CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

Man...... I hate when work gets in my way of watching the awesome, totally epic. full length, as promised Axanar movie, delivered as promised. Too bad the corporate Goliath made the humble little David take it down before I viewed it. LoL

 

Unless it was CBS/P who took it down, whoever took it down is in violation of the guidelines. That could be unfortunate if that someone had a settlement which is dependent on strictly following the guidelines...

It might have been an automatic content censor algorithm, tho...

 

Considering YouTube lists the DCMA claimant as "Axanar Productions Inc." - I doubt it was CBS.

 

Technically speaking, the guidelines state fan films cannot REGISTER their copyright. Even unregistered, creators retain copyright. The intent of Guideline 9 is clear, however: Fanbfilms don't get to seek copyright protection for their works. I know CBS is looking into this.

 

Its my understanding that for information under seal, like a deposition with personal information, that at trial only excerpts are likely to be introduced into the record.

Might this be the mechanism for keeping it secret?

I am wondering about the whole Ms. Ranahan statement to FFF though. I thought the ruling was not just "well they didn't ask for it to be sealed this time so we declare it public" (which she seems to be suggesting). I thought it was "you keep asking to seal it, and NO, and STOP ASKING".

 

I've updated the AxaMonitor article to reflect the YouTube takedown. In the meantime, we're hosting the video on the AxaMonitor Facebook page. You can also view below:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154176627535824

 

Good. Should be interesting to see what takedown demands anyone dares to put to *you*.

 

ooo

ooOOOooOOooo

 

What's introduced at Trial is what the Judge said can be introduced (and BOTH versions of the Axanar Financials and Alec Peters two depositions fell into this category per the Judge's pre-trial rulings) - so either side could have introduced excerpts, OR they could have introduced the entire thing.

Filing it under seal prior to the Trial just means that outside Attorneys (not connected to the handling of the case) and other members of the public couldn't see it prior to the trial - and that its admissibility during the Trial as evidence would be ruled on later; which the Judge did when he deemed it all relevant (and therefore not excluded from being introduced as evidence at Trial) to the case.

 

You know, there's really nothing (except they are speaking English) stopping someone from making some shortened version of Prelude, heavy on Garth perhaps, as the new "Downfall" meme. How Garth got a studio of his own... Maybe overdub it in Klingon then caption it...

But I guess I agree with Mr. Bawden, best for everyone would be if they just focus on delivering something and people see that, instead of the vacuum being filled with memes from angry donors.

 

NAIL...... HAMMER...... SMACK!!!

 

How could Axanar be offended by a fan who feels they can make a better, more Trek-authentic version of Axanar than Industry Studios' casting achieved?

 

We are such simple beings to the Lord Garth.
You know there is a loophole in the guidelines that does allow an 1 1/2 hour version to be made while not violating anything they say you can't do and only doing what they say is acceptable. I'm not going to post what it is because once someone does it, there will be new guidelines.

 

Well sure. Do a half hour from each of 3 protagonists' viewpoints, with what goes on being perceived as totally different views of some offstage common events. Let the watcher stitch it together.

I have to imagine there are lots of ways the guidelines can be broken... what holds it together is a***hats not exploiting things just because they can.

 

That could be considered serializing and raise a valid argument for either side.

 

This linke requires FB account to access.

 

Legal question: What, exactly, can happen if Axanar is found to be non-compliant with the terms of the settlement????

 

That depends on whether the Settlement itself spelled out 'penalties' either side would incur if terms of the Settlement were breached. (And most Settlements usually do have such penalties spelled out because usually neither side wants to go back to court.)

The above said, it could also mean CBS/Paramount COULD file another complaint - and we start this rodeo all over again.

 

Me too... ...Dark Roast!