CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[Firebird]

Axanar Indiegogo update:

"Many of you ask for updates on what is happening on the lawsuit. And we really can't talk much about the lawsuit as we are in discovery and Erin Ranhana, our amazing lawyer, has advised us not to talk! But there is still one location you can get the inside scoop on the Axanar lawsuit, and that is Fan Film Factor, the only legitimate news source on the Axanar lawsuit online . Jonathan Lane, the author, consults with lawyers on every article and he is the only blogger that is both unbiased and knowledgeable about the law . He has multiple lawyers and legal experts he consults on each article and he really gets the important aspects of the case.

Please make sure you check it out and return regularly to get the insight we can't give you! :-)

Here is the latest article, which, while a bit long, is pretty damn good!

Fan Film Factor

Live Long and Prosper!

Alec"

To paraphrase Adrian Cronauer, "in the dictionary, under delusional narcissist, it says 'see him.'"

 

[Earthrise]

He dropped by Kickstarter too.

In response to a complaint about the Propworx auction email:

For the record, no one gave anyone's info to a third party. That is a lie. The email about the Propworx Star Trek auction was sent out from the Axanar Productions Constant Contact account as Propworx is my company and the auction was a fundraiser for Axanar. I donated over $ 35,000 from that auction to Axanar.

And for those of you who donated and feel like you're not getting a good deal--never fear!--when you next want to produce a film, Ares/Valkyrie/Industry Studio/Warehouse has you covered:

If you ever need to rent out the studio, you can do so for basically the cost of turning the lights on. That is only for donors and friends of the production.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

For Alec, unbiased means "agrees with me" rather than its literal meaning.

^^^ Well, yes, from my own examinations of the defendant's behaviors and postings (see my own small collection in a previous post in this thread) I totally agree with you.

Now in general I have enjoyed Mr. Lane's previous, I'll just say postings, about the production as much as I have come to enjoy 1701News' postings about it. Which is to say not at all because, at least to me I mean, in the same way they have both been so heavily emotionally charged as vindictive personal editorial rather than giving me information and insight. But this recent & linked Fan Film blog, rather than focusing on an indictment & mocking of persons like myself who does not support this defendant & production anymore because of genuine conviction through my own research that this thing had all gone awry and should be halted.... was enjoyable in that for the first time since this thing began I am given a chance to see it from the perspective of someone who has a very opposite POV to mine without once calling/labeling me a Hater, which I darned well am not. And insight into stuff like the willful infringement v non-willful and the various rulings that are conceivable was extremely interesting. And the thousands of pages being exchanged in discovery, the legal maneuverings that can be employed in doing so, and picturings of various possible other LL v WS lawerings and goings on, speculated reasonings & possible as-the-court-turns outcomes from another POV. It is, to me I mean, the other... non-vitriolic, ad hominem, mud slinging... part of 'a' discussion that has been missing for me.

I do not need to agree with Mr. Lane's POV to be interested in hearing it. I do not need to agree with everything as interpreted by Mr. Lane in each of his writings to be interested in reading them. But as long as I'm not labeled, attacked, mocked, demeaned, belittled, etc. by his writing, and Mr. Lane's posts continue in the same vein as this first one... I will be quite interested in continued reading.

 

[jespah]

Never met an exclamation mark he didn't like. I mean, like!

I've blogged 3300+ words on the declarations, too. That post will go live on the 12th (the one on the motion goes live on the 6th). The delay is to give people a chance to read what feels a lot like War and Peace. And I wrote a 125,000 word novel (currently in editing; will be queried to publishers next year)* last year, but it wasn't the slog this motion was.

*PS If anything big comes out in November, I have NaNoWriMo to do. Historical urban fantasy! Petticoats and ray guns! So my head will be elsewhere.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

I am getting the nagging feeling that the issue is impossibility.

See, if you start with 1,000 patches (just to use a nice, round number) and 950 of them are to be given out as perks for early donations, but you sell 300 at conventions you kinda have a problem.

Huh. I hadn't thought of that. Interesting!!! (<-see what I did there)

 

[Sgt_G]

The email about the Propworx Star Trek auction was sent out from the Axanar Productions Constant Contact account as Propworx is my company and the auction was a fundraiser for Axanar.

Just because you own both companies doesn't mean you can simply transfer data from one to the other willy-nilly. Wonder if he does the same with money. Oh, look! He "donated" money from Propworx to Axanar. And both companies presumably pay him a salary.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

^^^ Indeed

Think of it this way. How could series television survive if a few hundred Axanars around the world were operating "fully professional" studios directly copying the ideas and characters of your shows week by week, funded by viewers who would have been your viewers, selling merchandise directly based on your show, and cloaking it all in cashflow called "donations"? Let Axanar stand, and every popular entertainment property would have a gaggle of studios making next week's episode before the studio could do so, selling commercials to view it, and pretty much every angle they could find to monetize the studio's IP.

Exactly my own thoughts.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

He dropped by Kickstarter too.

In response to a complaint about the Propworx auction email:

For the record, no one gave anyone's info to a third party. That is a lie. The email about the Propworx Star Trek auction was sent out from the Axanar Productions Constant Contact account as Propworx is my company and the auction was a fundraiser for Axanar. I donated over $ 35,000 from that auction to Axanar.

EDITED using 'strike' function to indicate the parts I later learned where I was incorrect:
Well, no, that was not what was said. 'A Third Party' was not said or implied.

There is zero issue that the defendant owns Both Companies. None. Nadda. No question at all. The defendant owns both companies. There Is No Third Party. Nobody thinks there's a third party. Nobody has 'ever' thought there was a third party. How could this be misconstrued?

EDITED to explain: It is explained further in the thread that Third Party more accurately refers to the defendant's For Profit business. And while no-one disputes both companies are owned by the same person, the For Profit company that used the mailing list from the non-profit company is referred to as a Third Party, which was correctly called such in AxaMonitor.

What was said was that the defendant, who unquestionably owns both companies, took a mailing list of people gathered from Star Trek fans donating to his not for any kind of fiscal benefit anywhere ever Company. To make The Best Star Trek Movie Ever Made, using the Plaintiffs' IP to advertise to 'get' these donors and their donations 'to make' the The Best Star Trek Movie Ever Made with the Plaintiffs' Intellectual Property and therefore should never generate fiscal benefit for the defendant anywhere ever for any reason in any way. ........................................................ And used that list to then 'advertise' the coming sale to generate revenue for defendant's 'other' Entirely For Profit Company that is housed in a facility leased and redone entirely with Star Trek fans' donations to make that movie.

A list the defendant would not have had without the use of the Plaintiffs' Intellectual Property, that the defendant then used to advertise (generate revenue) for himself with his second entirely for profit company.

No Third Party. Nobody ever said anything about a Third Party.



As far as that $35,000 goes? If it goes anywhere, it goes to CBS and Paramount. I mean that's a really big donation. How much money was made in that sale anyway? That must have made a whole lot of money for the defendant for him to just give away $35,000. And how much of that was generated by using the Plaintiffs' IP to get that donor's mailing list?

BTW, $35,000? That is almost exactly the year's salary the producer decided to pay himself for working on this production. So, how come the defendant needs a salary if the same amount is in-turn donated straight back to the production from his second entirely for profit second company that used the Plaintiffs' IP to generate a mailing list to advertise the entirely for profit company's sale?

Huh. Can this $35,000 donation be allowed to be used as a tax deduction for the defendant's entirely for profit company? And then... 'is' the defendant's entirely for profit second company paying 'any' rent in the building offices redone and leased using Star Trek fans' donations by using the Plaintiff's IP to get those donations and then use their IP to actually make the movie. That therefore must never ever in any way derive fiscal benefit for the defendant?

Paying rent or not paying rent the defendant is deriving benefit from housing his entirely for profit company in a building that uses Star Trek fans' donations generated by using the Plaintiffs' IP.

 

[WebLurker]

It sure seems like nothing good has come of this. The legal situation (as we the public are being told) seems to boil down to a "he said/ she said" thing; Paramount says that Axanar is profiting off of them. Axanar denies this.

The new fan film rules seem to have been created in response to this, and while Paramount is within their rights to decide how it works, I for one think that -- while there are some perfectly fine regulations -- there's some pretty harsh stuff in there. If I was into fan filmmaking, I would not make a Star Trek film under this system. I recall that the website page where this was announced was flooded with negative feedback, so I think its safe to say that it was instigated at the cost of goodwill from the fanbase.

The sad thing is, is that this all sprang from a fan film production, something that's supposed to celebrate the source material in question, be a way for fans to connect with the franchise sandbox, make it personal, and share something they love with other people in a way that has their personal touch. It's a tragedy, no matter which way you slice it.

 

[MikeH92467]

There's no dispute that AP paid himself $38,000. Anything short of "make a fan film of any kind of any length, get a C&D and/or lawsuit" can't be considered harsh, because the IP holder can quite legally take action against anyone doing anything at all with their IP. Anne Rice, J.K. Rowling, Marvel take a very hard line. By comparison CP is being very generous indeed.

 

[dmac]

Talk about getting it all wrong. The first time I heard J.J tell Lin that this "whole thing was going away" I thought he was talking about putting a hit out on the LFIM.

 

[Sgt_G]

How could this be misconstrued?

By willful, purposeful, intentional deceit. He may have been trained as a lawyer, but I do believe he was born as a con artist.

 

[OtherGene]

And for those of you who donated and feel like you're not getting a good deal--never fear!--when you next want to produce a film, Ares/Valkyrie/Industry Studio/Warehouse has you covered:

" If you ever need to rent out the studio, you can do so for basically the cost of turning the lights on. That is only for donors and friends of the production."

That is a lie. I don't for one moment believe Mr Peters will hand the keys to his beloved studio to some dude or dudette who threw him $20 two years ago for a bargain-basement rental price. He means the top-line donors but, of course, to gullible Axalytes it reads like mi casa su casa.

 

[urbandefault]

It sure seems like nothing good has come of this. The legal situation (as we the public are being told) seems to boil down to a "he said/ she said" thing; Paramount says that Axanar is profiting off of them. Axanar denies this.

The new fan film rules seem to have been created in response to this, and while Paramount is within their rights to decide how it works, I for one think that -- while there are some perfectly fine regulations -- there's some pretty harsh stuff in there. If I was into fan filmmaking, I would not make a Star Trek film under this system. I recall that the website page where this was announced was flooded with negative feedback, so I think its safe to say that it was instigated at the cost of goodwill from the fanbase.

The sad thing is, is that this all sprang from a fan film production, something that's supposed to celebrate the source material in question, be a way for fans to connect with the franchise sandbox, make it personal, and share something they love with other people in a way that has their personal touch. It's a tragedy, no matter which way you slice it.

Harsh? How harsh is being given the OK to crowdfund $50K per half hour on someone else's property? That's pretty gol dern generous in my book.

Maybe your universal translator is on the fritz.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

The only reasons that the guidelines seem harsh is because they are viewed against what has proceeded them, but I think if people were honest what came before were productions that were getting away with murder, and yes that includes those that have not been seen in the same light as Axanar, such as New Voyages, Continues, Farragut, Renegades and so on.

I do think that one of two or the guidelines are uncalled for (such as the prohibition on episodic series and the time length) but most are perfectly reasonable when you consider what the Star Trek property is. Too many fans, Axanar people or otherwise, have decided that Star Trek is public ownership art and they have a right to do with it whatever they choose. I find it astonishing that nearly a year after Axanar was sued, and after so much discussion, there are still so many fans who do not understand that Star Trek is a commercially owned entertainment product - and that it's that product they are a fan of.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

That is a lie. I don't for one moment believe Mr Peters will hand the keys to his beloved studio to some dude or dudette who threw him $20 two years ago for a bargain-basement rental price. He means the top-line donors but, of course, to gullible Axalytes it reads like mi casa su casa.

I think there are two elements to this.

First, when he says "cost of switching on the lights" in reality he probably means "I'll not charge you rent but you otherwise still have to pay all the overheads for me while you use it so I don't have to".

Second, I wouldn't be surprised if this is an attempt to sweeten the donors in view of the possibility that they will either get no Axanar film or their money back (the latter being the more likely scenario IMO). It's in Peters' interest to try and string them along and keep them placated as long as possible so that he can then blame the lack of film and consequential financial crisis on the big bad corporations who are "against the fans".

 

[Smoked Salmon]

It sure seems like nothing good has come of this. The legal situation (as we the public are being told) seems to boil down to a "he said/ she said" thing; Paramount says that Axanar is profiting off of them. Axanar denies this.

The new fan film rules seem to have been created in response to this, and while Paramount is within their rights to decide how it works, I for one think that -- while there are some perfectly fine regulations -- there's some pretty harsh stuff in there. If I was into fan filmmaking, I would not make a Star Trek film under this system. I recall that the website page where this was announced was flooded with negative feedback, so I think its safe to say that it was instigated at the cost of goodwill from the fanbase.

The sad thing is, is that this all sprang from a fan film production, something that's supposed to celebrate the source material in question, be a way for fans to connect with the franchise sandbox, make it personal, and share something they love with other people in a way that has their personal touch. It's a tragedy, no matter which way you slice it.

No. The tragedy is that fans didn't know where to stop and kept pushing the envelope more and more...and while Alec Peters is a particularly questionable individual whose practices and ego have taken it this far and has blown the whole thing into perhaps more than it needed to be, the reality is that if it wasn't Axanar sooner or later someone else would have gone too far (even if, perhaps, not as far as Axanar).

I do understand the argument that keeping fans on side is in the interest of the studio. But that is not something that it is in their interest to do at all cost, because to be blunt, fan film makers are a tiny fraction of the overall source of revenue from the franchise and rather insignificant as a result. It only has limited value to pander to them. The fact is that some of these people should stop acting like spoiled brats, realise they aren't as important as they think they are, and be damned grateful they can still make fan films if they wish.

 

[wtriker1701]

I firmly believe, that once Axanar would have been completed, it wouldn't be as "free online" as advertised by AP & Co.
They already tried to take that now famous 2-minute-Vulcan-scene offline, as the latest trailer that had "leaked".

So who with a sound mind would believe, that Axanar would have been treated any other way?
I think,l they would have tried to distribute over their streaming portal, for which everybody would have to pay royalties. Of course, Axanar would not have been paid for an extra $1,99 as would have been other productions... but I guess, you know where I'm going with this.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

I firmly believe, that once Axanar would have been completed, it wouldn't be as "free online" as advertised by AP & Co.
They already tried to take that now famous 2-minute-Vulcan-scene offline, as the latest trailer that had "leaked".

So who with a sound mind would believe, that Axanar would have been treated any other way?
I think,l they would have tried to distribute over their streaming portal, for which everybody would have to pay royalties. Of course, Axanar would not have been paid for an extra $1,99 as would have been other productions... but I guess, you know where I'm going with this.

I think that would have depended on two factors. I think Peters may has started charging for it on the basis that he was raising for the next movie (which, let's face it, was more than likely if he'd pulled this off). I also think that if he had somehow found a way to copyright some of it he would've seen it as his to do with as he pleased.

 

[OtherGene]

I firmly believe, that once Axanar would have been completed, it wouldn't be as "free online" as advertised by AP & Co.
They already tried to take that now famous 2-minute-Vulcan-scene offline, as the latest trailer that had "leaked".

So who with a sound mind would believe, that Axanar would have been treated any other way?
I think,l they would have tried to distribute over their streaming portal, for which everybody would have to pay royalties. Of course, Axanar would not have been paid for an extra $1,99 as would have been other productions... but I guess, you know where I'm going with this.

I agree. Perhaps the initial intent was to release it for free on Youtube but I'm sure when it came to it their own self-importance would've prevented them doing so. This would've been the best Star Trek ever ever in his eyes (apart from anything else because he's in it!) irrespective of how poorly it may have ended up being reviewed so it would've gone against his grain to give it away. Jeez, he won't even give people the crappy patches they've paid for, free stuff isn't gonna happen.