There also seems to be a little wave given to productions "in progress". I'm afraid to ask when "in progress" begins.
I'd "assume" STC has had contact with CBS/Paramount with an outline of what they propose to accomplish.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
I'd "assume" STC has had contact with CBS/Paramount with an outline of what they propose to accomplish.
A darkly amusing thought crossed my mind with the specter of the statute of limitations running out: the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act was a law designed specifically to target ongoing criminal enterprises such as the Mafia for offenses which might not carry serious penalties by themselves can be cited as "predicate acts" as the foundation of RICO charges which carry 20 year maximum sentences and $25K fines per RICO count. It takes at least two predicate acts from a list of 27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes (per wikipedia so judge accuracy with appropriate amounts of salt grains). From my meager research it appears that California does not have a state RICO law, but it does have anti-racketeering laws which might apply. Could be an interesting unintended consequence if there's proof that AP and Co. are trying to stretch this out to keep milking (fleecing?) their supporters.
If Madame Chief Justice or any other of our more legally knowledgeable posters wish to comment, or just point, laugh and dismiss what I agree is just a passing whimsy, I hope they will.
If Madame Chief Justice or any other of our more legally knowledgeable posters wish to comment, or just point, laugh and dismiss what I agree is just a passing whimsy, I hope they will.
LOL
2101. Money Laundering
The actual source of the funds must be one of the specified forms of criminal activity identified by the statute, in 18 U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7), or those incorporated by reference from the RICO statute (18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)). Section 1956(c)(7)(B) includes in the list of specified unlawful activity certain offenses against a foreign nation. Thus, proceeds of certain crimes committed in another country may constitute proceeds of a specified unlawful activity for purposes of the money laundering statutes.
To prove a violation of § 1956(a)(1), the prosecutor must prove, either by direct or circumstantial evidence, that the defendant knew that the property involved was the proceeds of any felony under State, Federal or foreign law. The prosecutor need not show that the defendant knew the specific crime from which the proceeds were derived; the prosecutor must prove only that the defendant knew that the property was illegally derived in some way. See § 1956(c)(1).
The prosecutor must also prove that the defendant initiated or concluded, or participated in initiating or concluding, a financial transaction. A "transaction" is defined in § 1956(c)(3) as a purchase, sale, loan, pledge, gift, transfer, delivery, other disposition, and with respect to a financial institution, a deposit, withdrawal, transfer between accounts, loan, exchange of currency, extension of credit, purchase or sale safe-deposit box, or any other payment, transfer or delivery by, through or to a financial institution.
A "financial transaction" is defined in § 1956(c)(4) as a transaction which affects interstate or foreign commerce and: (1) involves the movement of funds by wire or by other means; (2) involves the use of a monetary instrument; or (3) involves the transfer of title to real property, a vehicle, a vessel or an aircraft; or (4) involves the use of a financial institution which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
2101. Money Laundering
The actual source of the funds must be one of the specified forms of criminal activity identified by the statute, in 18 U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7), or those incorporated by reference from the RICO statute (18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)). Section 1956(c)(7)(B) includes in the list of specified unlawful activity certain offenses against a foreign nation. Thus, proceeds of certain crimes committed in another country may constitute proceeds of a specified unlawful activity for purposes of the money laundering statutes.
To prove a violation of § 1956(a)(1), the prosecutor must prove, either by direct or circumstantial evidence, that the defendant knew that the property involved was the proceeds of any felony under State, Federal or foreign law. The prosecutor need not show that the defendant knew the specific crime from which the proceeds were derived; the prosecutor must prove only that the defendant knew that the property was illegally derived in some way. See § 1956(c)(1).
The prosecutor must also prove that the defendant initiated or concluded, or participated in initiating or concluding, a financial transaction. A "transaction" is defined in § 1956(c)(3) as a purchase, sale, loan, pledge, gift, transfer, delivery, other disposition, and with respect to a financial institution, a deposit, withdrawal, transfer between accounts, loan, exchange of currency, extension of credit, purchase or sale safe-deposit box, or any other payment, transfer or delivery by, through or to a financial institution.
A "financial transaction" is defined in § 1956(c)(4) as a transaction which affects interstate or foreign commerce and: (1) involves the movement of funds by wire or by other means; (2) involves the use of a monetary instrument; or (3) involves the transfer of title to real property, a vehicle, a vessel or an aircraft; or (4) involves the use of a financial institution which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
Sure they do. They were issued because of Axanar. Alec wanted to take credit for mediating and negotiating the guidelines, and then fans blamed him when they emerged, overly draconian, only for Continues to choose to adhere to some edicts and ignoring others that would have enforced too many creative compromises. Now fans who were saying Alec personally killed fan-films when the guidelines first came out are seizing on Vic's convenient interpretation of "they're guidelines, not laws" excuse. So it seems like we're almost right back where we started again, back in the gray zone, where the only line nobody's likely to cross going forward crowdfunding limits. It's just classic human nature. Until fan-filmmakers perceive the guidelines as if they are laws, they will look around to see what others are getting away with and treat that as the de-facto rule, sort of like how everyone drives 10 miles over the posted speed-limit.
Now, considering that Alec was playing the selective-enforcement card way back, with Vic accusing Alec of "poisoning the well" I really do not think Alec is done inserting the other fan-productions into his legal defense.
I'd expect C/P to be putting out some significant bts warnings if the fan films don't take the guidelines seriously. And I'd expect Axanar to seek PR cover claiming that any guideline pushback proves Axanar is the golden champion of a righteous cause. It would all end with higher ups in C/P declaring the guidelines an experiment that wasn't respected, and so was closed down. Fan films are a hobby favor given out to a very small group of enthusiastic fans, not a right or essential to the future of Trek. It would be a shame if further pushback replicated in a small way the major pushback Axanar committed, and ended up being the bread stick that broke the sehlat's back.
Last edited:
SHROUDED STUDIO With the formal opening of the for-profit studio Alec Peters built using money supporters donated to produce Axanar, AxaMonitor‘s investigation into the companies behind the studio revealed a complete lack of transparency about who stands to financially benefit from the facility.
SHROUDED STUDIO With the formal opening of the for-profit studio Alec Peters built using money supporters donated to produce Axanar, AxaMonitor‘s investigation into the companies behind the studio revealed a complete lack of transparency about who stands to financially benefit from the facility.
One thing is for certain. This has gotten way too complicated for a fan film.
But perfect for a fan-funded shell game!
"TampAxanar: The Whole Bloody Mess"
Probably doesn't effect the lawsuit any but may have some impact on policy in regards to the rest of fan films.
"The vice chairman of Paramount Pictures is leaving the troubled Hollywood studio in the latest shake-up to hit corporate parent Viacom Inc., the executive said in an email. Rob Moore, a veteran Hollywood executive, has been at Paramount since 2005 and was one of the most powerful people on the studio lot. Across Hollywood, he's known for an obsessive attention to detail when it comes to decisions being made across the studio. He has been vice chairman since 2008, the studio's ostensible second in command who was responsible for many aspects of its day-to-day operations."
"The vice chairman of Paramount Pictures is leaving the troubled Hollywood studio in the latest shake-up to hit corporate parent Viacom Inc., the executive said in an email. Rob Moore, a veteran Hollywood executive, has been at Paramount since 2005 and was one of the most powerful people on the studio lot. Across Hollywood, he's known for an obsessive attention to detail when it comes to decisions being made across the studio. He has been vice chairman since 2008, the studio's ostensible second in command who was responsible for many aspects of its day-to-day operations."
I know people like that who think they're funnier than they are once they've had a drink.
He's the Captain of the Discovery....
Amusing but I don't think AP is a big enough piece of sushi. RICO is generally used for stuff like money laundering.A darkly amusing thought crossed my mind with the specter of the statute of limitations running out: the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act was a law designed specifically to target ongoing criminal enterprises such as the Mafia for offenses which might not carry serious penalties by themselves can be cited as "predicate acts" as the foundation of RICO charges which carry 20 year maximum sentences and $25K fines per RICO count. It takes at least two predicate acts from a list of 27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes (per wikipedia so judge accuracy with appropriate amounts of salt grains). From my meager research it appears that California does not have a state RICO law, but it does have anti-racketeering laws which might apply. Could be an interesting unintended consequence if there's proof that AP and Co. are trying to stretch this out to keep milking (fleecing?) their supporters.
If Madame Chief Justice or any other of our more legally knowledgeable posters wish to comment, or just point, laugh and dismiss what I agree is just a passing whimsy, I hope they will.
One of the best articles you have written @carlosp. Not a lot of information to be found, but you connected it rather nicely. At least now we know where all the missing fundraising money has gone.SHROUDED STUDIO With the formal opening of the for-profit studio Alec Peters built using money supporters donated to produce Axanar, AxaMonitor‘s investigation into the companies behind the studio revealed a complete lack of transparency about who stands to financially benefit from the facility.
- Status