• 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.
jespah said:
1. Absolutely. An IP holder would be a dolt if s/he were to hand over rights in perpetuity unless they were sold or otherwise contracted for. For example, my publisher holds any number of rights in my novel. But per our contract, those rights will revert back to me after a while (3 years, IIRC) and then I am free to shop it around to another publisher or self-pub it if I think another edition or an improved edition will sell.

2. Attorneys are asked all the time to prepare wacky defenses. Sometimes those can fly or they can start to chip away at what seems to be granite-hard precedent. The attorneys begin to get into ethical trouble if they are lied to AND they repeat that lie AND they know it is a lie as a part of the defense.

For example, let's say I borrowed your car without permission and I went joyriding. I come back and leave it in your garage. But you notice there's less gas in the tank and there's a scratch on the fender. If I say I didn't do it, and I maintain that throughout my defense with my attorney, they are okay although I am probably committing perjury if I say this under oath. Things change if I tell my lawyer, "I did it, but you're going to tell them I didn't." My lawyer should (a) counsel me not to do this, (b) refuse to be complicit, (c ) offer an alternative defense whereby neither of us have to lie (say, a plea agreement, which isn't really a defense per se, but is probably best for me anyway), and (d) threaten to quit if I want to go ahead.

Sometimes lawyers get this stuff sprung on them in the middle of trial, when they really can't ethically quit, so they are kind of between a rock and a hard place. Then, suddenly, their Aunt Mary is sick and they have to go and attend to her, and/or they sidebar with the judge and just heavily hint, I have to say this but I don't really mean it. It's the passive-aggressive aspect of the law, at its finest.

For more on ethical dilemmas, I was given this terrific book by my cousin Joel (also a lawyer) when I started law school. It is written in very approachable language and it's not too expensive (I don't believe it's in ebook form). It's a small hardcover in case anyone wants to read about lawyers and ethics. I cannot recommend it enough and, no, I don't have any commercial interest in its sales. If a sale through an Amazon link helps TrekBBS, then obviously I am all for that.
Click to expand...

I guess what I was trying to get at was - the defense by W&S presented thus far has been riddled with so many holes and rookie moves that it seems like it's a vehicle driven by someone who graduated law school 25 years ago and never practiced. I just doesn't seem like the bold legal maneuvering of someone who was just named as one of Law360's up-and-comers.

Is it ethical for an attorney, pro-bono or otherwise, to just do whatever their client asks of them even if it's futile or at some point do they have to say "Look, dude. This isn't going to work. Settle or we walk"?
 
I admire you trying to keep an open mind, Lurok. I think Mr. Peters did, too...seems like his mind escaped, though!

(Disclaimer: This Poster in no way wishes to influence and/or taint any future Jury Pool, or assist in any Theoretical Defense Strategy)
 
Squiggy said:
I guess what I was trying to get at was - the defense by W&S presented thus far has been riddled with so many holes and rookie moves that it seems like it's a vehicle driven by someone who graduated law school 25 years ago and never practiced. I just doesn't seem like the bold legal maneuvering of someone who was just named as one of Law360's up-and-comers.

Is it ethical for an attorney, pro-bono or otherwise, to just do whatever their client asks of them even if it's futile or at some point do they have to say "Look, dude. This isn't going to work. Settle or we walk"?
Click to expand...
Their lawyers are under an obligation to provide a zealous defense. They basically have to do what the client says (so long as it's ethical, etc.). Are they telling him it's a loser of a case? That would not shock me, but of course I am not privy to such things. They would be covered under attorney-client privilege anyway.

PS We covered the Second MtD today. Blog post and YouTube will be up later. Many thanks for your kind and continued support. <3
 
Last edited:
Squiggy said:
I guess what I was trying to get at was - the defense by W&S presented thus far has been riddled with so many holes and rookie moves that it seems like it's a vehicle driven by someone who graduated law school 25 years ago and never practiced.
Click to expand...

Which would be about the time Chief Justice Jespah quit...
 
Lynsioux said:
Shiny and new! Oh, what's this? As this group has brought forth, he billed himself as "the Star Trek Archivist." Here's the confirmation it was another bogus credential.
"Which, considering Alec Peters’ history of volunteering for CBS on the CBS Star Trek Archive"

:beer:
Click to expand...

great catch. Knew it had to be true.

KennyB said:
Kinda----by using the term "burn rate" he did let every donor know that their money has gone up in smoke............:wah:
Click to expand...

:-) So in the end, he didn't say "when the lawsuit was served, here was our financial situation, and here is how we are spending money since then, and here is what our new income is?". I know he doesn't *have* to disclose it, but when you pose the question TO YOURSELF in a FAQ, you do create certain expectations among readers... and oh, no donor is going to have the thought that maybe your burn money s/b given back to donors instead, no, perish the thought, in fact, pre-perish it...

Philip Guyott said:
New interview with Alec Peters:

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

Now this video will silence the critics! :biggrin:

If you don’t watch the full interview be sure to watch the last 70 seconds (32:37+), it’s the best bit.
Click to expand...

So he is spending his time at a "ban" button dealing with a group of "a dozen or so" "haters", while his house is burning down around him? And he admits it on an easily republishable segment of video? That will just confirm to his broader donor base that the Axanar site is not a reliable source of information. Smooth move. No wonder his PR person is trying to retcon the interview even before it is published, by insisting Alec's words be followed by the PR person's words.

I suppose the site could do a dueling Axanar of it if they have had enough, put every retconned Alec statement right next to the PR person's retcon.
 
Last edited:
urbandefault said:
Hey, we got to hear a tease of that fancy phone system in action. :techman:
Click to expand...

I was more intrigued that he chose to frame himself against some sort of bearclaw-samurai pennant. Given the quality of their defense, all I could think was CBS must be seeing
bear-claw.desktop.jpeg
 
Tellarites4Ever said:
It greatly disturbs me that they need / want more money >_> Raising over a million dollars is just part of what created this problem for them in the first place. Are they incapable of learning from their mistakes? I understand wanting to make something of quality but enough is enough man... It's just money money money with them. I suppose the only good thing about this is that they'll never raise that kind of money again. I highly doubt as many people would donate to them compared to before. I know I won't again.
Click to expand...

There's nothing like coming back to the customer's wallet for the third time on a project, still claiming that overruns, incompetence, and funding your acquisition of new infrastructure directly are really just an earnest desire to deliver the best quality.

Puts an end to the patience of the customer every time. Ask any major corporate legal department overseeing vendor contracts. Ask the corporate lawyers among the donors. There's a seed for your AG action. Sooner or later people with experience in this who do have standing are gonna act.

I have been amused to see how Alec keeps dismissing instead of answering critics who don't "have standing" by being a donor, and censoring and banning and "de-standing" those who "do". He's just been building up the inevitable righteous outburst among those who "do", as they take up the castle-storming maps written by those who "don't".
 
Last edited:
Squiggy said:
I guess what I was trying to get at was - the defense by W&S presented thus far has been riddled with so many holes and rookie moves that it seems like it's a vehicle driven by someone who graduated law school 25 years ago and never practiced. I just doesn't seem like the bold legal maneuvering of someone who was just named as one of Law360's up-and-comers.

Is it ethical for an attorney, pro-bono or otherwise, to just do whatever their client asks of them even if it's futile or at some point do they have to say "Look, dude. This isn't going to work. Settle or we walk"?
Click to expand...

Not sure about the US, but here you are supposed to advise your client if you think it's a bad argument.

But we also can't make the decisions for them once we're actually retained. You can try todrop the client, but even that's a bit of a sticky issue.
 
Philip Guyott said:
New interview with Alec Peters:

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

Now this video will silence the critics! :biggrin:

Great Interview, I think that this YouTube channel deserves a lot more likes and subscribers then it currently receives.

If you don’t watch the full interview be sure to watch the last 70 seconds (32:37+), it’s the best bit.

Hopefully, Part two will be out soon.
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting, I listened to whole interview. Here are some quotes:

*Interviewer's opening comment: Feeling the need to control the narrative, Alec took exception to several of my questions and refused to answer. Axanar P.R. manager Mike Gordon requested I split the interview into two podcasts so he may defend Alec's comments.

*Alec: When we start getting into stuff that's nothing more than fodder for the critics, we're not willing to talk about it.

*Alec: Any critique of what we're doing is basically people who have no business experience, no idea what they are talking about or just trying to find problems with what's happening.

*Interviewer: I have been blacklisted by Axanar, for some reason.

In true Alec style, he goes on about IDIC, transparency, how awesome he and Axanar is yet when asked questions he wants to avoid immediately becomes angrily tense and deflective, contemptuous and combative towards the interviewer.

No doubt Alec was wishing the interview conversation was taking place on a his FB site so he could've lowered the ban hammer on another "hater" like he's done to so many others posing questionings. I find it hilarious Alec had banned the interviewer previously from his sites and when that's brought up Alec starts having a tantrum.

FYI Alec (since you follow what's said here), IMO it's your petty attitudes and narcissistic behavior that's turning people off from supporting you. If you acted with calm openness, grace, and maturity you wouldn't need a "P.R. Manager" to clean up your train wrecks. For the record I don't hate you however I refuse to abandon critical thinking and deductive reasoning because you think it's your due to be everyone's personal Star Trek Savior Guru force feeding your propaganda down peoples throats.
 
Last edited:
KennyB said:
Yeah Alec definitely controlled the interview. Would have loved to see Matthew press him harder on the Lucasfilm rules he held up as a model...........since Axanar and Prelude would have both failed to pass their guidelines. The best part is the previews for part 2.......where he demands to "phone a friend" aka Mike the PR guy.
Click to expand...

Is Matthew's background in journalism? I also wanted to see him press more and hold Peters to the fire for a lot of his unfactual statements in the interview. But it takes a skill and finesse to do that, and having a background in journalism helps.

However, at least, he's trying to ask the tougher questions. And sometimes you just let the interviewee hang himself by having them do all the talking. And sometimes you let them get comfortable first before bringing down the hammer.

Although Part Two looks like it'll be good. And I love how Peters tries to control "this is off the record." Yeah you saying it doesn't make it so. That's not how "off the record" works.
 
Red Shirt said:
Thanks for posting, I listened to whole interview. Here are some quotes:

*Interviewer's opening comment: Feeling the need to control the narrative, Alec took exception to several of my questions and refused to answer. Axanar P.R. manager Mike Gordon requested ....
Click to expand...

FYI the man's surname is Bawden. Thanks for the bit of a transcript.
 
Ryan Thomas Riddle said:
Is Matthew's background in journalism? I also wanted to see him press more and hold Peters to the fire for a lot of his unfactual statements in the interview. But it takes a skill and finesse to do that, and having a background in journalism helps.

However, at least, he's trying to ask the tougher questions. And sometimes you just let the interviewee hang himself by having them do all the talking. And sometimes you let them get comfortable first before bringing down the hammer.

Although Part Two looks like it'll be good. And I love how Peters tries to control "this is off the record." Yeah you saying it doesn't make it so. That's not how "off the record" works.
Click to expand...
I'd think the best way for Lord Axahat to control what's "off the record" would be to keep his big damn mouth shut. But since he can't seem to do that, it's all fair game.

This has been the best 3 months of constant entertainment I've ever experienced, and there's no end in sight. Let the good times roll! :guffaw:
 
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