• 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.
mos6507 said:
Sure, they are entitled to go after him, but not obligated.

That's why STC, Renegades, and PII/NV are still standing. A strict letter-of-the-law policy would wipe the slate clean, not be talking about issuing guidelines.

I mean, a lot of the rhetoric here seems to revolve around Alec deserving harsh payback for bad karma. But the irony is that JJ of all people went up to bat for the guy, despite the trash-talking Alec did towards nuTrek. It might not have been something you or I would have done in the same circumstances, but he did it. None of us can control whether JJ or CBS/P should be vindictive towards Alec anymore than we could stop them from one day impeding STC, Renegades, or PII/NV. We're merely spectators.
Click to expand...
A lot of people here see that Alec has gone much further in violating the IP. Read his Indiegogo page. It says that he's raising funds to make a professional, independent Star Trek movie (HIS words, not mine). He's not entitled to make a professional movie. Read the blog he wrote, announcing the launch of Ares Studios, in which he said that the money donors gave to make a Star Trek movie would be used not only to make the movie, but to set up a studio which could be used for not for profit, as well as for profit projects. That is setting up a business based on a property not owned by him. Read David Galanter's ( a Star Trek author, who's written licensed Star Trek novels) account of how AP tried get him to write an Axanar novel, and to circumvent potential issues, by using a pen name. Read Tommy Kirk's account of his treatment regarding his involvement in Prelude. I read all of this, I've read some info about copyright law (and that, I admit, does not make me an expert by any stretch of the imagination), and know that CBS/P don't have to go after anybody. However, by his actions, I am convinced that Alec Peters is the most egregious violator of this IP. Karma is it's own reward, and I believe that CBS/Paramount was right to go after him.
 
mos6507 said:
You just described all that I meant by "grandfathering". You're trying to find a point of disagreement here when none exists.
Click to expand...
That's not what grandfathering means. It means that you are exempt (someone or something) from a new law or regulation. What Zoom said that going forward, crowdfunding may be limited or eliminated. If AP was grandfathered, then he would still be able to go on, business as usual, not having to be bound by new rulles.
 
That's not really grandfathering. 'Grandfathering' is when an old rule still applies for some people. What Zoom described is just the usual approach to rule making - no penalising people for past breaches that occurred prior to a rules enactment, because they may not have made the breach if that rule had existed. Future breaches are still open season.

Edit: Dang. Ninja'd
 
Jody Wheeler said:
I was thinking, and others have rolled this around too, that the other simple explanation for Abrams sudden comments on Friday is that he was given the go ahead to speak but at the very last minute. It was so last minute that the teleprompters weren't updated and that limited information had made its way to the the powers that be.

That would still keep the "why" within the realm of what others have also said, that Abrams was worried about his film / co-opting fans to back into the fold / creating as good a unifying front as possible.

If Uncle Occam is to be honored, reducing that gets us one less assumption -- he spoke out of turn and caused a commotion. Instead, he spoke in turn, but only a few departments understood. Hence the craziness in back chatter over the weekend.
Click to expand...

So, you're convinced that there's actually been a big change in the studio's position? So they're willing to make public announcements about an unresolved legal conflict without relaying it to the opposing lawyers beforehand?
 
CaptGrumpy said:
That's not what grandfathering means. It means that you are exempt (someone or something) from a new law or regulation. What Zoom said that going forward, crowdfunding may be limited or eliminated. If AP was grandfathered, then he would still be able to go on, business as usual, not having to be bound by new rulles.
Click to expand...

Or if they say 50 minutes is the limit but we're not going to apply that to axanar.
 
That's not really grandfathering.
Click to expand...

I get it now, sorry for the confusion.

CaptGrumpy said:
I believe that CBS/Paramount was right to go after him.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone posting here disagrees with that. I certainly do not. In fact, I could see a C&D coming for fan-films a mile away. The crowdfunding hauls were getting insane. Just because AP's a dick and a lot of people don't like him doesn't mean Axanar was the only production pushing its luck. It could have just as easily have been one of the others (especially Renegades). However, the dispute is between AP and CBS/P. If CBS/P doesn't want to punish AP to the full extent of the law, that's their prerogative. It might feel like a miscarriage of justice, but the injured party isn't us, it's the copyright owners.
 
mos6507 said:
I get it now, sorry for the confusion.



I don't think anyone posting here disagrees with that. I certainly do not. In fact, I could see a C&D coming for fan-films a mile away. The crowdfunding hauls were getting insane. Just because AP's a dick and a lot of people don't like him doesn't mean Axanar was the only production pushing its luck. It could have just as easily have been one of the others (especially Renegades). However, the dispute is between AP and CBS/P. If CBS/P doesn't want to punish AP to the full extent of the law, that's their prerogative. It might feel like a miscarriage of justice, but the injured party isn't us, it's the copyright owners.
Click to expand...
True, we are not injured, but we can be aggrevied by Alec's actions. We Star Trek fans are a passionate lot.
 
There are RULES ranaxA broke them and C/P took him to court, the rules worked just fine in this case.
Now it's up to C/P not to look the other way.
 
I really think someone needs to communicate with Lin and Abrams that not all Star Trek fans (or even a sizable portion) support Axanar and/or Alec Peters.
 
mos6507 said:
I get it now, sorry for the confusion.



I don't think anyone posting here disagrees with that. I certainly do not. In fact, I could see a C&D coming for fan-films a mile away. The crowdfunding hauls were getting insane. Just because AP's a dick and a lot of people don't like him doesn't mean Axanar was the only production pushing its luck. It could have just as easily have been one of the others (especially Renegades). However, the dispute is between AP and CBS/P. If CBS/P doesn't want to punish AP to the full extent of the law, that's their prerogative. It might feel like a miscarriage of justice, but the injured party isn't us, it's the copyright owners.
Click to expand...

You are right that something was likely coming since people were inching close to the line.

The different is that AP just drive right over the line with an atv and just completed demolished the line.
 
dmac said:
There are RULES ranaxA broke them and C/P took him to court, the rules worked just fine in this case.
Now it's up to C/P not to look the other way.
Click to expand...
The biggest rule AP broke was "Don't do it". From the Wrap “CBS has not authorized, sanctioned or licensed this project in any way, and this has been communicated to those involved,” a representative from the network told TheWrap. “We continue to object to professional commercial ventures trading off our property rights and are considering further options to protect these rights.”
http://www.thewrap.com/how-1-1-million-star-trek-fan-movie-has-escaped-studio-shutdown-so-far/
Alec ignored them. They were warned and this was the price
This is my longwinded way of agreeing with you DMAC :rommie:
 
CBS doesn't necessarily have to ban crowdfunding. They could impose limits and assert that every penny goes directly to production and nothing else. They could also insist on strict accounting of any and all funds received.

They could also dictate the nature of perks, if any.

But seriously, how different is crowdfunding from donating directly through a production's home website?
 
Warped9 said:
CBS doesn't necessarily have to ban crowdfunding. They could impose limits and assert that every penny goes directly to production and nothing else. They could also insist on strict accounting of any and all funds received.

They could also dictate the nature of perks, if any.

But seriously, how different is crowdfunding from donating directly through a production's home website?
Click to expand...
However, crowdfunding and perks, are part of what led us here. Why should they allow it. It's just one more thing they have to police. Their guidelines could, conceivably ban outside funding at all (any kind of donations). See when they set up guidelines, they have to make sure the guidelines are followed. That's why there haven't been any overt rules to date. Why should they make their job more difficult?
I'm getting tired. Did that statement make sense (whether you agree or not)?
 
Warped9 said:
CBS doesn't necessarily have to ban crowdfunding. They could impose limits and assert that every penny goes directly to production and nothing else. They could also insist on strict accounting of any and all funds received.

They could also dictate the nature of perks, if any.

But seriously, how different is crowdfunding from donating directly through a production's home website?
Click to expand...

They could, but who is going to flip the bill to enforce the accounting process?
 
Warped9 said:
CBS doesn't necessarily have to ban crowdfunding. They could impose limits and assert that every penny goes directly to production and nothing else. They could also insist on strict accounting of any and all funds received.

They could also dictate the nature of perks, if any.

But seriously, how different is crowdfunding from donating directly through a production's home website?
Click to expand...

I think there's a meaningful difference because the sites themselves are making money (albeit indirectly) from someone else's IP even if the money that ultimately gets collected by the producers gets spent on the "right" things. With a "Donate" button for cash and any other donations in the form of gift cards at least there's no middle man raking a profit off the top. Even a "Donate" button might more trouble than it's worth to them because there's still the opportunity for misspending and that possibility still exists with gift cards.
 
CaptGrumpy said:
A lot of people here see that Alec has gone much further in violating the IP. Read his Indiegogo page. It says that he's raising funds to make a professional, independent Star Trek movie (HIS words, not mine). He's not entitled to make a professional movie. Read the blog he wrote, announcing the launch of Ares Studios, in which he said that the money donors gave to make a Star Trek movie would be used not only to make the movie, but to set up a studio which could be used for not for profit, as well as for profit projects. That is setting up a business based on a property not owned by him. Read David Galanter's ( a Star Trek author, who's written licensed Star Trek novels) account of how AP tried get him to write an Axanar novel, and to circumvent potential issues, by using a pen name. Read Tommy Kirk's account of his treatment regarding his involvement in Prelude. I read all of this, I've read some info about copyright law (and that, I admit, does not make me an expert by any stretch of the imagination), and know that CBS/P don't have to go after anybody. However, by his actions, I am convinced that Alec Peters is the most egregious violator of this IP. Karma is it's own reward, and I believe that CBS/Paramount was right to go after him.
Click to expand...
Here's the links to AP's annual report and the CBS/P lawsuit paperwork. I couldn't find the amended information, it's a long thread. lol. Just a FYI for anyone interested.

CBS/P vs Axanar Lawsuit
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2660454-Startreklawsuit.html
Axanar 2015 Annual Report
https://drive.google.com/a/kd-law.co.uk/file/d/0BxWHYHfCkIj2dFA3QlZaRFdLeDQ/view?pref=2&pli=1
 
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