• 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 2 - Electric Boogaloo-Fanboys gone WILD-too many hyphens

Do you enjoy pie?

  • Yes, sweet, please

    Votes: 79 40.9%
  • Yes, savory, please

    Votes: 42 21.8%
  • Yes, any kind

    Votes: 80 41.5%
  • No, I'm a heathen

    Votes: 37 19.2%

  • Total voters
    193
Part 2 : When the walls... Came tumblin' down... More subtitles then you can shake a stick at...

Good old Peters... The gift that keeps on giving... and giving... and giving...

Still 30 days... I think this joke has run it's course... back to... WHERE'S THE MOVIE ALAC ?
 
Apropos of nothing, I was just going through some of the Roddenberry documents and I discovered the following in a September 10, 1968 report by de Forest Research on "Whom Gods Destroy":

Garth . . . . No conflicts. Source name for character: Thomas Garth, 1872-1939.​

Who was this guy (link)

Then further this...

Garth of Titan — Titan is the name of Saturn’s largest moon. By Star Trek time, 200 years in future, our solar system will be suburbia. Is this meant to indicate that Garth comes from Titan? If meant to indicate an exploit, suggest: Garth of Izar.

The Titans are destined to be the Master race — See note for 2/5. Suggest: Izarians.​

So Izar could have meant an "exploit", and certainly a race, but not necessarily a planet. Some other tidbits...

The Titans are peace-loving members of the Federation — See above.

Axanar — Provided by Research. Mentioned in Court Martial​

So apparently, de Forest's researcher coined the name.

Axanar...Peace Mission — See above. Kirk holds a service decoration: Palm Leaf of Axanar Peace Mission.
Oh, and Garth's first name is Aloysius.





I kid. ;)
 
Last edited:
Two points about the first new case.

1) Peters owes $26,000 in attorneys fees? After this long!? Why hasn't said attorney not chased after this?

2) Does the purchasing of the DeBord judgement by Armstrong means she essentially paid him what he was owed to chase it in court herself?

My non legal trained mind is confused! :)
 
Two points about the first new case.

1) Peters owes $26,000 in attorneys fees? After this long!? Why hasn't said attorney not chased after this?

Welcome to Civil tort law (it's why Civil Attorney's try like hell to ONLY take cases they believe are winnable and make agreements to take their fees from the Judgement). However attorney's will weigh whether time spent in pursuing said fees will be worth it as opposed to just moving on to another case with a better chance of ROI.

2) Does the purchasing of the DeBord judgement by Armstrong means she essentially paid him what he was owed to chase it in court herself?

It means: She gave the person who has the Judgement (in Civil cases the Plaintiff may indeed receive a Judgement, but it's up to the Plaintiff to 'collect' IE said Plaintiff can now legally file garnishments/liens, etc; but that takes time and more money to FIND sources of income to garnish, properties to file liens against, etc.) a lump sum of money (some percentage of said Judgement); and now she has full rights to go after the whole thing.

My non legal trained mind is confused! :)
^^^
Yeah, the collection side is something most TV shows/films don't get into because it would make the ending depressing. Yes, he/she received a multi-million dollar judgement; but were they to show how it usually plays out, an entity who has the Judgement suddenly declares bankruptcy, or has been liquidating assets all through the proceedings and has nothing left to garnish, or put a lien against and starts doing everything in cash, etc.
 
@Noname Given

1) Got it. Although I find that depressing. Yes, some attorneys might be rich and some not so, but that figure is a full years wage to some people!

2) So not the full figure. Got it. :techman:
 
Jonathan Lane's Interlude fan-film is to cost nearly $19,000 to make:
https://fanfilmfactor.com/2019/05/17/my-star-trek-fan-film-is-going-to-cost-how-much/
:wtf:
"It's gotta be Axanar quality," AP told him, "It costs what it costs. People will accept that."
:wtf:
AXANAR DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST YET!!! There's no way to gauge the quality of a film that DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST YET! Which means there's no way to use it's quality as a standard to measure up to, because IT DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST YET!

There aren't enough faces and palms in the world to facepalm this level of bullshit.
 
In AxaMonitor Daily's late edition May 15:
Two new fronts have opened in Axanar producer Alec Peters’ legal wars. Legal papers filed this week in Nevada and Iowa feature a couple old names you’ll recognize as Peters’ legal bluster against former Axanar director Robert Meyer Burnett may be backfiring on him.

These new cases — backed up by actual evidence filed in court, unlike Peters’ claims against Burnett — threaten Peters with tens of thousands in damages. He may even lose some of his vaunted props collection. Read the preview, or sign up for AxaMonitor Daily.

Well to someone buying up that judgement against LFIM, I have this.......

giphy.gif



To all the rest of that.......

giphy.gif



In all seriousness though, if both cases end up with verdicts against LFIM, I hope this is the beginning of the downward spiral for him (that will culminate in him sliding off the face of the earth and shutting his trap for good). There's only so much stuff he has that can be sold off/pawned/garnished to mollify this CF he's created.

Also, with the ever growing list of people he's manage to alienate/piss off, I would think that the list of people willing to let him crash in their basement or similarly support him, has to start evaporating at some point as well (if it hasn't already).
 
Welcome to Civil tort law (it's why Civil Attorney's try like hell to ONLY take cases they believe are winnable and make agreements to take their fees from the Judgement). However attorney's will weigh whether time spent in pursuing said fees will be worth it as opposed to just moving on to another case with a better chance of ROI.



It means: She gave the person who has the Judgement (in Civil cases the Plaintiff may indeed receive a Judgement, but it's up to the Plaintiff to 'collect' IE said Plaintiff can now legally file garnishments/liens, etc; but that takes time and more money to FIND sources of income to garnish, properties to file liens against, etc.) a lump sum of money (some percentage of said Judgement); and now she has full rights to go after the whole thing.


^^^
Yeah, the collection side is something most TV shows/films don't get into because it would make the ending depressing. Yes, he/she received a multi-million dollar judgement; but were they to show how it usually plays out, an entity who has the Judgement suddenly declares bankruptcy, or has been liquidating assets all through the proceedings and has nothing left to garnish, or put a lien against and starts doing everything in cash, etc.
Yes. Judgments are a species of investment. You can sell 'em. You can sell settlements, too. So, say you were granted $10,000,000 over the course of 40 years (e. g. $250,000 per year without going into interest -- I won't so as to simplify matters). There are plenty of people who need/want cash now. They may have a disabled child cor spouse who needs care for the rest of their days, which is often why settlements like that are stretched out for decades. Of course it also makes them far more affordable to the defendant(s).

But people want the $$ now, because either they've got expenses or they don't give a damn about their sick/injured child or spouse and want the payout yesterday, or any of a myriad of other reasons. So they take an immediate settlement of $1,000,000, let's say. They'll take 10 cents on the dollar because they like the idea of being "rich" and they aren't seeing the forest for the trees.

Those folks might end up blowing the $$ (that's why annuity settlements exist in the first place; to keep people from doing just that) or get rooked or the like.

The buyer gets much of the remainder because, as @Noname Given said, they're better at collecting. And they're a lot better at playing the long game. The buyer assumes his/her company will be around for another 4 decades or at least a successor entity will, so they don't mind waiting. It's the ultimate subscription service, like a Patreon for those who prey on tort victims.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top