CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[Franklin]

Typically, you have to prove not only that what was said is false, but then prove damages. Like it cost you a job, or a raise, or you got a fine because of it.

Like, Alec Peters claiming I said that Axanar funds were used to purchase his townhouse in Florida. I never said it. It's false. It's damaging my reputation, and if there were actual monetary damages, I might have a case for defamation. His latest post that I have more than one chin? He might think it's an insult, but I'm like, "Wow! The first truthful thing he's said about me!" And it's truthful, so it can't be defamation.

But then you also have to show that it's not just an opinion, and actually a misstatement of fact. For instance, someone calling Alec a douche is not defamatory. But if you called him a con-man or a fraudster, that could be defamatory, especially if he isn't one. So be careful about words like that ... there is nothing that proves that he scammed anyone or defrauded anyone. The only thing that's on the table right now are multiple allegations of copyright infringement, so at the worst at the moment, he's an alleged copyright infringer.

Even after all that, you still have to show damages.

Now this does change all the time, thanks to new laws and case law, and I'm not a lawyer. But working in media for a long time, you have to keep up on libel, so I do speak with some experience here.

Well said.

I would just add that in this case, because what has happened to him has created publicity and news, of however narrow a scope, Peters could be considered a "limited public figure" or an "involuntary public figure," both of which make it harder for him to sue for defamation of character and win. As long as the remarks a person makes are within the scope of the actions which made him a public figure, they would be protected. For truly public figures (think real celebrities), the person suing would also have to show that the remarks were made with actual malice intended, and not just false statements.

Of course, none of that means he couldn't try to sue and a person would have to spend several thousand dollars to get a lawyer to have the case dismissed on the grounds above, or at least win the case should it get as far as court.

So, let's be careful out there.

 

[carlosp]

Tim of Borg published an audio on youtube about axanar's problems. its his commentary, and about 20 mins of having his computer read some of the key critical articles. It might reach a few fans, only about 290 views so far.

I'm sure Tim means well but that YouTube "video" is a slog to get through. Good luck to anyone who tries.

 

[carlosp]

I don't think they could prevent him from selling props, he seems to have a sizable collection of his own. They can bar him from participating at officially sanctioned and licensed prop auctions and such.

Props are not derivative works. They ARE the works, just being resold, which is a legit business. They are not relevant to a copyright lawsuit. The prop company is not named in the suit, so the judgment would not apply to it.

 

[Indysolo]

Prizes include getting sued by CBS and Paramount and getting your name in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety.

Neil

 

[Franklin]

Prizes include getting sued by CBS and Paramount and getting your name in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety.

Neil

What the hell is going on here, man? I guess the only real advice his lawyers have given him is to hold off on production until the matter is settled, but otherwise continue as nothing is wrong. WTF. Really. WTF.

Maybe this is supposed to "fan up" the production a bit more. Certainly isn't very professional.

 

[Michael Hinman]

I'm sure Tim means well but that YouTube "video" is a slog to get through. Good luck to anyone who tries.

While I'm impressed he convinced Stephen Hawking to do the reading ... I think it would be better if he read it himself, and just commented as he read.

You hear radio shows do it a lot ... they are reading a story and providing commentary along the way. It's technically NOT Fair Use (because even though you are injecting commentary, you still can't reproduce something in such a large quantity), but I doubt anyone would ever give someone grief over it.

 

[Noname Given]

Prizes include getting sued by CBS and Paramount and getting your name in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety.

Neil

I cannot see ANY of his lawyers being happy about this. WTF? Is he going to go to court saying: "See HOW MANY people are participating in Star Trek copyright infringement - yet you're suing ME only?"

I just don't understand how anyone being sued for copyright infringement is effectively enticing others to do the same while said person is being sued. Does Mr. Peters have any real grasp on the reality of his situation? Hint: If you are trying to reach any sort of settlement with the other side it behooves you NOT TO CONTINUE to engage in overt acts or behavior that demonstrate you have no intention of stopping the type of acts/behavior that got you sued in the first place. (This on top of the recent 'Axacon' and Ares open house announcements.)

(Maybe Mr. Peters is thinking he can plead insanity; but there's no such defense in a civil lawsuit.)

 

[BillJ]

I wonder if a second legal team is coming in because Winston and Strawn has told Peters there's no way to win?

 

[Mudd]

I wonder if a second legal team is coming in because Winston and Strawn has told Peters there's no way to win?

They're troubled by the fact that he always wants to take meetings sitting in that damned Captain's chair, eating an apple.

 

[muCephi]

Prizes include getting sued by CBS and Paramount and getting your name in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety.

Neil

looks like before, when the fundraisers said "there's always some risk of being sued", instead of "with our approach there is an almost guaranteed outcome of being sued".

he's telling them to invest their time/resources again, again without representing accurately the severity of the risk of failure.

not very respectful of fans. he should at least wait till he has won.

 

[Zaminhon]

(This on top of the recent 'Axacon' and Ares open house announcements.)

I'm wondering who is still aboard to run those events?

 

[JD]

Prizes include getting sued by CBS and Paramount and getting your name in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety.

Neil

 

[Jedi_Master]

Prizes include getting sued by CBS and Paramount and getting your name in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety.

Neil

I love the fact that he isn't pretending to be discreet. He even ADDS species that are protected under copyright and that weren't listed in the original lawsuit. What possible purpose would that serve?

 

[Franklin]

I love the fact that he isn't pretending to be discreet. He even ADDS species that are protected under copyright and that weren't listed in the original lawsuit. What possible purpose would that serve?

One hundred fifty thousand dollars here, $150,000 there. Eh. Hey, in for a penny, in for a pound, I say.

 

[urbandefault]

I love the fact that he isn't pretending to be discreet. He even ADDS species that are protected under copyright and that weren't listed in the original lawsuit. What possible purpose would that serve?

He must think it's all part of the method, but as far as I can see it's just madness.

 

[Jedi_Master]

One hundred fifty thousand dollars here, $150,000 there. Eh. Hey, in for a penny, in for a pound, I say.

More like "In for ten, in for twenty - to - life"

 

[Hallgarth]

Prizes include getting sued by CBS and Paramount and getting your name in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety.

Neil

 

[carlosp]

I think perhaps you misunderstood my comment. I am fully aware of the current legal non-existence of Ares (as far as we know) and that it is little more than a pet name for the studio within the defendant Axanar Productions. There was some speculation upthread about what Alec might do even if Axanar and Alec go bankrupt in connection with the lawsuit where he could incorporate Ares as a new commercial start-up entity and ta-da! he's back in business and ready to crowdfund again to keep the lights on. In fact, I suspect that's been the plan for Ares for quite some time based on something Terry (or maybe RMB) said somewhere about how they were REALLY looking forward to equity crowdfunding opening to non-accredited investors this May.

My question was more along the lines of how much distance would there need to be between Alec and Ares should the CBS/P lawsuit go fully against him and he is barred from "participating or assisting" in any Star Trek fan production that uses the Star Trek Copyrighted Works. It seems likely that CBS/P would not be happy if, after such a judgment against him, Alec is enjoying any financial benefit from their IP. So, if Alec is founder/chair/CEO/majority stockholder of Ares it seems they'd need to find a creative way to wall him off if they want to do any business with any ST fan productions.

I apologize; I appeared to indeed have misconstrued your the premise of your comment now that I reread it.

In answer to your hypothetical, if Peters does create a new and separate company, Ares Studios, that rents itself out to other productions, that is not the same thing as materially assisting or participating in further infringement of copyrighted works. Studios renting space don't ask to see the script or approve the sets or do any kind of work determining whether the people renting their facility have secured the legal rights to produce what they're producing. In my opinion, that imposes an undue legal burden, as unfair as trying to hold a grip legally responsible for the copyright status of the production for which he or she is hanging lights. But if Ares (with Alec as a knowing owner/partner) goes any further than just renting out space or contracting out for mere technical services, then it could be in trouble as a company, and Alec Peters as an individual, depending on what the terms of the judgment or settlement are in the current case.

 

[carlosp]

More like "In for ten, in for twenty - to - life"

Interestingly, the $150,000 per infringement figure is legally significant. According to copyright law, that amount is justified when the infringement is judged to be willful. Like when the entire Internet is filled with you saying you respect CBS' copyright until you declare you don't.

 

[Franklin]

He must think it's all part of the method, but as far as I can see it's just madness.

I see what you did there.