• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

Status
Not open for further replies.
carlosp said:
...The defense is hoping that he can speak to Peters' state of mind regarding willfulness in his infringement...
Click to expand...

It sure seems that podcasts, emails, and testimony of colleagues would carry a lot more weight about the "willfulness" that might have been active at the time. Clearly, Axanar Productions *never* internally said they intended to replace CBS/Paramount or build any sort of profitable asset off of their fan's money...:lol:
 
carlosp said:
Just as Prof. Jenkins isn't qualified to come to legal conclusions, I suspect the judge may decide he's also not qualified to give economic ones. The defense is hoping that he can speak to Peters' state of mind regarding willfulness in his infringement. But unless he knew Peters at the time, I can't see how Jenkins could say much more than 'some' fans think it's OK to infringe if you're making a fan work.
Click to expand...
All I can tell you is that very early on LFIM contrived a reasoning why Axanar wasn't infringing on Star Trek. What I can't tell you is if someone convinced him it wasn't due to the script being based on a non cannon book or if he came up with that himself in order to get people to join his scheme.
I wasn't convinced and quickly dropped any interest I might have had in the project.
 
muCephi said:
It sure seems that podcasts, emails, and testimony of colleagues would carry a lot more weight about the "willfulness" that might have been active at the time. Clearly, Axanar Productions *never* internally said they intended to replace CBS/Paramount or build any sort of profitable asset off of their fan's money...:lol:
Click to expand...
The jury will probably be instructed that the at-the-time podcasts, etc. are to be given more weight than the conclusions of someone who wasn't there and didn't/doesn't really know defendant Peters.
 
dmac said:
All I can tell you is that very early on LFIM contrived a reasoning why Axanar wasn't infringing on Star Trek.
Click to expand...

I think it probably it will probably be argued he felt they "weren't using it" and that Axanar was "doing more for the franchise" than the studios, therefore any excess was okay: http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/cbs-paramount-sues-to-stop-axanar.278077/page-388#post-11458044

But of course this leaves out building a studio to own all his selfsies.

15-1024x768.jpg
 
muCephi said:
It sure seems that podcasts, emails, and testimony of colleagues would carry a lot more weight about the "willfulness" that might have been active at the time. Clearly, Axanar Productions *never* internally said they intended to replace CBS/Paramount or build any sort of profitable asset off of their fan's money...:lol:
Click to expand...

jespah said:
The jury will probably be instructed that the at-the-time podcasts, etc. are to be given more weight than the conclusions of someone who wasn't there and didn't/doesn't really know defendant Peters.
Click to expand...

Your honor, what the Defenants said on the podcast was not an indication of intent to infringe. Clearly, it was "locker room talk."
 
dmac said:
All I can tell you is that very early on LFIM contrived a reasoning why Axanar wasn't infringing on Star Trek. What I can't tell you is if someone convinced him it wasn't due to the script being based on a non cannon book or if he came up with that himself in order to get people to join his scheme.
I wasn't convinced and quickly dropped any interest I might have had in the project.
Click to expand...
Is there some record of this contrivance somewhere that you recall?
 
RedForman said:
Haven't heard much from Reece lately...........still seems to be shotgunning the Kool-Aid though

16195431_10154810966433567_290550969286097418_n.jpg

16114144_10154810966428567_3967758457343308854_n.jpg
Click to expand...


So

1. no matter the actions taken by a business, if you are friends with the business owner, you should make false statements without limit about that activity, and never criticize or withdraw from that activity, because loyalty is the highest truth.

2. hope (that your desire will come true just because you wish it, to co-own and co-profit from a valuable IP at no cost to you) is always more worthy than law and the basic goals of IP protection, because, well, its *hope*, and that's always a positive.

3. loyalty and hope are so virtuous (I mean, look at the words (not what they are being attached to)), that the argument is won just because of this shining light. Those who would ever ask for the attached actions to be examined on their own merits are just haters who bring only darkness.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top