jespah - Paramount's name comes first on all the paperwork, does that mean they are the primary Complainant?
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
No idea. Coulda been a coin flip.
they are paramount
Its of paramount importance to know
As joint plaintiffs there is no reason to be opposed to collecting them on opposite sides of the same slash.
Of course Alec and his closest supporters seem to have bought into the notion that Paramount is driving this suit for all kinds of conspiracy theory reasons.
wasn't he recently quoted as saying that its obviously Paramount driving it because they are making the film and it is the film which is threatened by the quality of Axanar? ([hear] backing-up-beep on logic train from faulty assertion to faulty premise)
Well sure because AP's donors are his bread and butter right now and giving said donors all sorts of ridiculous reasons for a scapegoat is how he's keeping the donations flowing in. It's Cult Leader 101.
Saw this on twitter
Jim Jones would approve.
I meet a lot of people who have the most extraordinary capacity for self delusion. People who shout, argue, swear, and refuse to compromise and then tell you how they're so polite and accomodating. People who pass out drunk with their baby on their lap and their viscious dog loose, and then talk about being a good parent and that their kids are their world. People who could start a fight in a nunnery talk about how they treat everyone with respect. These people aren't being dishonest, they just have an unshakeable self image of what they'd like to be.
Peters strikes me as this type of person - the disconnect between his words and reality is totally and utterly lost on him.
Starfleet may or may not have been a 'military' in the practical sense of a trained fighting force, but one thing we never saw was jingoistic 'glory of war' bullshit. In fact, Star Trek probably couldn't have been more preachy at times on the 'war is wrong' cause. The Axanar kickstarter patches, however, have the Fifth Fleet with the slogan "First to the Fight!". Explanation point theirs. Really? This is a fleet that uses mottos like "To boldly go where no man has gone before", "Hope is a waking dream" and "For I dipt in to the future, far as human eye could see; Saw the vision of the world, and all the wonder that would be."Even their only acknowledged-in-canon combat ship used "All I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by."
USS Ares
NCC 1650
Starfleet Ship Yards San Francisco
"...STARFLEET FUCK YEAH!"
Hey, who told you about that?
Yes, but since the names aren't in alphabetical order as one might expect, I thought maybe Paramount was the primary and CBS the secondary.
It's both Paramount & CBS suing.
Okay. I thought maybe there was a legal standard for such things.
Hey man, they're all about Roddenberry's Vision!!!
A standard that proudly flies over Axanar's cold, dead corpse
STARFLEET, OORAH!
There may be an element of truth to that, Paramount probably paid a great deal of money to CBS for the exclusive license to make Star Trek films. Such licenses often obligate the licensor to defend/enforce the licensed rights in the case of any infringing parties - and if the licensor is unwilling, the right to initiate legal proceedings (with either side cooperating with the controlling party).
Paramount may not have paid anything, I may be wrong, but it's always been my belief that when Paramount Television was ripped away from Paramount Pictures and given to CBS, Paramount Pictures simply retained their rights to make Star Trek movies since that wasn't something that belonged to the television side. There's long been rumors of deals and non-competition agreements of which there's never been any tangible proof, so it always looked to me like Paramount Pictures just kept what was theirs to begin with.
I think there is a good likelihood that plaintiffs are choosing to amend the complaint rather than fight the motion is so that they can add other claims. Remember, this lawsuit was filed at the beginning of the year and, as other people pointed out, likely a gambit made on the assumption that Axanar would fold. They didn't.
Opposing the motion to strike would just leave C/P - if they won - arguing on their original complaint and copyright infringement claims only. Think of all the things that have come to light since the beginning of the year that made so many of us go "why didn't C/P sue on THAT claim as well?" I'm not talking about alleged financial shenanigans but rather things like trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, unfair competition, use of ST motifs on coffee, potentially infringing ship designs in models sent out as perks etc.. Now that "stuff's got real", I suspect that C/P will not only amend their complaint to add specifics on the copyright claims (such as infringement in the script, in ship designs used as perks) but also to add various other counts that will open a whole new world of things defendants have to defend against. They coudl always amend their complaint later as new facts came to light (though, at a certain point, such an amendment might require permission of the court) but now they have free reign to do so early in the litigation.
M
Opposing the motion to strike would just leave C/P - if they won - arguing on their original complaint and copyright infringement claims only. Think of all the things that have come to light since the beginning of the year that made so many of us go "why didn't C/P sue on THAT claim as well?" I'm not talking about alleged financial shenanigans but rather things like trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, unfair competition, use of ST motifs on coffee, potentially infringing ship designs in models sent out as perks etc.. Now that "stuff's got real", I suspect that C/P will not only amend their complaint to add specifics on the copyright claims (such as infringement in the script, in ship designs used as perks) but also to add various other counts that will open a whole new world of things defendants have to defend against. They coudl always amend their complaint later as new facts came to light (though, at a certain point, such an amendment might require permission of the court) but now they have free reign to do so early in the litigation.
M
- Status