CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
I spent a rather long discussion with one on STC's FB group last night. No matter what evidence I could provide from Axamonitor and boxoffice grosses for STID, his final stance was "I don't care what facts you have, I've made up my mind."
You might try bringing up the diversion of hundreds of thousands into making a green screen for the use of a for profit corporation intending to seek investors and make feature length non-Trek genre films in the future. They pretty much can't justify that anywhere I have seen.
Last edited:
I mean like when your boss hires his son to help you and your life ends up a nightmare.
Sidebar alert in case you haven't seen it, info on the new show. Interesting (but not unexpected) how they write themselves a "graphic" exemption to their family friendly fan film mandate: http://collider.com/new-star-trek-series-details/
I know what you mean - I only went offline for 12 hours on Thursday and missed the drop AND fallout of the guidelines!
Can't wait for your latest podcast BTW!
It is their property. If something risky is done with it, they want to be in control of it.
Not seeing a problem. They are protecting their assets.
Double your blogging, double your fun (?) 
Terry plays The Universe's Smallest Vulcan Lute:
http://www.gandtshow.com/universes-smallest-vulcan-lute/
While I analyze the guidelines:
http://www.gandtshow.com/brave-new-world-fan-film-guidelines/
Thank you for your kind support and, as always, watch for an Easter Egg in the links.
Terry plays The Universe's Smallest Vulcan Lute:
http://www.gandtshow.com/universes-smallest-vulcan-lute/
While I analyze the guidelines:
http://www.gandtshow.com/brave-new-world-fan-film-guidelines/
Thank you for your kind support and, as always, watch for an Easter Egg in the links.
They didn't care about facts, they only wanted to argue based on their misinformation. The best line this guy had was "I don't follow the rhetoric," yet he was quoting line after line of Mein Kaxanar beliefs.
Why do they have to follow the rules? No production company, including ones that set fan film rules, have ever followed their own guidelines. By that logic, should the new TV series only have 15 minute episodes?
To misquote Peter David "if you don't like it, then make your own."
I've started skipping pages these days. The big events get discussed so often you can usually catch up pretty quickly. I've heard the lawsuit is going away soon, for instance.I've been away from the story for a couple of days now and I don't think I've the energy to try to catch up with it all
Why do they have to follow the rules? No production company, including ones that set fan film rules, have ever followed their own guidelines. By that logic, should the new TV series only have 15 minute episodes?
To misquote Peter David "if you don't like it, then make your own."
Of course.
And I am not asserting that they must be 'fair'.
But there is an observation to be made that the 'family friendy' guidelines are rooted not in some arbitrary ruling by the studios, but in the studios' internal guidelines that material in general public circulation should conform to some 'safe' boundaries. It is perhaps broadened in this case in an attempt to preempt edge cases, but it comes from somewhere. Part network, part FCC at least.
The argument made by the staffer of the new show wrt/ going outside these bounds is that the show is on CBS all access and thus does not have to conform to the network standards of 'safe' boundaries.
Its an interesting phenomenon. Do they really still think that the online version of their network is a private 'adult' (paid for by a foolproof credit system guaranteeing adult supervision) club with respect to the public?
It won't be just adults watching Trek over the net. I wonder if they can really get away anymore with this distinction between radio waves on the one side, and coax channels/internet packets carrying a paid service on the other.
And if the distinction is meaningless these days, if the boundary isn't really 'family friendly' the way they laid it out, then how do they explain their stance? I know they don't *have* to, but still, they are adults articulating a position about what it is ok to do in the context of Trek. Having multiple standards is a bit strange.
Last edited:
Question for Jespah wrt/ your analysis of the guidelines:
If under guideline #9 a fan film cannot claim copyright on their work, and guideline #3 requiring proper written permissions to use someone else's 'non Star Trek' work protect, then how are fan films protected from each other? My guess is, probably not at all. But the studio intent seems to be to exclude the 'official' material (that for which the guidelines exempt permission requirements).
And what is 'non Star Trek' in guideline 3? Is it professional content, or is it also amateur content? If someone makes a fan film out of someone else's fanfic, have they violated the studio guidelines themselves? Can the fanfic defend themselves if they didn't have the right to use the Star Trek universe to start with?
Just curious. The grand plan for empire building by superfans appears to be exhaustively dead, and may even end in a nova in court.
If under guideline #9 a fan film cannot claim copyright on their work, and guideline #3 requiring proper written permissions to use someone else's 'non Star Trek' work protect, then how are fan films protected from each other? My guess is, probably not at all. But the studio intent seems to be to exclude the 'official' material (that for which the guidelines exempt permission requirements).
And what is 'non Star Trek' in guideline 3? Is it professional content, or is it also amateur content? If someone makes a fan film out of someone else's fanfic, have they violated the studio guidelines themselves? Can the fanfic defend themselves if they didn't have the right to use the Star Trek universe to start with?
Just curious. The grand plan for empire building by superfans appears to be exhaustively dead, and may even end in a nova in court.
Last edited:
This point was of interest to me:
"I strongly suspect membership in something like SAG-AFTRA creates a non-rebuttable inference of professionalism."
This one does not just hit Axanar. Tim Russ in Renegades, and Kipleigh Brown in Star Trek Continues, may be as out as Gary Graham and JG Hertzler are from Axanar
Yes. Lamentable in the extreme to me. For them and allll our wonderful fans who make our fan films.
And David Gerrold.
Not so much
G&T Christian Gossett interview:
Interviewer: "There's no sense of personal responsibility for the actions. It's everybody else's fault and we are the good guys. And the production people and Followers are still antagionizing in social media."
Christian Gossett: "And this is the kind of lack of understanding of the reality of the professional aspects of the situation that makes the guidelines a necessity. What it all comes down to is if you can't display an ability to accept reality, not reality as you would wish it, but reality as it is with others in a social grouping, in a social agreement, well, we're just going to have to be draconian. You are forcing our hand. If all this is beyond you then we're going to have to go places where we've never had to go before. Before you came along."
Since the term ‘fundraising’ is used, and not ‘crowdfunding’, this means any sort of fundraising, including autograph sales at conventions, solicitations via mailing list, etc."
Huh. I missed that implication my first read through. Well, that's a danged big 'Period' to the ongoing Adventures Of Living in the Convention Lane.
"No unlicensed Star Trek-related or fan production-related merchandise or services can be offered for sale or given away as premiums, perks or rewards or in connection with the fan production fundraising.
The fan production cannot derive revenue by selling or licensing fan-created production sets, props or costumes."
Point Made
hmmm.....
Correct me if I'm off base on this.... but with these guide lines in place and now Official... it gives me the idea that this litigation could immediately be dropped. I mean, I never thought the, what do you call it, the itemized requests for monetary re.. something was ever more than a bargaining chip. C/P needs this, I'm going to say 'out of control guy', but the litigation says Production, to be stopped. Citing the Independent Star Trek film IP infringement. Well, yeah.
But it was/(is?) much much bigger: All the money raised and continuing to be raised under ST IP auspices that did not go On That Damned Screen but instead to crowdfunding fees, wages, studio, perks, possible business streaming service, donor store, planned for business of film making... all that stuff we've been, well I've been, saying WTF??? about.
And these guidelines seem to have addressed every one of our (and suspected 'their') issues with this wtf money issue.
Right?
So, at this very minute, with the movie in question not yet made, that now can not be made under these guidelines, covers every issue we've been pushing....... with the exception of How Do We Get Our Own Money Back for those wanting this to address this. Right?
So as of exactly right now couldn't C/P say: 'Okay, Sir, we will drop our requests for (those requests for IP infringement money}, not push this to trial, and drop this lawsuit if you'd like. '
And since the litigation was never about the donors getting 'our' donations back, that's going to be our job.... however this has gone on long enough, with enough legal and lay people who understand just 'how' we can now begin to address getting our donations back that that information has possibly already begun being circulated.
And I suspect the people who donated in the thousands and per Mr. Gossett TEN THOUSAND??? are already on it.
Therefore, unless Ms. Ranahan still desires a trial to get an IP Achievement Award of some kind, and unless the defendant is up for a trail where he can't get that damned movie made anyway.....
This litigation could be over in everything but the paperwork... at any moment.
Couldn't it?
hmmm....
And the defendant can say "They dropped the lawsuit!"
And Mr. Abram & Lin can say "We did it! See, we told you!!"
And the plaintiffs can just go back to work. Knowing they got everything they wanted/needed without furthering the lawsuit.
Ms. Ranahan, what would be your move?
Last edited:
I'm not Jespah, nor do I play her on television.
But I assumed this meant if you wanted to film a Doctor Who / Star Trek crossover, you'd need permission from the BBC to use one of the Doctors. And possibly the Gallifrean Film Commission...
I could be wrong, of course.
Thanks. I agree with that. Along with more serious dimensions, I am wondering whether Trek fan films being required to give up copyright means other fan films can go at them.
Could, for example, all the fan filmmakers who are so pleased with Alec make various spinoff Axanars with the same characters, perhaps building studio-ships with subspace donations and banning Klingons with insults? Even recreating entire episodes with different actors and inflections of voice giving different takes on the 'weighty dignified' pewpew?
I guess that would be protected parody in any case.
Here's a link into the RPF's Axanar thread, which is beginning to discuss the props/costumes issues more: http://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=252955&page=14
- Status