• 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.
hqdefault.jpg
 
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.

no seeds

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

Also 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.
 
Also 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.
More so with this being the 50th anniversary lot of Licensing going on in the next few months
 
@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 -
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.
 
In one of the podcasts, Peters mentioned that "they had their own licensing program" :eek:

How does that work???

Another line of income that doesn't show up anywhere on the financial report.

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.
 
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.
From what I've seen so far, it wouldn't surprise a bit.
 
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.
 
Wow, I've never been on a 400-page thread before. At the beginning I was reading every page but was falling way behind so went to every fifth page, then once it was over 250 it slowed down enough I read it all. In the same time, I could have read a classic masterpiece of literature, but I arguably wouldn't have learned as much and been so entertained. I assume every single one of us knows something about copyright and/or trademarks we didn't know before. And the story has an actual villain. Onward, brainiacs of Trek bbs!
 
Not sure what to make of this.

Axanar was pimping these on their site during the run of the Kickstarter for these books (one of three Trek novel Kickstarter campaigns the author has run, apparently), but oddly the crowdfunding campaign is never mentioned.

Not sure if there's any direct relation between the author and Axanar, outside of the author being a donor for both the Axanar and Prelude to Axanar campaigns.

Damned egregious.

(Saw this here originally: http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/pirates-cove-by-steven-fender.278956/)
 
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.

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.
 
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.
Well then, we'll just take our coffee some place else!

Neil
 
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.
 
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.

Well there are plenty of "small fry" companies that would be smart.

But o I agree with you, and I figured as much-- and that just makes it all the more despicable if you ask me. It feels like they're preying not on small companies, but gullible business owners who don't know anything about licensing or copyright.
 
Well, they apparently did find a licensee more than a year ago, and that sparked exactly the same kind of questions in the modeling world. Even then, Axanar people tried to smack down legitimate questions. For example:

Over on Starshipmodeler, I questioned how the producers of Axanar can licence kits to Starcrafts for production, when Axanar has no licence from CBS/Paramount. … Someone claiming to be one of the Axanar lawyers told me I didn't know what I was talking about and that it was all legit. That slap down certainly turned me off this whole production. I think the Axanar producers are wandering into a very grey legal area, and hence their offer to give you a model if you support their non-profit production, rather than just sell it to you. But really, you can call it whatever you want if it gives you heartburn. Pay $X, and they will send you a model.

That generated this warm reply from an attorney claiming he worked for Axanar:

I am also one of the attorneys representing Axanar and can confirm you don't know what you're talking about.

What a difference one year and a lawsuit make, huh, Mr. Attorney?

And then none other than Axanar director Rob Burnett shows up to make this startling declaration I'm sure CBS' lawyers will be gratified to learn:

As industry professionals, it's our desire to bring back what drove our fandom when we were young and first discovered Trek … In addition to the film itself, we also set out to make all the supporting merchandise we as fans want to see, including model kits, apparel, literary tie-ins, etc. [emphasis added; you can read the whole thing here.]

Since they're "industry professionals," you would think they would also want to avoid a multimillion dollar copyright infringement suit. But I guess not .
 
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