CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Hm. To me, if he loses at trial and the studios are awarded damages for income lost, or if a settlement results in a payment to the studios, what has been said is that Axanar knowingly violated copyright law for gain. And if Axanar admits through either of these routes that they knew during fundraising they were transgressing in a way that was likely to poke the bear, perhaps this info could be grounds for donors accusing them of fraud in their fundraising.
Is this is where your suggestion that the FTC might be interested enters, or would it be yet another agency that could pile on? SEC?
Some of you have already commented on the so-called 'gag order' imposed at STLV, as reported by Axanar supporter Jonathan Lane at FanFilmFactor.com. Here's a roundup of the incident, plus news of what further occurred on Sunday, and whether this really means anything to fan productions not being sued by CBS/Paramount.
Interesting that they asked Axanar not to wear their t-shirts (and uniforms?)
The FTC clearly has jurisdiction to act right now if it wanted. The agency's authorizing legislation covers all "unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce." There is certainly a case to be made that AP has engaged in multiple "unfair or deceptive acts" with respect to the crowdfunding campaigns.
The SEC's jurisdiction is somewhat murkier. The agency only recently issued regulations governing the crowdfunding of securities offerings, and it's not clear to me that AP would qualify under those standards. My educated guess is if the SEC wanted to get involved, it could find a way to go after AP, but I think the FTC is probably the better avenue to go.
But he could already say he can't make the movie because of the guidelines. (Of course he's already in a lawsuit). He and Burnett have worked on official Star Trek, the actors will want to be paid, and the time limit.
I'll have to ask once my colleagues are home. MidniteShadow7 and I kept the home fires burning to get the blogs out. There are more blogs to come but they don't have Axa connections.
There's been a lot of focus on what the actors think about fan films, but has anyone talked to the writers? I mean folks like Ron Moore or Ira Stephen Behr who are WGA members entitled to residual and character payments for the scripts they created. The WGA contract has very strict rules about when and how such payments are required. To use the most obvious example, Gary Graham played Soval in both of the published Axanar shorts. I believe that character was introduced in the Enterprise pilot, so Rick Berman and Brannon Braga are likely entitled to character payments for the "spin-off" of their character.
Now, I don't imagine that B&B care about the money--the actual payment would be at most around $2,000--but this speaks to why C/P have a legal duty to put a stop to Axanar. They are not merely defending their copyrights; they have a duty to ensure fly-by-night professional studios are not undermining the contracts that govern the entire industry.
Now, I don't imagine that B&B care about the money--the actual payment would be at most around $2,000--but this speaks to why C/P have a legal duty to put a stop to Axanar. They are not merely defending their copyrights; they have a duty to ensure fly-by-night professional studios are not undermining the contracts that govern the entire industry.
Yes and no. There is a recognized "no backsies" principle in law (which goes by several names depending on the specific context it arises in -- "detrimental reliance", "collateral estoppel", etc.). In short, declaring "if you do X, I won't sue you" but then suing someone who relies on your declaration and does X can be considered unkosher and can result in your lawsuit being thrown out.
So CBS does not necessarily have a free hand here with respect to people operating within the guidelines.
I don't know that estoppel would apply, as I discussed in several posts above. However, it's worth pointing out the guidelines have not been tested in court. It's entirely possible a fan film could violate one of more of the guidelines yet fall within the "fair use" exception of U.S. copyright law.
Question for the lawyers -- could CBS/P's guidelines statement be interpreted as an offer which is then open to being accepted by a fanfilm production, thus creating a contract?
Axanar made a list of 50 Trek-related legal actions. Worth the read, IMHO. Some funny, some interesting.
http://www.trademarkandcopyrightlaw...e-many-star-trek-50-50-star-trek-litigations/
http://www.trademarkandcopyrightlaw...e-many-star-trek-50-50-star-trek-litigations/
In short, yes - that's the purpose of the last line of the first paragraph of the guidelines:
"Therefore, CBS and Paramount Pictures will not object to, or take legal action against, Star Trek fan productions that are non-professional and amateur and meet the following guidelines."
In short, the offer is to not object or take legal action if the production accepts the offer by complying with all of the guidelines. Though the vagueness of some of the guidelines leave a lot of room for interpretation as to whether the production met them (and validly accepted the offer), general principles of how a court must construe a contract provide that any vague guidelines would be construed narrowly against CBS as CBS was the party who drafted them.
So, in short, a fan production that could demonstrate to a court that they complied with all guidelines (as construed narrowly against CBS) would have grounds to legally enforce CBS' promise to "not object to, or take legal action against" them.
M
Did they ask Alec Peters to not wear his light-blue polo shirt??
On the other hand, a court may also consider "extrinsic evidence" when interpreting an ambiguous provision of a contract. So looking at this from a practical standpoint, if C/P decided to sue Fan Production X, the studios could try to bury the other side with extrinsic evidence to prove its definition of a particular term is the correct one. That might well discourage the fan production from asserting its purported contractual rights in the first place.
Put another way, I look at the vague terms in the guidelines as a trap. If C/P argue Fan Production X is not "family friendly" as required by the guidelines, then the judge has to sort out what that means by looking at whatever outside evidence the studios (and the defendant) introduces. Sure, the defendant may ultimately prevail on the law, but will they have the time and money to do so?
^^ I asked about this very same issue nearly a year ago, exactly! Naturally, none of the Axanar supporters still hanging around at the time had much of an answer.
Guild contracts are a black hole. I've been looking at the WGA Agreement for a couple of hours and I'm still not sure exactly what rules apply here. The problem is that you have "new media" rules applicable to Internet broadcasts, but also rules applying to "serial" episodic television. I also suspect redistributing Internet broadcasts on DVD and Blu-Ray--as Axanar did--invokes a whole other set of rules. I assume this is one reason the C/P guidelines prohibit distribution on non-Internet, physical media.
"Peters Asked Not to Appear in Axanar Wear
Lane also reported that Axanar producer Alec Petersclaimed Creation co-founder Gary Berman had asked him not to wear any Axanar T-shirts or costumes during the convention. The restriction, Peters told Lane, didn't appear apply to other fan series; Mignogna was seen wearing a Star Trek Continues T-shirt. Of course, other productions are not being sued."
I think he really had balls to even show up and if he appeared in uniform a crowd of people would have showed him what his balls actually looked like.
Lane also reported that Axanar producer Alec Petersclaimed Creation co-founder Gary Berman had asked him not to wear any Axanar T-shirts or costumes during the convention. The restriction, Peters told Lane, didn't appear apply to other fan series; Mignogna was seen wearing a Star Trek Continues T-shirt. Of course, other productions are not being sued."
I think he really had balls to even show up and if he appeared in uniform a crowd of people would have showed him what his balls actually looked like.
- Status