"

Paramount v Axanar 2-15-cv-09938 CD CA 2016-05-10 43 Court Order denying motion to dismiss.pdf

LOL - Considering Alec's recent blog just yesterday:
http://www.axanarproductions.com/paramountcba-vs-axanar-trial-date-set/
Alec Peters wrote:

And we should be hearing in a few weeks on Judge Klausner’s decision on our motion to dismiss. And despite a certain conspiracy nut’s claims, we expect to win at least part of that motion. (My money is on the judge dismissing at least the claim against the film Axanar, since we haven’t even begun production and so you can’t even judge a fair use defense).

Interestingly, the Judge only had two scheduling meetings on his docket and had cancelled the TEN or so hearings he had on his schedule. As Erin pointed out, this is SOP for Judge Klausner, and shoots down another crazy conspiracy theory by the same conspiracy nut.

One has to wonder if today's 100% denial of all aspects of W&S motion to dismiss will finally make Mr. Peters understand that Copyright law exists for a reason, and you can't just try to argue to invalidate it no matter how many times you effectively file the same brief (IE W&S' double response to L&L's one and only reply to their MTD.)

I can't wait to see how Mr. Peters tries to spin this as something positive.

As for the case being moved up, I think it pretty much boils down to W&S NOT trying to get every document from C/P proving C/Ps co-ownership (Paramount the current feature films and CBS the previous feature films and ALL the TV series material) and somehow find C/P doesn't own something. (IE W&S KNOW that's a waste of time - OR Peters doesn't have the funds to cover the work needed to go over everything with a fine tooth comb because Pro Bono only covers basic courtroom work - not investigative work, or even filing costs.) As for C/P, they probably figure they can depose the principals in a few months and get the documents they need from Axanar etc in a few months (and if Axanar hedges on releasing said documents or being deposed <--- That ISN'T going to sit well with the Judge who may then just issue a Summary Judgement for C/P and that will be that.)

Bottom Line (IMO of course): The Trial date being moved up PLUS the Judge's 100% dismissal of Axanar's Motion to Dismiss pretty much signal the Judge has a good idea JUST how 'open and shut' this case is - and wants to get it over with quickly.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Best line?

"Although the Court declines to address whether Plaintiffs’ Claims will prosper at this time, the Court does find Plaintiffs’ claims will live long enough to survive Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss."

That is really funny.
I wonder if Peters found it so.

 

[Jody Wheeler]

And how chagrined will W&S management be at seeing themselves mocked for low quality work?

To be fair, they were trying to chip away at CBS' case. We know W&S is going to try for a Fair Use / It's Transformative!™ defense. Carlos Pedraza suggests that if Ranahan can get any kind of narrowing or specificity on Fair Use in fan-films, it'll have all been worthwhile.

Unlegal scholar me thinks this case won't get that kind of result. Given that the Caroll Publishing / Joy of Trek case from 20 years ago is almost exactly the same as this one, I think this will just end up with a loss for Peters and a hell of a lot of legal fees.

 

[Jody Wheeler]

LOL - Considering Alec's recent blog just yesterday:
http://www.axanarproductions.com/paramountcba-vs-axanar-trial-date-set/
Alec Peters wrote...

Alec and Reality aren't on speaking terms. I think that's really obvious at this point.

As for the case being moved up, I think it pretty much boils down to

I have to wonder if the judge knew the case wasn't THAT complicated. It wasn't really going to require months and months of pre-trial work. He snapped a few months off to get people to stop dicking around and either get to the trial or get a settlement.

 

[Jay]

I wonder if now he finally WILL STFU on social media.

 

[RedForman]

I know Ken. He's been in the gaming industry for quite a while now. I know he knows about licensing and such because he ported his game to a couple other universes. That announcement was from a year ago. I would be very surprise if he didn't quietly walk away from this project when the *bleep* hit the fan.

If this is true and he did indeed bolt after the initial filing, then we have more proof Lord Alec will throw anyone and everyone under the bus.......

 

[Amaris]

I wonder if now he finally WILL STFU on social media.

Oh my, no. His past history indicates he doesn't heed any kind of caution very well.

 

[Noname Given]

Nice! Didn't know that 'Soval' was in TMP though............(see under 'Plantiffs Provide Sufficient Notice)

^^^
If this were a final Judgement that slip COULD be grounds for an appeal (IE Even the Judge was confused)- BUT as this is a response to an MTD - and that error (when taken in context with the whole of the decision) isn't enough to reverse the totality of the Judge's legal reasoning for his ultimate decision to deny the MTD, it's the equivalent of a trivial typo.

 

[Mudd]

This morning Judge Klausner denied our Motion to Dismiss stating in part:

”Although the Court declines to address whether Plaintiffs’ Claims will prosper at this time, the Court does find Plaintiffs’ claims will live long enough to survive Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.”

Winston & Strawn will now prepare our answer to the amended complaint, which is due in 14 days.

In the meantime, we continue our efforts to settle this matter with CBS and Paramount so we can move forward with telling the story of AXANAR in a way that satisfies both the studios and the over ten thousand fans who financially supported our project.

The trial date has been set for January 31st, 2017.

Link

 

[Jay]

^^^
If this were a final Judgement that slip COUP be grounds for an appeal (IE Even the Judge was confused)- BUT as this is a response to an MTD - and that error (when taken in context with the whole of the decision) isn't enough to reverse the totality of the Judge's legal reasoning for his ultimate decision to deny the MTD, it's the equivalent of a trivial typo.

I don't think a judge will be deciding this case. They asked for a jury right?

 

[Michael Hinman]

Our update on the motion to dismiss denial is here:

http://1701news.com/node/1186/axanar-crash-judge-denies-motion-dismiss.html

 

[urbandefault]

Does this mean that until or unless CBS/P file for an injunction, LFIM could actually start (or resume) filming before the trial date?

E. Defendants’ Prior Restraint Argument

Finally, Defendants argue that it would be an impermissible prior restraint for the Court to allow Plaintiffs’ claims based on the Axanar Motion Picture to proceed. This argument is unavailing. Plaintiffs have not yet filed a motion for injunctive relief and Defendants are not restrained by the filing of this Complaint. Rather, Defendants are on notice that Plaintiffs allege certain copyright infringement allegations against them. This ruling does not affect Defendants choice to proceed with the production of the Axanar Motion Picture. Though Defendants attempt to utilize Globe International, Inc. v. National Enquirer, Inc., No. 98-10613 CAS (MANX), 1999 WL 727232, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 1999) to support their argument, Defendants point out in both their Motion and their Reply that this case is regarding a preliminary injunction, which is not the issue here. As such, Defendants’ impermissibleprior restraint argument is inapposite.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzmetJxi-p0VNVVSUHNySnEtSjQ/view

 

[CaptGrumpy]

Was that the slap-down heard 'round the fandom? Let's get ready to rumble!

 

[mkstewartesq]

IMHO, the most illuminating line of the Denial is the following:

Because Plaintiffs’ allegations of infringement are based upon an entire franchise of works, the Court anticipates that its substantial similarity analysis will primarily be based on Defendants’ utilization of similar character, theme, setting, and mood in the Axanar Works, rather than copying a specific plot line or dialogue sequence.

In other words, the judge has given a clear heads-up on how he will be approaching this case. We’re not going to be arguing over nitty-gritty details of whether the Four Years War was actually shown in TOS, or whether the Axanar emblem is distinguishable from the chevron shield. The inquiry is going to be a much higher-level “does Axanar copy the big-picture copyrightable aspects of the Star Trek universe - setting, ‘look and feel’, mix of races and species, and so on.” The fact that, for example, it contains new characters and story points is not going to help much if those new characters are peaceful logical Vulcans, warlike Klingons who speak a unique language or noble captains of starships that fly the flag of the United Federation of Planets and are clearly modeled after those in the Federation fleet. This approach to framing the inquiry is a big win for the plaintiffs.

M