That's like the Scalosian version.It does seem to improve the Axanar Trailer
Blog post is up:
http://www.gandtshow.com/g-t-show-243-flapdoodle-hootenanny/
YouTube to follow, uh, eventually.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Blog post is up:
http://www.gandtshow.com/g-t-show-243-flapdoodle-hootenanny/
YouTube to follow, uh, eventually.
It's an online tactic I see in a lot of political forums...where someone cannot refute your point...so they deflect it by saying something outrageous that has nothing to do with the original topic. It's called desperation when losing a debate.
Well, there's also the fact that, absent certain exceptions that wouldn't likely be applicable here, registration is a prerequisite to filing a lawsuit for copyright infringement (17 U.S.C. Sec. 411(a) ("no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title")). So C/P is saying that they will not give you a promise to not sue if you take steps with your own work - namely registration of the copyright - that would position you to be able to sue them (or anybody else) later.
And, yes, as noted earlier, the creator of a derivative work based on C/P's copyrightable subject matter (such as a fan-filmmaker) would have an independent copyright on that derivative work from the moment the work is fixed in a tangible medium (though it doesn't give him any copyright claim to the preexisting work on which the derivative work is based.) However, because the original copyright owner (C/P) has the exclusive right to make or authorize derivative works based on the original copyrightable subject matter, the fact that the new derivative work was created without C/P's authorization makes it an infringing derivative work (subject to the usual defenses.) So the fan-filmmaker has a copyright in the derivative work, but also a corresponding liability for infringement.
M
Edit to add one correction to your quote - "While copyright exists from the moment of publication" - actually not the case under US law; copyright exist from the moment the work is first fixed in a tangible medium (for example, when you hit "save" on your word processor). Publication is irrelevant to whether and when copyright comes into existence.
Now THATS Star Trek.It does seem to improve the Axanar Trailer
At the very least it gives Alec Peters LESS time on screen. <-- That's plus in my book.
It does seem to improve the Axanar Trailer
"The fan production must be less than 15 minutes for a single self-contained story, or no more than 2 segments, episodes or parts, not to exceed 30 minutes total, with no additional seasons, episodes, parts, sequels or remakes."
Okay, I'll count that as the 2nd and final installment of the Axanar epic saga. Promise to donors fulfilled, now would someone please get that man off the stage!
Ars Technica has a piece up on the guidelines. Here's a choice quote:
In my 15-plus years of working with lawyers, I can tell you they love nothing more than to be insulted, especially by people they happen to be suing.
Would that be a Jujutsu move lawyer style?
Also a tactic regularly used by guests on talking head shows.
This could discourage people who simply have fair use or parody defense from seeking registration. Is that legal, to threaten lawsuit without at least being clear on this point?
It does seem to improve the Axanar Trailer
The blue one (Axanar Reframing Distinguished Service Medal) is now awarded to you.
So primitive it doesn't even rise to the level of political rhetoric http://www.speaklikeapro.co.uk/Rhetorical_devices.htm
Axanar's fan base could suffer from colony collapse at any time, for example from the testimonies beginning to appear. They can't be the red shirts against bear poking indefinitely.
You're completely wrong. By the way, did you know that there's a rare Andean breed of panda bear that eats rainbows for breakfast?
I think that's already begun to happen. There are some rapid fans (just like anywhere) who still are support axanar...but watching them continue to toss grenades on their facebook forum...rational people are beginning to see them for who they are.
Well, anyone can threaten to file a lawsuit for any reason, even if the legal merits are questionable. This is why I brought up "Red Shirt Diaries" as an example of parody that would likely be protected from a copyright infringement complaint under fair use. CBS and Paramount are staking out the broadest grounds possible with their guidelines; whether they would all hold up in court is another matter altogether.
Claiming CBS and Paramount have "no understanding of the concept of Star Trek fandom" makes Star Trek fandom sound like a form of mental illness.
Retroactive Manufactured Blaming?
"Your honor, my client insists that his character, 'Spack', is not an alien. He is just a very stoic elf. Humanity discovered that elves were hiding on Earth this whole time, and then allowed them to join their space adventures. The story just hadn't come to the exposition that would fill these details in, yet...."
And if they had just allowed us that additional 15 minutes, we could have gotten to it.
That's crazy. They are actually pets of the Nibblonians, and as such, masters of the universe. They just happen to like the Andes.
Guideline #8 is a disclaimer requirement. Guideline #9 prohibits copyrighting already-copyrighted elements. Because there are original elements within many of these stories (e. g. the Dr. McKennah character in Star Trek Continues), this prohibition may apply. It is not necessary to register a copyright! However, copyright registration makes it easier to bring an infringement claim. Terry opines that CBS and/or Paramount would, if they wished to use McKennah or any storyline in, say, Potemkin, they would compensate the creators. Guideline #10 then prohibits any implication of an IP holder endorsement. It is somewhat similar to guideline #2.That's like the Scalosian version.
Blog post is up:
http://www.gandtshow.com/g-t-show-243-flapdoodle-hootenanny/
YouTube to follow, uh, eventually.
Just a note: Putting Potemkin and compensating anyone for their creation in the same sentence, has been a major No-No for years around the studio.
Could be each sale is a separate $150,000 violation.... lol
Unless their strategy is based on getting to a trial.
They must have some strong arguments to persuade Alec that he should hold out.
Personally, if I were him though, I'd be thinking about the motivations of anyone who might be offering to drive me off a cliff, or help me drive off a cliff, for free.
Not sure how continuing to sell unauthorized merchandise is going to make a jury more sympathetic to their cause?
- Status