CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

True, people did know. But, most of those people are within the Star Trek Fan Community. I'm not sure how that's a media circus.

 

From having read both the dismissal of the MTD, and Jespah's analysis. I can't see them getting anything past Judge Klausner.

 

Your instincts are correct that these provisions, like the rest of the Constitution, only apply to limit actions by the government and not private individuals. However, how it comes into play in a civil case – and for the life of me I cannot remember the exact name of the case where this was stated, but I read it in law school and I will look it up later – is that it is the action by a court to enforce the rights of the private individual that amounts to a government action that triggers the limits of the Constitution. In that case, if I remember correctly, there was some sort of discriminatory restrictive covenant relating to real estate – I think it was that African-Americans could not buy houses in a given neighborhood, and this was before various civil rights legislation – and, while the actions of the private individuals in refusing to sell for discriminatory purposes were not themselves unconstitutional, if a court were to rule in their favor, the court would be engaging in government action that infringed the Constitutional rights of the parties who were not permitted to buy houses.

So Axanar is basically telling the court that, if it finds in favor of CBS and keeps them from creating their film – which they allege is noninfringing – those actions by the court will amount to a violation of their free-speech rights under the First Amendment, would result in a taking of property under the Fifth amendment, etc.

EDIT- Here you go - Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S.1 (1948),

"The United States Supreme Court held "[T]he restrictive racially-based restrictive covenants are not, on their face, invalid under the Fourteenth Amendment." However, while private parties may voluntarily abide by the terms of such a restrictive covenant, they may not seek judicial enforcement of such a covenant because enforcement by the courts would constitute state action. Since such state action would necessarily be discriminatory, the enforcement of a racially based restrictive covenant in a state court would violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."

M

 

Thanks for the explanation. This case is teaching me things I never thought I'd learn about, or even be interested in.

 

So..."if you don't let me steal their property you're depriving me of my rights as an American citizen?"

Seriously?

Don't the American citizens who own and work for CBS and Paramount have the exact same rights, and wouldn't they be violated in the exact same way if the court rules in favor of Axanar?

How is everybody staying so calm about this? It's fucking piracy!

 

Look, if I got all upset every time Axanar said something stupid or made a goofy legal argument, I would've been dead from hypertension in February.

M

 

If they pull that "Sovereign Citizen!" bullshit, I don't know if I'll laugh my ass off or...yeah, that'd be the only option really

 

How much more high profile does it need to go? It's been written up in the industry rags. Should it be front page news on the New York Times?

 

As I understand it, the judge recently listened to a rock music case. Think a little smoke and mirrors will dazzle him?

Its HILARIOUS piracy, that's how

Depends what you do with it

 

You know, something has been nagging me about tucked in at 8 Alec story.

Any adult would understand how basically ridiculous it actually is to put this forward in a federal case that could become a precedent and cited, and studied in law schools.

So is it that W&S is so very exasperated with their client at this point that it is leaking out involuntarily?

 

Yeah, there's not much else left, is there?

For anyone who's found themselves having a surprising amount of fun reading legal documents during this long process, one of my favourite legal decisions ever (I'm a government librarian, and a lot of my work involves supporting our legal staff) takes a long, detailed look at sovereign citizens and related types: Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII). No connection to any work requests, but it caught my eye and I had to read the whole thing.

This is a Canadian decision, but the Canadians who buy into the freemen/sovereign stuff tend to draw on American-published material. In four years this decision has been cited nearly a hundred times in Canadian courts, and it's drawn the attention of lawyers and judges in other countries, including the US and the UK.

Long but fascinating read about people who believe obviously wrong things, believe they can get away with anything they want, have no understanding of the actual law, and have a ridiculous sense of entitlement. So, not like anyone who's been discussed around here, right?

 

*So* not like anyone who's been discussed around here

 

I didn't say it wasn't covered in the news. I'm disputing that it's a media circus, and that it should stop CBS/Paramount from continuing with the suit. There have been higher profile suits that didn't end because of the publicity.

 

I fell out of my chair laughing from reading AP's "bio" in W&S's latest filing. Completely ridiculous.

 

I can NOT!!! wait to read this :-D

 

Read Axanar's Proposed Fan Film Guidelines
Alec Peters tries to rally other fan productions to back his vision for new limits on fan films that wouldn't be needed if not for Axanar. AxaMonitor has a copy of the guidelines Peters worked on this week with other fan producers.

"With CBS/Paramount drafting fan film guidelines, Axanar's Alec Peters has reached out to a half-dozen fan productions for their support of rules Peters wants the studios to accept, and isn't having much luck. The rules include an end to crowdfunding and a limit on films' running times."​

Read more »

 

Oh, Alec... grasping for anything he can find to hold on to as he swirls through the grand flushing toilet bowl of this Axanar debacle.

Delicious.

 

But didn't he already break every one of those rules, except for run-time which he would have broken given the script was for, what, a 90-120 minute long feature film???

 

That's the most delicious part of all this. Peters has been and remains a goddamn two-faced, single-minded hypocrite.