The big news is always just around the corner.............
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Some notes from Ms. Ranahan's interview:
1. W&S Motivations
"...As much as I was also salivating over the potential of taking the fair use decision up to the Ninth Circuit, I could not pressure my client to take on that appeal when it presented risks and a delay... Of course, having our fair use defense taken away before trial was disappointing, and legally I am confident that the decision would not have stood up under scrutiny by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals."
2. Alec's financials weren't the reason for settling -- the idea they were ordered released was due to a clerical error
JONATHAN: In the end, of course, the two sides did settle. Some detractors have said that the judge’s order (two days before the settlement was announced) removing the redactions from certain key pieces of evidence involving Alec Peters’ financials resulted in a rush to settlement on your side…with you personally signing the Joint Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal the day after the ruling. Is that what happened?
ERIN: That is not accurate. The Court had found the very same financials to be confidential and sealed them on multiple occasions (despite Plaintiffs repeated efforts to make those public). Here, upon receiving the Order you are referring to, we called the Clerk and realized that the Court did not notice that we had filed the requisite declarations to seal those documents. So it was simply a clerical oversight, and if the case had not settled the same week, it would have been corrected. Also, both sides had been in settlement discussions throughout the case. The impetus was that trial was in less than two weeks; it had nothing to do with that mistaken Order. The notion that we could have finalized a settlement in just two days is also simply not realistic.
JONATHAN: So just to be clear, Alec Peters’ financials were NOT going to be made public?
ERIN: That is correct. They would have remained sealed.
3. Was this a good or bad thing for fan films?
JONATHAN: What do you think the future holds for fan films–both Star Trek and other genres? Did this case make fan films more secure or more vulnerable to new legal challenges from big studios?
ERIN: Fan films will continue to flourish like they always have in the Star Trek community—just those that are not parodies, satire, or other clearly protected speech will have to run a little shorter, which forces a new level of editing and creativity. The studios went a long time without suing anyone, and I would expect that, given the experience in this case, they won’t be running out to sue fan film creators any time soon. Fan films for the most part offer free promotion and enhance the brand, not harm it, so business considerations would make an onslaught of lawsuits like this highly unlikely.
As far as any “precedent” regarding fair use, fair use is an incredibly fact specific inquiry. The Court’s ruling in this case foreclosing fair use before trial is problematic from our perspective in multiple respects, but is binding on no one (not even another district court in the Central District).
observations:
1. Does it make sense that the judge would order the finances to be public as result of a "clerical error" of not seeing another request to seal them? This sounds a bit to me like using your credibility to block the one most damaging fact from view. I thought the judge was ruling against the repeated requests to seal them, not just following through on what would be the default behavior if no request to seal was seen in the final round of filings, as I read Ms. Ranahan's argument.
2. To summarize her statement of whether the lawsuit was good or bad for fan films:
a) films have to be shorter, but this just stimulates creativity
b) knowing that a fan film might get a legal defense, the studios would be reluctant to sue in the future
c) lawsuits against fan films will have deterring business consequences
To me this is making lemonade. Limitations are gains! The mad rush of fan films that wildly overstep copyright will be less likely to be sued, win!
3. "problematic" - this part of 'consequences for fan films' says we lost our main argument, and we note we even created a precedent where fair use arguments can be precluded *before* trial, a consequence that is 'problematic' [what, to other cases in the future?], but fortunately it doesn't have any lasting consequence for fan films.
But I wonder. Isn't the judge's ruling on the summary judgment motions still citeable as precedent?
1. W&S Motivations
"...As much as I was also salivating over the potential of taking the fair use decision up to the Ninth Circuit, I could not pressure my client to take on that appeal when it presented risks and a delay... Of course, having our fair use defense taken away before trial was disappointing, and legally I am confident that the decision would not have stood up under scrutiny by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals."
JONATHAN: In the end, of course, the two sides did settle. Some detractors have said that the judge’s order (two days before the settlement was announced) removing the redactions from certain key pieces of evidence involving Alec Peters’ financials resulted in a rush to settlement on your side…with you personally signing the Joint Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal the day after the ruling. Is that what happened?
ERIN: That is not accurate. The Court had found the very same financials to be confidential and sealed them on multiple occasions (despite Plaintiffs repeated efforts to make those public). Here, upon receiving the Order you are referring to, we called the Clerk and realized that the Court did not notice that we had filed the requisite declarations to seal those documents. So it was simply a clerical oversight, and if the case had not settled the same week, it would have been corrected. Also, both sides had been in settlement discussions throughout the case. The impetus was that trial was in less than two weeks; it had nothing to do with that mistaken Order. The notion that we could have finalized a settlement in just two days is also simply not realistic.
JONATHAN: So just to be clear, Alec Peters’ financials were NOT going to be made public?
ERIN: That is correct. They would have remained sealed.
JONATHAN: What do you think the future holds for fan films–both Star Trek and other genres? Did this case make fan films more secure or more vulnerable to new legal challenges from big studios?
ERIN: Fan films will continue to flourish like they always have in the Star Trek community—just those that are not parodies, satire, or other clearly protected speech will have to run a little shorter, which forces a new level of editing and creativity. The studios went a long time without suing anyone, and I would expect that, given the experience in this case, they won’t be running out to sue fan film creators any time soon. Fan films for the most part offer free promotion and enhance the brand, not harm it, so business considerations would make an onslaught of lawsuits like this highly unlikely.
As far as any “precedent” regarding fair use, fair use is an incredibly fact specific inquiry. The Court’s ruling in this case foreclosing fair use before trial is problematic from our perspective in multiple respects, but is binding on no one (not even another district court in the Central District).
observations:
1. Does it make sense that the judge would order the finances to be public as result of a "clerical error" of not seeing another request to seal them? This sounds a bit to me like using your credibility to block the one most damaging fact from view. I thought the judge was ruling against the repeated requests to seal them, not just following through on what would be the default behavior if no request to seal was seen in the final round of filings, as I read Ms. Ranahan's argument.
2. To summarize her statement of whether the lawsuit was good or bad for fan films:
a) films have to be shorter, but this just stimulates creativity
b) knowing that a fan film might get a legal defense, the studios would be reluctant to sue in the future
c) lawsuits against fan films will have deterring business consequences
To me this is making lemonade. Limitations are gains! The mad rush of fan films that wildly overstep copyright will be less likely to be sued, win!
3. "problematic" - this part of 'consequences for fan films' says we lost our main argument, and we note we even created a precedent where fair use arguments can be precluded *before* trial, a consequence that is 'problematic' [what, to other cases in the future?], but fortunately it doesn't have any lasting consequence for fan films.
But I wonder. Isn't the judge's ruling on the summary judgment motions still citeable as precedent?
Last edited:
Reminds me of some old TampAxanar memes - mainly, these two..............
https://twitter.com/Tampaxanar/status/752801568488034304/photo/1
https://twitter.com/Tampaxanar/status/745242980131422208/photo/1
It sure as hell is, and it is being cited, by the fine folks involved in the Dr. Seuss Enterprises v. David Gerrold et al case. <-- that link leads you back to (natch) Semantic Shenanigans, where I got to wax poetic about citing the plaintiff therein citing Judge Gary Klausner.
Why is Klausner being cited? Because, while Ms. Ranahan states, a lot of fair use is rather fact-specific, the general principles kinda aren't. And Klausner offers good, supported (e. g. documented) backup for his reasoning. His ruling is also new, and newer findings tend to hold more weight.
I'm still waiting on the promised announcement abot industry studios...and the release of the financials... and the...
Yea I kinda figured she was Freudian-slipping that they actually harmed future fair use arguments.
What about her claim that it was all just a clerical error that made anyone think Alec's financials would ever see the light of day, not the judge's ruling on repeated attempts to seal?
Gravely, I agree with this. I do so very much hope that you and I turn out to be proven wrong.
However, the defendant's long and documented history of disreputable businesses & business Practices as well as documented personal actions devoid of empathy for those being used, frequently being discarded, and the long and fully documented historical marked propensity to continuously proclaim victory, truth, & righteousness atop the corpses of those left in his wake..... will continue to couple him with people who to my ongoing utter dismay remain emotionally & intellectually vulnerable to televangelists, cult leaders, dictators, con men/women, racism, discrimination, et al., whatever the individual reasons that make it all seem perfectly reasonable to them... plus those who will be motivated by their own self interests in joining with this person..... demonstrates the strong likelihood this will continue.
Therefore it remains my considered though sad belief that you and I will not be proven wrong.
Last edited:
Heeyyy...we were promised waves crashing on the firmament, weren't we?
Nothing like betting the farm on a ruling from the most-overturned Appellate Court in America.
TWO-FER: AxaMonitor reports on the Alec Peters-free "Prelude to Axanar: Redux" and has an exclusive interview with the fan editor who created it.
Last edited:
Wow. You really can polish a turd. That was watchable.
The key was removing a turd.........
It's like talking shit about a game after it ended in a tie......."Yeah we could have whipped their ass but didn't have the balls to go for the touchdown."
She's mis-representing what would have happened with the financials had they gone to Trial. The Judge ruled the Financials (both sets) WERE material to the case and could be introduced as evidence (and witnesses cross examined were they introduced.)
^^^
At THAT point the information would have become part of the trial transcript and as such the info introduced as evidence would have become public record insofar as trial transcripts for non-family law Civil proceedings ARE available to the public (as well as anyone attending the Trial and hearing the testimony live.)
Aaaaaaand it's gone.
How can Axanar productions claim copyright as per the settlement they have to follow the Fan Film Guidelines which state they can Copyright NOTHING with regard to Star Trek?Aaaaaaand it's gone.
- Status