using this creative freedom with a popular product category would be what a serious startup business would do. if you insist on only using the ingredients of a big mac, in the order the ingredients are usually stacked, and sell it under golden arches with a clown as your marketing gimmick, in exchange for donations, just leaving off the name "McDonalds", you may have a problem.
Didn't they even want to get established Trek writers to do the novels?
Precisely.
I can see how the licensing implications might have been the Red Line that Axanar finally crossed. The studio may have been willing to look the other way with a fan film, as they had with other fan films, but when they started branching out into other endeavors where companies were paying them for the rights for Star Trek that Axanar was assuming for free, that became a problem because Axanar was devaluing the license. A licensee would say, "CBS, why are we paying you for this, when they're doing the same thing for free?"
Didn't they even want to get established Trek writers to do the novels?
More so with this being the 50th anniversary lot of Licensing going on in the next few monthsAlso makes you wonder if licensees played a role in their decision to file suit, perhaps putting pressure on them to act. Probably not, but I do know that most license agreements (particularly exclusive ones) include a provision requiring the rights holder to shutdown instances of infringement that involve their product category.
I could certainly imagine Simon & Schuster invoking this provision if CBS wasn't taking the initiative on their own.
FYI, if you use Dropbox, it's an excellent way to host one-off documents like this. Just put it into your Public folder, right click and get the shareable link.@Michael Hinman and all who are interested - I have the stipulation. But I don't have a place to host it. It's a PDF. I can email it to whoever wants it, but aside from the titles and signatures, this is all it says -
Ridiculous fantasy. Like the movie.In one of the podcasts, Peters mentioned that "they had their own licensing program"
How does that work???
Another line of income that doesn't show up anywhere on the financial report.
In one of the podcasts, Peters mentioned that "they had their own licensing program"
How does that work???
Another line of income that doesn't show up anywhere on the financial report.
From what I've seen so far, it wouldn't surprise a bit.What gets me about this is that any license agreement worth a damn will include an indemnification-- a legal acknowledgement that the licensor owns the copyright on the material completely and undisputed, and will protect the licensee from litigation in the event of a challenge.
Very few legitimate manufacturers will sign an agreement without this indemnification.
Now, Axanar's people are pretty arrogant about what they think they have a right to do, I can't believe they'd be so bold as to claim they own the copyright-- on a legally binding agreement.
I bet they will claim that they are only licensing products of their own original design, using the "add-on" defense, interestingly, their lawyer, Erin Ranahan, successfully argued in the recent gaming company copyright case.
Unfortunately, I don't think that will work. The products are clearly derived from CBS copyrighted works, relying on the same look and feel, far beyond a product that merely attaches to products from the protected IP.
Well then, we'll just take our coffee some place else!Except that in the case of a legitimate licensor, they have documentation to prove they own the copyright. Legally recognized documentation, often registered, and up to and including trademarks.
Somehow I doubt they have this sort of paperwork to back up any such claims. It's one thing if, say, Marvel approached me to make an Iron Man coffee mug. I'd trust that yeah, they own Iron Man. Even then, if I asked i'm sure they'd supply me with trademark and copyright filings to show they do.
But if some guy approaches me claiming he owns this thing called "Axanar" that looks an awful lot like Star Trek, and is clearly set in the Star Trek universe (by their own admission)-- you can bet i'd ask for some paperwork that attests to their ownership, to minimize the risk of a lawsuit from Star Trek, before I signed any licensing contracts.
But if some guy approaches me claiming he owns this thing called "Axanar" that looks an awful lot like Star Trek, and is clearly set in the Star Trek universe (by their own admission)-- you can bet i'd ask for some paperwork that attests to their ownership, to minimize the risk of a lawsuit from Star Trek, before I signed any licensing contracts.
I don't think big-time companies are the target of Axanar's licensing program. They're hoping to make money off gullible fans/wannabe licensees.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.