CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

Got it! Thanks again Whole Big Bunches!!



EDIT:
Oh shiiii.... ooot, @jespah. I'm just now reading the Semantic Shenanigans: Judge Klausner’s Axanar Orders on Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence. Pulled up the ruling document you linked and there it says (I copied & pasted the following directly from the document so the capitalization is not my own): The Court makes the following TENTATIVE rulings on the Motions In Limine I must have blinked and missed your post that the blog about it was up.

 

I am wondering how sweeping this decision is. Willful infringement would be much clearer if the constant claims of being "professional not fan" were present. I don't even see how the fundraising project description could make sense if the word "professional" were removed. I think it would be like requiring the word "explosion" to be redacted from an Avengers CGI timeline.

 

This misconception could be why he decided that in the first place.

"Professional" really has nothing to do with "willful." If Alec can convince the jury that he thought what he was doing was okay, then whether he was doing it for profit or not is irrelevant.

If I understand things correctly, all they need to prove for "willful infringement" is that he was fully aware that Axanar violated IP law, and that it was therefore illegal and was not okay, but then he went ahead and did it anyway.

If this is how Klausner is thinking, then I can kinda see the point. There's a whole sideshow about Alec's professional ambitions here, but that's not what the case is about. It's about whether or not he used someone else's intellectual property without permission, full stop. The financial data (the basics of which I presume are still allowed) would be enough to show that he was profiting monetarily when they get to assessing damages; whether he was profiting "professionally" doesn't really matter.

This is just off the top of my head. Someone with more knowledge, feel free to chime in.

 

But surely even Peters would have known that there's an imaginary line in the sand. Up till now, CBS/P left fan films alone, but on the other end of the scale it's fairly obvious that they'd sue if, say, Warners tried to make a Trek film.

The further up the amateur/professional scale Peters went, the more chance he had of crossing the line and therefore getting sued.

I'll wait on the Judge's clarification, but to my mind the 'professionalism' angle was a key point here: the very reason for this lawsuit is because he strayed too far from the fan film 'norm'.

 

While it's not the core reason stamped on the paperwork, I think those ambitions should be quite relevant.

The plan for the studio and his future was tied very closely to this effort. Wilful infringement out of arrogance is one thing, wilful infringement our of greed or self service to this degree is another.

Maybe it's not relevant to the judge, maybe it's a case of simplifying it for the jury or to avoid a complete circus unfolding within the room, but the entire context given for Axanar's "Frak you guys, we can do this better and we'll launch our own for profit platform" isn't one that should be ignored. The intent behind the infringement seems incredibly important to me, not just for correctly establishing damages, but in ensuring no one tries it again with Star Trek or any other property that could be challenges in the same way.

 

Omitting the word "professional" and failure to connect the dots about how it explains so many actions beyond making a fan film allows defense to go back to saying "if you let other fan films do this, what's wrong with what Axanar did?"

I think that the "professional" intent is critical in separating Axanar from prior allowed conduct of fan films. Its absence invites the jury and press to sympathize with an "innocent" underdog.

Of course, the studios can just work around it, for example by calling out salaries, union dues, studio, business expenses, intent to rent the facility, etc, and let the jury fill in the word.

Sometimes its more powerful to let the listener connect the dots. Then it's their invested conclusion, not your suggested conclusion.

 

Yes, and fans of fan films should not be pleased with this development. C/P have taken great care to distinguish Axanar from other fan films by emphasizing its intent to be professional. Doing so allows them to protect both their business interests and fan works. If the defense is successful at undermining C/P's efforts, they may come to the conclusion that there is too much risk of IP parasites hiding behind expressions of fandom. In such a situation they would shut it all down.

If Alec Peters and his team care about fan films, they would settle now. Axanar would be up a creek, but the rest of the fan film community would have a chance.

 

Clear. Succinct. Straight to the heart of the matter.

Nice

 

I think the whole issue is that it doesn't matter what everyone else did, or what Axanar called itself. To the law, willful is a binary thing; it's either willful or it isn't. Stuff like calling the production "professional" goes to how willful it was, but that's largely irrelevant. In the damages phase, I don't believe that things like Alec's Netflix ambitions are excluded, and stuff like that is damaging enough.

I'm not saying I'm agreeing with any of this, mind you. This is just my guess as to what the judge is thinking.

 

I think there is a valid argument to be made to the Jury (if any other info on C/P's treatment of fan films prior to the Axanar situation is allowed) - as to the fact that PRIOR to the Lawsuit being filed 'Axanar' was being promoted as the 'First professional and independent Star Trek feature film...'

If the Judge doesn't allow any evidence as to how CBS/Paramount treaed Star Trek fan films prior to this whole Axanar situation; then yes, the 'professional' aspect has little to no bearing; but if the Defense gets it on the record that C/P treated other groups differently; the Plaintiffs should be able to tell hem "why" in full.

 

A little drama in the comments section of this vid (at least that's what I got from the Facebook group - not sure how many posts on both sides have been deleted)

 

Straw man arguments, no, not at all, and while my review of his history may have been inaccurate even Carlos admits about that he had an issue with Peters from the outset of this case. His blog may not contain factual inaccuracies, but it's clearly designed to make Peters look bad by analysising pretty much everything he says. For instance, where and the "truth or fact" explorations on his blog for every move Loeb and Loeb make? There aren't. You don't need to lie to still promote a bias.

Look, I'm ok nobody's side, albeit that much view of Peters is such that I end to fall on the anti-Axanar side. But I just want honesty and I think it's disingenuous to pretend that there aren't people on the anti- Axansr side who are desperate to see Peters fall on his sword.

 

I think a cliche is in order here: "I have never wished anyone dead, but I have read many an obituary with great pleasure." I have to say I disagree that Carlos has claimed to be totally neutral. I think his feelings toward the conduct of AP are quite clear and have been from the beginning and those feelings should be factored into what he rights, but unless you can find some specific instance of his feelings leading him to publish incorrect, inaccurate or slanted material, I think it's grossly unfair to throw him into the same pool with some of the people who do seem to have no boundaries when it comes to attacking AP.

ETA: the exact quote is from Clarence Darrow's autobiography "All men have an emotion to kill; when they strongly dislike some one they involuntarily wish he was dead. I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction."

 

Hinman and Peters are both posting. Of course there's drama.

 

Carlosp replied to your baseless accusations, read the above quote. I don't know why you continuously use your straw man of people are desperate to see Peters fall on his sword, you just want to see him fail, your biased, your prejudiced, blah blah blah derail over and over again. Maybe some do maybe some don't, everyone can speak for themselves. The point is you don't ask, you jump in pointing your finger at someone using the same pointless arguments repetitiously derailing the thread.

I like carlosp and oswriter's (and Jespah's) contributions on this thread. They offer topical conversational insight and they each have a fun sense of humor getting along with everyone. Let's please resume discussing the thread topic.

 

Loeb & Loeb aren't the ones being sued for IP infringement, the last time I checked.

 

I literally did this for First Contact, and it was something like a 30x50 resolution.

Anywho, this is getting tedious. I wonder what the Ares would look like with blue nacelles.