by jstevens-967-140993 » 12 hours ago (Tue Jul 26 2016 01:21:29)
"Wrong on almost every level."
Wow, so sweeping. You must be a genius (or a CBS lawyer). Well, let me answer your ridiculous defense of CBS...
Now, I am not some bumpkin who has just come in from the woods. I have run some large corporations that had extensive intellectual property portfolios, including patents, trademarks and copyrights. I have fought huge legal battles over trademarks and patents. I have been there, both in CBS's place and as a defendant. I run a company today that lives on IP. And I know the "legal" advise CBS has gotten because I have attorneys who tell me the same things - litigate against the infringers! Forget the business case, protect your rights!
Experience has taught me a simple pearl of wisdom: "Sometimes things are legal but they are not right (or make no business sense); and sometimes the right thing is not legal."
Apply this to CBS - They may have the LEGAL right to sue these people but it is wrong and, in the long run, economically stupid. Piss off your customers and you will have no customers.
Now onto your legal reasoning. You are technically correct that copyrights and trademarks are different but they both share a concept called "Fair Use". And the Copyright Office (and underlying law) makes clear that a CBS copyright "does not extend to titles, names, slogans or short phrase", such as "Star Trek" or "Beam Me Up, Scotty". See
www.copyright.gov/circs/circ34.pdf. So much for your statement about making money off the Star Trek name!
Ideas also cannot be copyrighted, such as the idea of our better future in the 23rd century in the United Federation of Planets.
Now, under Fair Use there is a lot of wiggle room, especially for "transformative works". As you may know, there is a 4 point test to determine Fair Use. One of the key points is the commercial aspect - was the work done for a profit? (This is not dispositive but can have a huge effect upon the outcome.)
What damage does this new work do to CBS? Does it harm their new movie? I would answer that "fan" fiction and movies just help maintain the franchise, to keep Star Trek in people's minds, especially since CBS is not catering to the "classic" fan base.
And as to the "Kickstarter" campaign as the catalyst for this lawsuit, give me a break. Does CBS think that fan movies cost nothing to make? Other fan groups solicit money directly from fans or sell posters or props. Some people put up their own money. Money is fungible, it has to come from somewhere. All these people did was use an existing online fund raising site instead of selling posters or asking for donations. CBS should be impressed that so many people donated through Kickstarter. A lot on money was raised but that just shows the appetite for classic Trek. (OK, so some guy may have made a few dollars off the Kickstarter campaign - is that money that CBS lost? Nope, and we don't even know if that is true. Its just complete conjecture. And unimportant in the big scheme of things.)
CBS will lose this fight, in Court and in the court of public opinion (whatever the outcome, CBS loses). JJ Abrams knows that well and has tried to show CBS the stupidity of this action. What is CBS's best outcome? Win the lawsuit and seize the Kickstarter money? Take the fans donations? That'll go over well! Or maybe get a judgment against the movie's producer(s) and seize their homes? Bankrupt them? Again, are they really THAT stupid? Destroy a fan and the mob will destroy you, CBS. What is your "exit strategy", CBS?
The best thing that CBS could do (which would require some changes in the legal department) would be to cut a deal with the movie's producers to let them do their movie, dismiss the lawsuit and then stream the movie on the new CBS portal. In fact, establish a fan portal at CBS where all fan movies and shows can be showcased. Make CBS THE PLACE to go for Star Trek, official and fan. You could add trailers to other CBS shows as a bonus and get great optics to a loyal fan base. Show the fans you love them. Let people make good content for no cost to CBS and generate excitement for Star Trek. This is the profitable solution - it gives the fans an outlet, puts more Star Trek content out there (content CBS does not want to make) and does not piss off the base.
Recall that the fans (and the businesses that fed them) kept Star Trek alive when Paramount had abandoned the franchise. Without them Star Trek might be just an old 1960s TV show. How about the conventions? People made loads of money off the Star Trek conventions, especially the promoters. The stars also made lots of money, upwards of $50K for an appearance. And all the vendors who sold stuff to the fans. Lots and lots of money changed hands. Why didn't CBS (or Paramount or Viacom) sue them! Because they understood that this industry was saving Star Trek. The fan movies (and series) do the same thing. And they take no money out of CBS's pocket.
And what happens when the inevitable fan backlash comes, when fans start organizing to boycott CBS and the official Start Trek movies and new TV series? CBS hopes the new Star Trek series generates profit for their new streaming service but what if the boycott comes? Then what? There is no good outcome to the suit, no deep pocket to take (if CBS wins). If CBS loses, think of the damage the brand. And the process creates bad PR for the brand, just as CBS launches a new streaming product!
Will CBS do the right and profitable thing? I doubt it since the lawyers are in charge and historically lawyers make bad business people. At some point, CBS will quietly drop the suit when they realize the damage to their reputation - but the damage will have been done. CBS has never been a brilliant company. This lawsuit just proves the point.
