• 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.
The point is that none of that has anything to do with the fact that he is right: Star Trek belongs to CBS/Paramount, they can enforce their IP rights however they want, and any calls by a fanfilm producer to protest via boycott or some other scheme to financially "pug nish" C/P just proves their lawyers' contention that fanfilms are a threat to their business.

And since there is no logical rebuttal to such clearly factual statements, whoever runs Axanar's Twitter fired off a lazy personal attack against the guy making them.
Well said!
Meanwhile I don't know if it has been brought up in here but Renegades released a statement that they are leaving the Star Trek union.
First is was Brexit by Britain, Today is Trexit by Renegades
 
I'm much more interested in how Axanar retweets every threat to boycott CBS and Paramount, then claims not to encourage any boycott. Which reminds me of how Trump says he doesn't encourage violence at his rallies, let me tell you.

It won't end well for them. They've gone from poking the bear to branding the bear, while the bear is still standing over them jaws open and claws swinging.
 
Nick and Mike sat down with Christian Gossett, Director and Writer for Prelude to Axanar,. Chris talks about his experiences working on Prelude, working with Alec Peters, and where Axanar went wrong.​

http://www.gandtshow.com/g-t-show-sl-christian-gossett/
And now, according to Axanar Management, Prelude would've been terrible were it not for RMB. Gossett "Flaked" apparently. I'm not posting links, surely by now nobody needs them?

This ongoing routine of of slating people who speak out against Alec Peters is so predictable it doesn't exactly suggest the Axanar script would've been an original piece of work, the guy clearly lacks imagination.
 
Prelude would've been terrible were it not for RMB
You mean it could have been worse?

Seriously, I watched that again a couple days ago and was struck at how cliché the plot / script / dialog was. The acting was good and the CGI was great, but all that doesn't help overcome a so-so story.
 
You mean it could have been worse?

Seriously, I watched that again a couple days ago and was struck at how cliché the plot / script / dialog was. The acting was good and the CGI was great, but all that doesn't help overcome a so-so story.
Perhaps I should've used the word 'unsuccessful'. Like it or not it was that, otherwise none of this would've happened. And I was only paraphrasing Axanars tweets anyway.
 
The Axanar list probably would be attractive to scam artists...



You could see it in the body language when he was asked when he had any last words about the matter.



This is something I am wondering about. How can the studios tell people they may not take full actions to protect their work, if some protection is automatic as soon as a script is set down? Isn't this somehow tortuous interference, (of necessity and by silence) acknowledging people have copyright automatically, but saying they may not claim the full rights thereby unless they wish to be sued? I could see someone making the argument that you can't concede the first without allowing the second, since the second was never intended to be a separable part of the law you are acknowledging by conceding copyright-by-fixing.

I agree; the list probably would be attractive to scammers. They do buy mailing lists. This is one of the reasons why we see such awful, obvious spam. The bar is set exceptionally low, so if anyone falls for it, their name goes on the list as someone who will buy or download anything.

To address your other point, yes, it is going to be interesting - but tortious interference refers to interference with contract, which is not what we have here. I believe the intention is to keep fan filmmakers from asserting copyright (or DMCA take down notices) for items already copyrighted by the IP holders. So, I can't assert copyright over the Enterprise. But there is more to it. E. g. if I made a knockoff of the Ares, well, the Ares is purely derivative of various copyrighted properties. When it comes to the designer of the Ares (hi, Sean :)), under the guidelines, I believe he would not be able to assert copyright. But that makes sense. You aren't supposed to be able to copyright derivative works; the guidelines merely codify that. That may be an area of law which comes into play (no pun intended) within the next decade or so, though. In our remix/sample/everybody's a star/24 hours must be filled somehow culture, more people remix and repurpose art than ever before.

But it's tricky with the McKennah character. Is she based on anyone? Extremely loosely, I suppose she is based on Troi, in that they are both female ship's counselors. After that, though, the parallels just plain aren't there. Furthermore, female counselor characters exist in other properties. Hell, doesn't Barbra Streisand play one in (IIRC) Prince of Tides? It's quite simply not a unique set of character traits, particularly as McKennah isn't alien or part-alien. Hence STC may be able to claim that character as copyrightable. The guidelines should not be able to prevent them from registering that character, I believe. I think that would make for an interesting question for Mr. Van Citters when he appears on Engage. Can McKennah be copyrighted? And if she can be, then, by extension, can Ashley Robinson's character in Red Shirt Diaries also be copyrighted?
 
The guidelines should not be able to prevent them from registering that character, I believe. I think that would make for an interesting question for Mr. Van Citters when he appears on Engage. Can McKennah be copyrighted? And if she can be, then, by extension, can Ashley Robinson's character in Red Shirt Diaries also be copyrighted?

Again, citing the Copyright Office's regulations, "The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material." In the case of something like "Red Shirt Diaries"--which is clearly parody and thus fair use--I don't see why the original material contained therein, including Robinson's character, would not fall under copyright. CBS and Paramount can make whatever statements they want; it does not change how the law works.
 
In the case of something like "Red Shirt Diaries"--which is clearly parody and thus fair use--I don't see why the original material contained therein, including Robinson's character, would not fall under copyright. CBS and Paramount can make whatever statements they want; it does not change how the law works.

Even if it wasn't fair use I would think the original part of the derivative work is still copyrightable in the fan-author's name.

After all, the guidelines don't change any law. All they are is a unilateral promise or pseudo-promise from CBS/P that they won't sue you if you do X, Y, Z. They can't stop you from breaking the guidelines. All they can do (and to be fair, it is serious action) is sue you if you don't comply. But just because you broke the guidelines and they sued doesn't guarantee a CBS/P win (even if it is likely).

Really, rights-wise the guidelines change nothing. CBS could do anything to fan films pre-guidelines than it can do post-guideline. What the actual changes are is that if you do X, Y, Z you have an excellent expectation CBS/P won't sue you (you had no such expectation before) and that if you don't do X, Y, Z you probably face a (significantly?) higher chance of getting sued than before.
 
Really, rights-wise the guidelines change nothing. CBS could do anything to fan films pre-guidelines than it can do post-guideline. What the actual changes are is that if you do X, Y, Z you have an excellent expectation CBS/P won't sue you (you had no such expectation before) and that if you don't do X, Y, Z you probably face a (significantly?) higher chance of getting sued than before.
Agreed.

I would add that enough of the fan community understand what is presently going on and have a pretty clear idea as to what crosses the line (technically all fan productions) and what is WAY over the line and completely unacceptable.
 
Thanks for all the clarifications on what the CBS/P 'no filing claims' clause may mean. So I take away that the derivative works' unique characters could be registered legally, and CBS/P can't take away that right. But CBS/P says if you want to avoid a lawsuit you better not do even that if the character is part of a work with derivative elements?

And does this mean if you have a Vulcan character, the admixture of Vulcan features makes any character of any sort a derivative work you can't register before the law?
 
Thanks for all the clarifications on what the CBS/P 'no filing claims' clause may mean. So I take away that the derivative works' unique characters could be registered legally, and CBS/P can't take away that right. But CBS/P says if you want to avoid a lawsuit you better not do even that if the character is part of a work with derivative elements?
Registration confers certain legal benefits in the event you want to file an infringement lawsuit. That's why the registration process exists in the first place. While copyright exists from the moment of publication, failing to register can make infringement more difficult to prove in court.
I read the CBS/Paramount guidelines as an attempt to discourage anyone from registering a copyright that could subsequently be used against them. It is not uncommon for people to sue major studios claiming they stole an idea. This is why studios never accept unsolicited scripts from writers who are not represented by an agent. (Ironically, TNG was one of the exceptions to that rule, at least during Michael Piller's tenure.) The last thing you want is for your writing staff to independently come up with an idea that is similar to one previously submitted--and copyrighted--by an outside party.
 
And does this mean if you have a Vulcan character, the admixture of Vulcan features makes any character of any sort a derivative work you can't register before the law?
"Your honor, my client insists that his character, 'Spack', is not an alien. He is just a very stoic elf. Humanity discovered that elves were hiding on Earth this whole time, and then allowed them to join their space adventures. The story just hadn't come to the exposition that would fill these details in, yet...." :rommie:
 
"Your honor, my client insists that his character, 'Spack', is not an alien. He is just a very stoic elf. Humanity discovered that elves were hiding on Earth this whole time, and then allowed them to join their space adventures. The story just hadn't come to the exposition that would fill these details in, yet...." :rommie:
I'm hoping if this does go to trial we get a Roger Meyers, Jr., moment in court.
838270.jpg
 
Who knows, maybe mindsets will change and people will be willing to have shows where the actors speak really quickly and the like. Stranger things have happened. Look at the insanity (and I do mean *insanity*) that took over college debate competitions. Just go 50% faster, rather than 200% faster. No doubt actors could still express nuance in the form. It might even get a new name, like "fanfic genre" for the unique characteristics required by this limitation.

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

It does seem to improve the Axanar Trailer :lol:

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