CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[therealsb63]

So licensed products have updated the Garth story.

In the Kirk autobiography he is posted for a mission at Axanar. Yes our favorite canon world. The Garth battle is described in some detail. He is on the Constitution and battles against the Klingons using then-new tactics. (Sorry limited spoilers.)

No Ares. No four years war.

Congratulations fan film - you poked the bear. They poked back. With Jim Kirk.

Nope. The writer of the Kirk autobiography is the same guy who wrote the "Federation: The First 150 Years," and he had the same info in the previous work, and that came out how many years ago? Nothing to do with Axanar the film, obviously, since the Kirk book was likely written long before the lawsuit happened.

 

[BillJ]

Who knows... You are entitled to your opinion, BillJ

Just isn't something that important in the grand scheme of things that people need to be going to their place of business.

 

[urbandefault]

On that note - does it really seem plausible to anyone that C/P gave Axanar zero heads-up/chance to cease-and-desist prior to filing a lawsuit, as Axanar has claimed? Even with deep pockets, filing a lawsuit is a pretty big step because, if the defendant doesn't fold, plaintiff has voluntarily committed himself to a potentially lengthy and expensive judicial process. Normal way to proceed here is to make a formal C&D demand in writing, with threat of a lawsuit to follow if the C&D is not complied with by a date certain. Yes, you can file a lawsuit without the C&D step (it's not legally required) - but if we are keeping with the commonly-held wisdom that C/P expected Axanar to fold quickly, one would think C/P would test those waters with a C&D first and result to a lawsuit only when that failed.

My speculation (and that's all it is), is that either (as someone mentioned earlier today and @Squiggy suggests above), C/P was in fact pretty blunt about their concerns in the meeting Alec has referenced and he ignored (or was oblivious to) their concerns (he "heard only what he wanted to hear")), or there was a C&D or similar "time to stop, guys" letter from C/P to Axanar in the November-December deadline that went unheeded and is not being publicly acknowledged by Axanar.

M

It probably went like this ...

CBS: You guys have raised a lot of money for this "fan film."
AP: Yes, a lot. We're going to need a lot more. That's ok, right?
CBS: No comment.
AP: So, if we don't make a profit we're good, right?
CBS: No comment.
AP: And we can keep raising money like we have been, right?
CBS: No comment.
AP: Ok, great! We'll let you know when the film is ready and maybe you'll consider it as a pilot?
CBS: No comment.
AP: Guys, it's always a pleasure!
CBS: No comment.

 

[Michael Hinman]

As far as Adverse possesion... And it's the same as waiver: IF you admit that CBS/Paramount "allowed" previous fan films then CBS/Paramount would have to show how Axanar is doing something different than the endeavors they've allowed in the past. I think we have hours of podcasts, convention appearances, blog posts Kickstarter campaigns etc. where Alec and others explain how different it is.

"Adverse possession" does not exist for copyrights.

 

[carlosp]

According to the Stipulation, they could not begin/continue any filming on the project. The wording was pretty specific. Nothing saying they couldn't still build sets, hang lights, make script changes, or anything else not related to actually filming scenes.

That stipulation expired on February 22, so any production halt (or pre-production halt) at this point is self-imposed by Axanar, and they likely won't go into much detail about that since it's not part of their narrative.

They can still spend money however they like unless and until CBS/Paramount get an injunction stopping them. That will be the day of legal fireworks.

 

[Michael Hinman]

On that note - does it really seem plausible to anyone that C/P gave Axanar zero heads-up/chance to cease-and-desist prior to filing a lawsuit, as Axanar has claimed? Even with deep pockets, filing a lawsuit is a pretty big step because, if the defendant doesn't fold, plaintiff has voluntarily committed himself to a potentially lengthy and expensive judicial process. Normal way to proceed here is to make a formal C&D demand in writing, with threat of a lawsuit to follow if the C&D is not complied with by a date certain. Yes, you can file a lawsuit without the C&D step (it's not legally required) - but if we are keeping with the commonly-held wisdom that C/P expected Axanar to fold quickly, one would think C/P would test those waters with a C&D first and result to a lawsuit only when that failed.

My speculation (and that's all it is), is that either (as someone mentioned earlier today and @Squiggy suggests above), C/P was in fact pretty blunt about their concerns in the meeting Alec has referenced and he ignored (or was oblivious to) their concerns (he "heard only what he wanted to hear")), or there was a C&D or similar "time to stop, guys" letter from C/P to Axanar in the November-December deadline that went unheeded and is not being publicly acknowledged by Axanar.

M

This is actually verified in a story in The Wrap that published like days after this reported meeting, where CBS issued a statement making it clear they objected to this project, and would pursue appropriate legal action if it didn't stop.

 

[carlosp]

Ironically, the Vulcan Scene remains on YouTube in this fan shoutout video in which it is embedded within commentary, and in which the fan states he received permission from Axanar to post it. He urges people to donate to the now-shuttered Indiegogo campaign.

 

[BillJ]

That stipulation expired on February 22, so any production halt (or pre-production halt) at this point is self-imposed by Axanar, and they likely won't go into much detail about that since it's not part of their narrative.

It makes me think they are out of money. They could've completed their sets and gotten their actors lined up for filming on February 23rd, if they were really serious about going forward.

 

[jespah]

Janet, I know you once said you were retired but still in good standing.... Could you represent people taking out a case against Peters for fraud based on the fact he has not delivered a film within the designated time frame?

Thank you for your confidence in me.

In order to un-retire, I would have to go through a metric ton of continuing education. And you'd need to pay my stress-related medical bills Plus I would have to be admitted pro hac vice in California.

Actually the best people for the job would be lawyers admitted in California who've handled class action cases in the consumer protection realm. (Nota bene: I just found a firm in Sherman Oaks with a little Googling. Can't vouch for quality; you would have to dig deeper. But these folks are definitely out there).

 

[Red Shirt]

This is actually verified in a story in The Wrap that published like days after this reported meeting, where CBS issued a statement making it clear they objected to this project, and would pursue appropriate legal action if it didn't stop.

Here's the article link.
http://www.thewrap.com/how-1-1-million-star-trek-fan-movie-has-escaped-studio-shutdown-so-far/

 

[Mudd]

Ironically, the Vulcan Scene remains on YouTube in this fan shoutout video in which it is embedded within commentary, and in which the fan states he received permission from Axanar to post it. He urges people to donate to the now-shuttered Indiegogo campaign.

It's on DailyMotion as well, and has been uploaded to Facebook albeit in private groups.

 

[BillJ]

It's on DailyMotion as well, and has been uploaded to Facebook albeit in private groups.

Was probably driving Peters crazy that one of his masterworks weren't out there for all to see.

 

[Karzak]

I have a copy of the Vulcan Scene and Prelude to Axanar on my DropBox account as well and I feel no compunction about sharing them with anyone who wants a copy until such time as this case is over and decided.

Who knows... You are entitled to your opinion, BillJ

I share Tom and BillJ's concern. There's no need for this, and as we have seen, Peters reads the TrekBBS. This is all the ammo that dipshit needs to rally his troops to try to discredit not only this message board but the pro-CBS/Paramount people who are posting here in good faith.

At least three people have now questioned the wisdom of this action and you're dangerously close to doing the exact thing we have been deriding Alec Peters for - doubling down on a bad decision because you don't want to admit you might be wrong. Come on man, we're all friends here. Again, there's no need for it.

Don't stoop to Peters' level of grade-school tactics and playground bullying. We're better than that.

 

[Mudd]

Is it okay if I mention that Terry is a garden-variety dick?

 

[Karzak]

Is it okay if I mention that Terry is a garden-variety dick?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Ironically, the Vulcan Scene remains on YouTube in this fan shoutout video in which it is embedded within commentary, and in which the fan states he received permission from Axanar to post it. He urges people to donate to the now-shuttered Indiegogo campaign.

Now why does that link look awfully familiar to me...

Thank you for your confidence in me.

In order to un-retire, I would have to go through a metric ton of continuing education. And you'd need to pay my stress-related medical bills Plus I would have to be admitted pro hac vice in California.

Actually the best people for the job would be lawyers admitted in California who've handled class action cases in the consumer protection realm. (Nota bene: I just found a firm in Sherman Oaks with a little Googling. Can't vouch for quality; you would have to dig deeper. But these folks are definitely out there).

Hmm... True - What i meant was could you handle the case yourself as a private lawyer in your home state?

 

[muCephi]

Janet, I know you once said you were retired but still in good standing.... Could you represent people taking out a case against Peters for fraud based on the fact he has not delivered a film within the designated time frame?

they should talk to the Attorney General or Office of Consumer Protection in in CA as appropriate, as well. Other crowdfunding failures have drawn govt attention in other states.

On that note - does it really seem plausible to anyone that C/P gave Axanar zero heads-up/chance to cease-and-desist prior to filing a lawsuit, as Axanar has claimed?

they gave public notice of not agreeing in the fall last year. that is actually a gentler way to get it moving than a c/d, I think. They were being generous.

 

[jespah]

they should talk to the Attorney General or Office of Consumer Protection in in CA as appropriate, as well. Other crowdfunding failures have drawn govt attention in other states.
....

Agreed. I would go the Attorney General route. Get the gummint involved.

I have never handled a consumer protection claim (insurance defense and product liability here, yo'). Plus you'd be in Federal Court rather quickly as the claim crosses state lines and, if it's a class action, it probably meets the minimum requirement for Federal diversity jurisdiction, which is an amount in controversy over $75 kilosmackers.

Right now, I'm waiting to see the ruling (which may not come in before our next show - the nerve! ) - who knows what Klausner is really going to want?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

You know, Axanar wants to know what trademarks they violate, right...? Well let me help them at 1:09 when we get the first frame of the two D'Kyr-type vessels in orbital formation

 

[Noname Given]

Maybe. Or maybe Judge Klausner is just confirming his reputation for not granting extensions in cases in order to keep them moving. Interesting he granted Axanar's request for a continuance (agreed to by Paramount and CBS) when Axanar's lawyers came on the job, but denied Paramount and CBS's request (agreed to by Axanar) for time to respond to the Motion To Dismiss.

More likely, the Axanar team informed the Judge of when they had actually 'taken' the case; and to be fair, the Judge (and CBS/Paramount) in recognition of that, granted what he saw as a fair period to craft an initial response. In that situation, it wasn't a delay to drag out the case, it was a delay to allow counsel new to the case a 'fair' chance to reply. (Oh, and Paramount/CBS could have challenged even that extension; but even lawyers will sometimes extend courtesy to one another (especially if one side feels they have a good case and don't want to give an appellate court easy grounds for an appeal.