• 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.
giphy.gif
 
Geez, this thead is 1282 pages long as I type this; I have to say, William Shatner's admonition to "Get a Life" has never been more relevant. Worse than a Yahoo News conversation about the 2016 election. How many of you guys even have a horse in this race? OK, my first and last post to this thread, and I'm done. Carry on.
THREAD not thead
 
Judges will often do something like that, and this next conference call might not be so nice.
That's what I assumed, kinda like why are you wasting my time with this shit? Of course Carlos makes a post like that then crashes for the night. #tease
 
That may be an anvil for which he's braced to absorb the impact. So much of this depends on two things:
  1. How truly non-negotiable Peters is about emerging from the case with a decision that would enable him to produce some version of Axanar.
  2. How devoted both Winston and Peters are to trying to make their fair use case.
Given that Peters indicated an expectation two months ago about being prepared to lose at the district court level in favor of appealing to the ninth circuit, the settlement talks may not move him much. On the other hand, this is the first time he's heard an actual judge give him odds on the strength of his case. That may change his mind.

Of course, these two conference calls are attorneys-only; Peters was only there for the face-to-face meeting on October 31. Without Peters present, Winston may not come across as stubborn, but they'll still have to sell Peters on whatever proposal emerges from this next conference call.

It was only at the Oct. 31 meeting that federal magistrate Charles Eick required each side to have someone present from each side who was authorized then and there to strike a deal. The attorneys-only conference calls may not have been made subject to that same constraint.
 
I do not want him to settle.

If he settles. We never see how he spent our money. He certainly didn't spend it on a finished Axanar, something he could have easily done.

That pisses me off.
 
It depends. It's very difficult sometimes when you're faced with a situation that can impact your future. I'm being sued at the moment on a issue relating to a property I own. The dispute has been superseded by an offer on the property so I am trying to settle the case. An old saying is that a lawyer who acts for himself is a fool for a client and it comes from the inability to be truly objective and detached. Case in point I was so sick of fighting it that I was just going to take whatever was a reasonable settlement to get rid of it and get the sale on track, but a colleague asked to take over negotiations today and has already on the way to a more favourable situation that, if I were honest, I would have tried for due to my mental exhaustion and emotion over it all. The irony is that had I not been do belligerent I couldn't settled it months ago on a similar basis.

Where Peters is concerned he too will have that emotional element. There will be an element of denial that he might have to take a commercial decision sooner rather than later that isn't about him making the film but rather as a damage limitation exercise and one that minimises the financial risk of losing, which will inevitably be much higher if he goes to trial, fails AND has damages awarded against him, to say nothing of what he may face after trial. So I can image that right now he is clinging very closely to the idea of fair use, almost as a way of denying the risk, and that in turn means that he is likely unable to negotiate from a realistic standpoint, even if he is being advised to do so. Of course it doesn't help on top of that that he thinks he's a lawyer and a very skilled businessman, as has an ego the size of Canada. So I can imagine his lawyer has their hands tied someone in terms of their ability to negotiate, as if one looks at it objectivity, a fair settlement is one where he gets to walk away with a little financial damage as possible, not one where he gets to make any version of the picture (well, unless it's fan guideline compliant).
 
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