• 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!

Case dismissed! Discovery and Tardigrade game "not similar"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Greg Cox said:
I object strenuously to mentioning the Marx Bros. and the Stooges in the same breath. Groucho, Harpo, and Chico were by no means as "buffoonish" than the Stooges. The Stooges shtick is that they were slapstick bumblers who kept smacking each other around and getting into trouble. The Marx Bros. humor included puns, wordplay, sight gags, absurdism, bedroom farce, and, yes, some slapstick. And the Bros. were anarchists, not bumblers. They caused chaos for the fun of it, much to the consternation of stuffed-shirts and "proper" society.

Did I mention I'm a huge Marx Bros. fan? Pretty much memorized all of Groucho's monologues as a teen. :)
Click to expand...

Was there a sanity clause in the pocket books contract?
 
Why did they add this total crap to the case?

Even my 10 year old niece would tell you he should have instead demanded to be credited as an executive producer or something, which is unlikely but way more likely than the show ending.
 
Well, CBS has filed a letter requesting a pre-motion hearing in preparation for their motion to dismiss. Despite being a short letter, it is quite brutal and brings up a lot of the points made in this thread.

- Tardigrades are not protectable
- the other elements are random similarities
- Abdin brings up that stuff was taken from blog, reddit, etc. but provides no links or copies of said infrienged content and without citing specific elements that were infringed the case should be dismissed
- Plantiff doesn't lay a claim for access to material and just being on the internet isn't enough
- no attorney fees
- no berne convention
- netflix international distribution doesn't apply and licensing an infriging work for overseas disribution is not infringement

After reading their very well cited reply, I'm of the opinion this is not going to survive the initial motion to dismiss.
 
Any chance you have a link?
:)

"no Berne Convention "
Does this mean that the country that Abdin is from isn't a member or something else?
(I found online that Egypt is a member, so what else could this mean?)

"no attorney fees"
I'm not sure what this means either.

Curiouser & curiouser ...

I found this article from Sept. 2018 that explains in fairly simple language what this is all about and gives a bit of conjecture as to the chances of Abdin being successful ....

https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/201...e-star-trek-discovery-plagiarism-allegations/

:shrug:
 
Last edited:
DaveyNY said:
Any chance you have a link?
:)

"no Berne Convention "
Does this mean that the country that Abdin is from isn't a member or something else?

"no attorney fees"
I'm not sure what this means either.

Curiouser & curiouser ...
Click to expand...

For Berne convention, he tried to bring that up in his complaint. It is an international copyright agreement. CBS is arguing it does not apply.

No attorney fees is that Abdin is asking for attorney fees and CBS is claiming he isn't eleigible because to get attorney fees the copyright has to be REGISTERED before the infingement took place since this one doesn't.
 
Krandor said:
For Berne convention, he tried to bring that up in his complaint. It is an international copyright agreement. CBS is arguing it does not apply.

No attorney fees is that Abdin is asking for attorney fees and CBS is claiming he isn't eleigible because to get attorney fees the copyright has to be REGISTERED before the infingement took place since this one doesn't.
Click to expand...
Thanks. :techman:
 
After reading that, it seems to me that the very first "Grounds For Dismissal - Part A" Claim is the most damning.

My guess would be that it's not going to get by any reasonable Judge as well.
(granted I'm no lawyer)

One thing that amazed me is that after reading that document only once,
I actually understood all the premises of it.
(beyond all the references to preceding court cases which of course I didn't know)

I think I've just impressed myself.
:vulcan:
 
Last edited:
DaveyNY said:
After reading that, it seems to me that the very first "Grounds For Dismissal - Part A" Claim is the most damning.

My guess would be that it's not going to get by any reasonable Judge as well.
(granted I'm no lawyer)
Click to expand...

I agree. If the items he is claiming were infrienged upon are not actually protectable in the first place then there is no case which is one of the things we've discussed a lot in this thread but CBS lawyers lay out the case so much better along with case citings.

The case cite that I found the most interesting espcially in terms of "can a life sized tardigrade be considered unique and protected" is the case against Dominos Pizza that rules that "humanizing a domino isn't subject to copyright protection". If a human domino isn't protected, a human-size tardigrade won't be either. That is a really bad case cite for Abdin.
 
Krandor said:
I agree. If the items he is claiming were infrienged upon are not actually protectable in the first place then there is no case which is one of the things we've discussed a lot in this thread but CBS lawyers lay out the case so much better along with case citings.

The case cite that I found the most interesting espcially in terms of "can a life sized tardigrade be considered unique and protected" is the case against Dominos Pizza that rules that "humanizing a domino isn't subject to copyright protection". If a human domino isn't protected, a human-size tardigrade won't be either. That is a really bad case cite for Abdin.
Click to expand...
After reading that, one really wonders if the Plaintiff's lawyers have any clue to previous case law in this particular arena.
Perhaps hiring a fly-by-night firm, was not the most astute choice to begin with.
Nor apparently, was listening to and taking advice from internet jockeys with very little to no court experience.
:eek:
 
DaveyNY said:
After reading that, one really wonders if the Plaintiff's lawyers have any clue to previous case law in this particular arena.
Perhaps hiring a fly-by-night firm, was not the most astute choice to begin with.
Nor apparently, was listening to and taking advice from internet jockeys with very little to no court experience.
:eek:
Click to expand...

I got the same throught reading the section on the berne convention where it is clear they are trying to apply it in a totally incorrect way.

I'm still of the opinion they never wanteed to argue the case and were looking for a quick settlement check. I think chances of that are now about nil
 
Jam3s1701 said:
On AxaMonitor: In a letter this week to a federal judge, CBS/Netflix outline their case against the Tardigrades lawsuit's alleged copyright infringement by Star Trek: Discovery.

http://axamonitor.com/doku.php?id=t...fCqKWZYYT-lCSpAegM6MDHXOjJZvVD-7TrQd5OV69yJoo
Click to expand...
I'm going to assume that this suddenly popped up here because someone attempted to initiate a new thread on the subject at hand...
Or is it just for the link to the article?


It's interesting that Abdin's lawyers have until tomorrow to respond. (Dec. 6th 2018) ...

"Abdin's Reply Due December 6
Under Buchwald’s rules, Abdin has three business days to submit a reply. In this instance, that would be by December 6.
Wook’s letter also brings to a halt the ticking clock on filing the formal reply of Abdin’s legal complaint until after the conference."

Is it possible that during or after the Judge's Mandatory Pretrial Conference, the case could be dismissed?
Or would it still have to go through the formality of being in the courtroom?
And what would happen if Abdin's lawyers don't respond in time?
:confused:
 
Last edited:
DaveyNY said:
I'm going to assume that this suddenly popped up here because someone attempted to initiate a new thread on the subject at hand...
Or is it just for the link to the article?


It's interesting that Abdin's lawyers have until tomorrow to respond. (Dec. 6th 2018) ...

"Abdin's Reply Due December 6
Under Buchwald’s rules, Abdin has three business days to submit a reply. In this instance, that would be by December 6.
Wook’s letter also brings to a halt the ticking clock on filing the formal reply of Abdin’s legal complaint until after the conference."

Is it possible that during or after the Judge's Mandatory Pretrial Conference, the case could be dismissed?
Or would it still have to go through the formality of being in the courtroom?
And what would happen if Abdin's lawyers don't respond in time?
:confused:
Click to expand...
Any time a Judge makes a ruling on the record, it's 'In the courtroom'. Many times a lawyer will submit a letter/filing as their argument. Not everything is done live/in person - as long as all parties to the case agree that it's okay to do it that way. Saves on client and court costs too.
 
Noname Given said:
Any time a Judge makes a ruling on the record, it's 'In the courtroom'. Many times a lawyer will submit a letter/filing as their argument. Not everything is done live/in person - as long as all parties to the case agree that it's okay to do it that way. Saves on client and court costs too.
Click to expand...
Ah, Ok, Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Gibraltar
Starship Reykjavík – Domum Soli
5 6 7
Replies
123
Views
11K
Gibraltar
Gibraltar
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top