Now I'm no lawyer - not even by training - but it seems to me that every single legal maneuver by Peters' legal team has been woefully amateurish.
You get what you pay for. But I guess this is what happens when you have no case.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
You get what you pay for. But I guess this is what happens when you have no case.
He could write a decision couched in speaking of tucking Alec into bed with a don't worry your little head, the adults will work this out. I dearly hope he does.
You are asking a thorn not to not be a prick. Good luck with that.
Well, in all honesty either dropping the case outright or agreeing to a settlement would set a bad precedent.
If they drop it (because of JJ Abrams/Justin Lin insistence) it sends the message - hey violate our IP - but if you find some Hollywood big shot connected to one of our productions and convince him to stump for you...
If they settle its - Hey steal our IP and if you get enough outside pressure we'll settle and give you a deal better than any licensing agreement you might have had to actually pay for.
That said, if the case is dropped/settled it has no effect on existing copyright law because to date Judge Klaussner denied every defense motion to date; and if there is no trial, there will be no further 'case law' generated.
Again, if JJ Abrams/Justin Lin pushed for this EVEN AFTER getting the full story (and I don't know if that's the case); I will have lost any/all respect I have for them as this REALLY sends the wrong message to younger people with regard to following the law. It also screws over small scale successful IP holders because if/as they get popular, I bet fans who want to profit from said IP will just go - hey, if the Star Trek IP holders didn't have a problem...why should you?
But again that's me.
Prelude was dull because it was a 'straight' fake documentary. Fake documentaries are fun as long as they're comedies (like Spinal Tap).
The real Axanar wasn't going to be in that format, so I would have expected it to be better. The Vulcan scene was really just exposition so you can't really judge the whole thing based on it.
BTW, I don't think if you're anti AP and anti-Axanar that you have to hate on the creative potential of the project as a whole. It seemed to have as much validity as any other fan-film project. The main limiting factor looked like it was going to be Alec Peters' soft-spoken bug-eyed nebbish version of Garth.
Aesthetically speaking I took issue with the decision they made to go with LCARS instead of tactile buttons but what little I saw of the actual panels in the WIP bridge, it still has somewhat of a retro TOS feel, just with surface mounted rectangular lights instead of raised buttons. I also don't like JJ-inspired FX with shaky-cam and lens-flare but I know I'm in the minority on that one.
The real Axanar wasn't going to be in that format, so I would have expected it to be better. The Vulcan scene was really just exposition so you can't really judge the whole thing based on it.
BTW, I don't think if you're anti AP and anti-Axanar that you have to hate on the creative potential of the project as a whole. It seemed to have as much validity as any other fan-film project. The main limiting factor looked like it was going to be Alec Peters' soft-spoken bug-eyed nebbish version of Garth.
Aesthetically speaking I took issue with the decision they made to go with LCARS instead of tactile buttons but what little I saw of the actual panels in the WIP bridge, it still has somewhat of a retro TOS feel, just with surface mounted rectangular lights instead of raised buttons. I also don't like JJ-inspired FX with shaky-cam and lens-flare but I know I'm in the minority on that one.
Most lawsuits end in settlement. It's not a loss necessarily for the plaintiffs to settle. It depends on the terms. Will they get everything they want? No. But that's the nature of suits. It would be more damaging if they just walked away (which I can't see them doing), because, then they are saying, IMO, that their case wasn't strong enough, or they can't be bothered
Fair enough.
But there's that and there's prelude and there's... nothing else, and there's been nothing else but talk for years...
I'm neither. I'm pro-property rights. I side with CBS and Paramount because I would like to own a million dollar franchise one day and not have some smooth-talking con artist start using it to line his pockets with the excuse that he loves it so much he automatically owns it.
So it might be good. Fair enough.
Yes, but you're in good company in that minority...
Most lawsuits aren't media circuses like this with a juicy David and Goliath angle the media can seize on.
Especially when they do something like:
"Ranahan also claimed CBS and Paramount violated Axanar's and Peters' rights under the First, Fifth and Fourteenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution, covering both freedom of speech and due process."
Oh Dear God, why do you make such stupid people?? CBS / Paramount are private entities, NOT government agencies that are restricted by the Bill Of Rights. This is a civil case, not criminal charges, so the rules are different, but I really want her to explain how due process was violated. I would love for the judge to ask her that on-the-record in open court.
This wasn't a media circus til JJ's statement on Friday. And outside of the Star Trek Community, this suit is barely a blip on the monitor.
The 14th? The fuck? The 1st and 5th I sorta of get, but it still doesn't make a lick of sense. The 14th? The holy-hell, what?
Those amendments prohibit government interference. This isn't a gov't case.
Last edited:
The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and a redress of grievances. CBS/Paramount has not deprived Axanar and its people of the right to either speak their minds or bitch.
The Fifth Amendment protects you from self-incrimination or loss of life, liberty and property without due process. Nobody has forced anyone at Axanar to admit to anything, and the lawsuit proceeding is "due process."
The only way CBS/Paramount could possibly have violated Axanar's rights in the case of the Fourteenth Amendment is if they managed to violate Axanar's rights in the case of the other two amendments. They haven't.
As all the other novices here have stated "I'm not a lawyer"...but I can read.
The Fifth Amendment protects you from self-incrimination or loss of life, liberty and property without due process. Nobody has forced anyone at Axanar to admit to anything, and the lawsuit proceeding is "due process."
The only way CBS/Paramount could possibly have violated Axanar's rights in the case of the Fourteenth Amendment is if they managed to violate Axanar's rights in the case of the other two amendments. They haven't.
As all the other novices here have stated "I'm not a lawyer"...but I can read.
Hey, stop ogling my IMDB! Masher!Which is ironic, given that those of us in the industry have resumes markedly bigger than Alec's.
I had this weird habit the day or two before every time I re-enlisted and just before I retired, I sat down and read the Constitution of the United States of America from beginning to end. I won't say I'm an expect, but how many people can honestly say they've read it?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Now, I haven't actually read the court filing, trusting the source to be accurate. I assume that's really in the document files to the court, yes?? Or at least made in a public statement?? If so, can anyone please explain to me how these apply to a civil case brought forth be a private entity (CBS & Paramount)?? Seriously.
The First Amendment
The Fifth Amendment
The Fourteenth Amendment (extract)
Now, I haven't actually read the court filing, trusting the source to be accurate. I assume that's really in the document files to the court, yes?? Or at least made in a public statement?? If so, can anyone please explain to me how these apply to a civil case brought forth be a private entity (CBS & Paramount)?? Seriously.
That's what people were saying before Lin and JJ got involved. A lot of people already knew about it.
That seems to be the defense's legal plan. Distract the judge, as they have the public, with total B.S. and hope they get a favorable ruling by mistake.
- Status