Th..Th..they don't? THAT'S BUUUUULLSHIIIIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ELEVENTYONEMILLIONS!!!!ONE!!!!!
(looks up at camera while shaking fist at sky)
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Th..Th..they don't? THAT'S BUUUUULLSHIIIIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ELEVENTYONEMILLIONS!!!!ONE!!!!!
(looks up at camera while shaking fist at sky)
Great to see Christian turn the tables and start speaking some rational sense. All the hate he's getting surprised me..............for a second. The remaining Axanar acolytes though, are truly deluded and need to pull their head out of that big vat of Axa-ade (or drink more?)
ok I should not have mentioned Brexit in this thread, but for what its worth, people on both sides Leave or Remain have concerns today, even if you voted leave, there is stuff in your life, that you dont know the outcome of post Brexit.Well I was a Vote Leave campaigner and am very happy with the result. But I assure you Sir, I am not responsible for Axanar!
If you want to label over half of the British population ignorant go ahead. Please feel free to sacrifice your own sovereignty to unelected bureaucrats if you want to, but don’t ask other countries to do so.
I didn't see this posted since last night but The G&T Show interviewed Prelude director Christian Gossett. Great interview! It does make me wonder how many more "haters" have to come forward before the Axalites realize their cult leader isn't quite the God he says he is.
You may never find out. Or at least not from this case. If it's settled (pretty likely), not at all. And even if it goes to trial CBS/Paramount don't have to specifically "win" a decision on the copyrightability of the Klingon language in order to win a decision of infringement based on Klingon's inclusion with other copyrighted elements in order to establish "substantial similarity" with Star Trek in order to prove copyright infringement.
I think you're misconstruing that guideline with regard to hate. The guideline says the video can't be hateful. That doesn't mean it can't portray characters displaying hatred, just that the substantial message of the film can't be one of hatefulness. In other words, you could portray two character engaged in a blood feud, but not a film that sends an overall message that, for example, you should hate Jews or whatever.
#4 precludes making custom uniforms if the same uniforms are commercially available from licensees. Since no one sells Vulcan robes under a Star Trek license, you could construct your own. Even Axanar's pre-TOS uniforms would escape this rule because those costumes aren't sold by any CBS licensee.
Where do you get that notion from? From this:
3. The content in the fan production must be original, not reproductions, recreations or clips from any Star Trek production.
I think that simply means you can't use footage from any of the Trek series or films, or stage reproduced (re-shot) scenes from any of the series or films. Just because Memory Alpha appeared in a TOS episode doesn't mean you can't portray it in a fan film produced under these guidelines.
They won't have any evidentiary impact on the case since they prospective. However, if you want to understand why CBS/Paramount sued Axanar (since those folks continue to profess utter shock, shock, I tell you, at why they alone among all fan films might ever have raised CBS/P's ire) examine these guidelines closely. You can pretty much draw a direct line from most of these guidelines to what Axanar was doing.
Only because I was so taken with the interview, I respect all of your team's work on everything you do, and because as you know, I'm secretly in love with you.
Professionally, that is.
Whatever your original works are, make sure they contain not even a whiff of anything Star Trek-related. I am no lawyer, and this shouldn't be construed as legal advice, but as screenwriter myself I would seek to protect my original work as an original work. You might also want to investigate creating an LLC to create a barrier between you, an individual, and the limited liability company that is the producer of the film. I'm sure the Honourable @jespah may have more perspective to offer.
When I read that guideline I immediately thought of Axanar's recent spate of takedown notices on YouTube and Facebook regarding copies of its cobbled-together 2-min. trailer. Under this guideline, they may well lose the right to prevent takedowns of such material since they're not allowed to assert copyright on any element, including original ones, appearing in their film. I think of it as sauce for the goose — you want to use our intellectual property? Well, then, everybody else can use yours, too.
I think that is directly related to Alec claiming to have copyrighted The USS Ares. He then "Licensed" the USS Ares to model kit makers and gaming companies. He issued C&Ds to other non licensed model makers.
The DMCAs on derivative works are a puzzle, eh?
I read it as not permitting DMCAs or sublicenses. I would also just advise (as a friend, not a lawyer!) keeping original content as separate as possible. E. g. who gets to own the Dr. McKennah character in STC?
Those kinds of questions could end up in (cue the music) court.
Our recently created primers gather the most relevant AxaMonitor articles in these topic areas in a central location on our home page:
I see you're a Commodore here. In all caps, you'd be a Commodore 64.
I have several very nice caps, but I do not wear them all at once.I see you're a Commodore here. In all caps, you'd be a Commodore 64.
1. The new 'save the fanfilms' project is probably a fig leaf to allow some shred of dignity to be claimed by Axanar supporters while their project is gutted.
2. That manna is on a cart, and about 100 yards further down the square is an angry crowd headed towards you saying "refund our manna".
The guidelines say "nothing offensive". So,
a) basically everything has to be run by the studios to make sure what they will say (shades of the 60s)
b) pressure groups could claim that any content they don't like is "offensive" and stir up the studio to takedown (shades of the 2000s)
Yes I think you are right. It is entertaining to see that they are doing a judo step out of the way of using the content, while firmly planting their foot in front of anyone trying to come in fast enough to be tripped.
Thats all great but I think a fair number of people would benefit from a metasummary of a few paragraphs right there along with the tabbed stories. A teaser, if you can forgive the suggestion
Actually, no it doesn't. If members of the Production want to make their own uniforms and other costumes for use only in their production, they can. What #4 is saying is: If you buy anything that you didn't make yourself to use in fan production (like a prop Phaser for example); it MIUST be a CBS or Paramount licensed item.
^^^
In other words if there's someone online or at a Convention selling say Star Trek V Hand Phaser replicas that he fabricated himself but aren't officially licensed; you can't say, buy five of those from him and use them in your fan film. (You could ask if he wants to be put 'on staff' for your production; but were that the case, he couldn't charge the production beyond material costs - IE couldn't charge for the time he took to fabricate, etc. - NOR could he sell them any longer - because that would put the Production at risk for objections/legal action.)
If Hasbro makes a toy Phaser that you feel looks good enough and you want to buy five and use them for your fan production <--- That's fine.
Last edited:
I know. And as you mentioned:
It 'is' intellectually fascinating to me, which sometimes I think helps me to distance myself from a despair I experience when I see this again and again surrounding this production and players in it. It's like a microcosm of the world at large. With me actually knowing two persons, one whom I've shared a long friendship with, that seem to disconnect from data processing regarding the matter of this production.
I do not find ability for discussion with them in this matter. And truly I do support anyone supporting either viewpoint in this.... so I am not only willing to listen but have an interest in seeing it from their point of view. However, my experience is when dialogue on this matter is begun the persons I know completely ignore/disregard/ship over without acknowledging what I have said and show a seeming NEED to shut down any part in our conversation that is distasteful to them by blasting me with glares and verbiage that is often non sequitur and pointedly diverting attention away from the specific matter being discussed..... e.g. Mr. Gossett and, his total involvement in making PtA, who was what made it what it is, who speaks out about the production from What He Witnessed For An Extended Period Of Time, who is not 'only' not listened to and calmly disagreed with any why, but instead labeled..... and now vilified?
This cannot even be discussed with the persons I know who support this production. It would be met with verbiage & glares that signify further talk about this will not be tolerated.
People are tribal creatures. That's why politics exists, for instance, or wars. It's all a product of human us vs. them tribalism. The hallmark of tribalism is to defend the tribe even if it means being embracing hypocrisy / cognitive dissonance. The tribe is always right because you identify with the tribe. Cast someone out of the tribe and then they're the enemy even though once they were friend. With Axanerds you're either with them or against them.
- Status