Last edited:
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Judge Klausner seems to be a no nonsense judge shooting down W&S's arguments with witty Trek references.
Got way too busy at work yesterday and I missed this..............good on Klausner for handing this down. Slow Lane on the other hand................well I don't think he'll ever come around (until right before LFIM throws him under the bus)
http://fanfilmfactor.com/2017/01/05...t-order-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-part-1/
Here are some gems from the Axa-faithful on Facebook........(user at the bottom publicly advocating piracy it sounds like - look at who 'liked' it)
And this wonderful little gem
Finally, what would be the chances of LFIM being able to escape this via a declaration of bankruptcy after he loses??
http://fanfilmfactor.com/2017/01/05...t-order-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-part-1/
Here are some gems from the Axa-faithful on Facebook........(user at the bottom publicly advocating piracy it sounds like - look at who 'liked' it)
And this wonderful little gem
Finally, what would be the chances of LFIM being able to escape this via a declaration of bankruptcy after he loses??
That may actually depend on whether the jury finds willful infringement--and how Judge Klausner instructs the jury. Most civil judgments can be discharged in bankruptcy, but there's an exception for "for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity." The Ninth Circuit actually has considered the issue of whether a copyright infringement judgment falls within this exception.
In a 2008 case, In re Barboza, the Ninth Circuit reversed a bankruptcy court decision holding a copyright infringement judgment non-dischargeable. The reversal was based on the fact that although the jury in the copyright infringement case found the defendants committed "willful" infringement, it could not be determined whether that finding was "based on a reckless disregard or a knowing violation of [the plaintiff's] copyright." Basically, if the infringement was based on a "knowing violation," the judgment cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, but if it is only based on "reckless disregard," it can be. The Ninth Circuit said the bankruptcy court could not "infer" which of the options the jury picked.
In the Barboza case, the debtors ran a company that sold bootlegged foreign language films. The debtors claimed someone working for them actually made the illegal copies without their direct knowledge. The jury could still find the debtors liable for "willful infringement" under the "reckless disregard" standard, but that was not sufficient to block a bankruptcy discharge.
Here, Judge Klausner has already found LFIM committed "contributory infringement" (subject to the jury's finding of substantial similarity) based on his direct involvement in Axanar. So if the jury comes back with a willful infringement verdict, that might satisfy the first prong of the Barboza court's test for non-dischargeability. But C/P would have to prove LFIM's conduct was "malicious" in addition to "willful."
The more I think about this, the more I think this is what may be keeping LFIM, Slow Lane et al optimistic and somewhat cocky still (banking it all on C/P not being able to prove both "malicious" and "willful" so that he can escape via bankruptcy when all is said and done)
Alec was, and is, still taking donor money, that should have stopped the same day he was first notified of the lawsuit. That also shows willful intent to profit on Trek since he can't use the money to make the film, so why still collect money from donors?
When he is found guilty and not allowed to make the film, what is he going to tell donors who want their money back? He did not spend it on the film, or even for legal fees, so where is the money Alec? Either way he is going to have to answer to them, and I hope they sue the crap out him.
When he is found guilty and not allowed to make the film, what is he going to tell donors who want their money back? He did not spend it on the film, or even for legal fees, so where is the money Alec? Either way he is going to have to answer to them, and I hope they sue the crap out him.
IDK - I'd say opening an online donor store and selling unlicensed Star Trek merchandise is about as 'willful as you can get. That goes beyond what any other fan film group has done. And lets not forget trying to trademark Axanar and discussions with Amazon and Netflix. (Yes other groups had KS and Indegogo perks - but so did Axanar.)
Yep. And Ms. Erin Ranahan didn't even try to tailor her responses and that's probably why the Judge's response to the motion is the way it is. Basically the Judge said to the defense: "Are you really trying THAT HARD to BS me? Not going to happen."
Or, he just has better taste in Star Trek.
Seriously though this case specifically (well except for Soval) revolves around the TOS timeframe and TOS (and JJ Trek) copyrights. TNG and other 24th century series aren't really being copied/used at all.
Last edited:
Once again, a lot of words that don't add up to a hill of beans. Also, Lane completely sidesteps the fact that Peters got his ass handed to him—"yes, you infringed and yes, you tried to profit from it."
As I said, he's got a very small opening. Like that micro-wormhole Voyager found with Vaugn Armstrong on the other end. I don't think his "good faith" defense will fit through it.
As long as we have groups like the Language Creation Society filing irrelevant, tangential amicus briefs, I say we ask Judge Klausner to rule on whether The Animated Series is canon.
He may not be thinking that far ahead. He may hold a genuine belief the Ninth Circuit will save him. His pattern indicates one-dimensional thinking.
Good to see they're still recycling the old canards about non-profit and bad CBS rules.
Wow - we have an appearance of 'Red Omega' (a known ali9as of Alec Peters himself on BBSes and comment threads) in the comments section of the recent Hollywood Reporter article that was linked earlier in the thread:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/th...-star-trek-fan-film-dispute-jury-trial-960703
If this is indded a comment by Mr. Peters, I'd say the chance of him accepting any settlement at this point are nil; and if/when he looses he'll be appealling until he's exausted that avenue. That Axanar Kool-Aid™ must take REALLY good at this point.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/th...-star-trek-fan-film-dispute-jury-trial-960703
^^^RedOmega David Hinkle • 15 hours ago
You see, with fans such as David Hinkle there is no way that we...that is, that Team Axanar can fail!!
If this is indded a comment by Mr. Peters, I'd say the chance of him accepting any settlement at this point are nil; and if/when he looses he'll be appealling until he's exausted that avenue. That Axanar Kool-Aid™ must take REALLY good at this point.
Wow - we have an appearance of 'Red Omega' (a known ali9as of Alec Peters himself on BBSes and comment threads) in the comments section of the recent Hollywood Reporter article that was linked earlier in the thread:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/th...-star-trek-fan-film-dispute-jury-trial-960703
^^^
If this is indded a comment by Mr. Peters, I'd say the chance of him accepting any settlement at this point are nil; and if/when he looses he'll be appealling until he's exausted that avenue. That Axanar Kool-Aid™ must take REALLY good at this point.
My money is on parody Red Omega, a younger cousin to Tampaxanar. Parody Red Omega's have been showing up on news articles since the summer, if I recall correctly.
Nevertheless, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some truth in exaggeration.
We have a couple of minor filings from yesterday, each party's "narrative statement" of what their respective proposed expert witnesses will say at trial. This includes Van Critters for C/P and Tregillis and Jenkins for the defense. Nothing much new here, though I'd point to Ranahan's statement that Tregillis will specifically testify "regarding the lack of any profits that Defendants have earned as a result of the alleged infringement." She's not letting that go (or perhaps more accurately, LFIM won't allow her to let it go).
Well, it isn't surprising. They are already backing someone who is openly stealing from CBS and the fans.
On AxaMonitor: In attempt to reassure donors, Axanar's spokesman minimizes its legal travails, while producer Alec Peters claims his multimillion-dollar film was 'just a hobby.'
To be fair, that brief was likely written before Klausner's decision was issued.
On AxaMonitor: In attempt to reassure donors, Axanar's spokesman minimizes its legal travails, while producer Alec Peters claims his multimillion-dollar film was 'just a hobby.'
Which, of course, flies in the face of his claims of it being a full time job and the need for a salary.
- Status