• 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.
KennyB said:
He's such a little bitch. :lol:
Click to expand...
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
 
Noname Given said:
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?
Click to expand...

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...
 
muCephi said:
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...
Click to expand...
Considering YouTube lists the DCMA claimant as "Axanar Productions Inc." - I doubt it was CBS.
 
Noname Given said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Noname Given said:
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.)
Click to expand...

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".
 
carlosp said:
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:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

Good. Should be interesting to see what takedown demands anyone dares to put to *you*.
 
muCephi said:
Its my understanding that for information under seal, like a deposition with personal information, that at trial only excerpts are likely to be introduced to 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".
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
muCephi said:
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...
Click to expand...

NAIL...... HAMMER...... SMACK!!!
 
muCephi said:
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? :nyah::guffaw:
Click to expand...
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.
 
dmac said:
...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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Legal question: What, exactly, can happen if Axanar is found to be non-compliant with the terms of the settlement????
 
Sgt_G said:
Legal question: What, exactly, can happen if Axanar is found to be non-compliant with the terms of the settlement????
Click to expand...
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.
 
muCephi said:
No disrespect to Mr. Hatch, but all I can think of when I see the name Kharn is "Roast".
Click to expand...
Me too... ...Dark Roast!

House_Of_Kharn1_705x1024.jpg
 
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