CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[Noname Given]

I so hope that CBS requests an audit of the Axanar books.

That would be part of Discovery (they need to to not only determine how C/P's interests were damaged - IE How much unlicensed merchandise was sold and what Axanar's return on that was); and also for the Judge to know just how much money Axanar actually still has should he, or a Jury, need to determine how much C/P should receive in damages, and further if any punitive financial damages should be included.

There's going to be actual accounting done as well as forensic accounting - to see where that money went. Remember one of C/P's complaints in the amended filing is that Axanar (and Alec Peters personally) benefited from 'financial gain' by illegal use of Star Trek copyrighted material; so discovery related to that aspect is fair game for C/P to request from Axanar (and Mr. Peters personal accounts too, as he's a named defendant.)

 

[Michael Hinman]

That was all Tim B's actions back then. I own TU now (I also remember you were in the running to buy it back in 2010) .

I never was in the running to buy it. I was advising someone else who was interested in buying it, but my advice to them is "it's damaged goods -- even a few years later." Why? Because I won't let people forget what a travesty that is. You own it now, that's your choice. It's damaged goods, because once again, I will NOT let ANYONE forget the bullshit that happened there.

You can call it whatever you want now. But don't act like you weren't a part of what the TrekUnited bullshit was back in the alleged scam days. You bought it through a nice little inside deal, and that's fine. But the only way I will start saying, "It's different!" would be with someone who owned it who had nothing to do with the alleged scam.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Hey look everybody - it's an old feud!

 

[muCephi]

For everyone telling Alec to be quiet and let the lawsuit play out. You're thinking like someone who would want to win the lawsuit.

I don't think Alec cares about winning. He wants his facility, He wants his prop business, he wants the notoriety,. He will spend the rest of his life billing himself as the one fan film maker who was so good Hollywood was scared of him. He needs to keep talking and podcasting to keep that up.

He needs articles to keep coming out against him. Because that fuels his followers. The people with him right now are so entrenched that any articles against Axanar feel like they are against him. The more they're attacked the closer they pull together. At the end they'll donate a hundred thousand more for Alec's new production after he's publicly fought his good fight, and been persecuted a bit more.

And his lawyers allow this because they don't care about winning either. They want to be seen arguing this case, They want to be up against CBS, they want to be seen as a firm attacking IP holders and the more blogs Alec get this in the better this is for them

he may want to be a celeb. but I just don't see it. there has to be shtf with donor money at some point. he probably will have spent it one way or another. he didnt give proper warning to donors that his approach had added "high ("my profit your risk") risks" compared to other fan films. setting up a table at a con where most of your notoriety is what Wil Wheaton called you, or how you took thousands of peoples money and didn't do anything with it, may not go so far. Every 15 mins someone could get on the PA and announce refunds for Axanar are now available at table A-7 . and I dont see fame from in the future becoming a producer or writer after this demonstration of his lack of professional skills.

 

[muCephi]

Speaking of articles and blogs - quick q, sushi fans - once this case is over, would there be an interest in more fandom legal blogging? I can't promise regular updates as I have to do my Capstone project this summer, but would there be an interest in stuff about, oh, I dunno, cosplay cases, the Batmobile case, etc.?

Many thanks for considering it.

you could do a good job of it; just bear in mind you would be entangling yourself in the arcana of various fanbases' worldview-battles. Do you have enough lifetimes for the subdiscussions that would accrue?

 

[jaime]

I never was in the running to buy it. I was advising someone else who was interested in buying it, but my advice to them is "it's damaged goods -- even a few years later." Why? Because I won't let people forget what a travesty that is. You own it now, that's your choice. It's damaged goods, because once again, I will NOT let ANYONE forget the bullshit that happened there.

You can call it whatever you want now. But don't act like you weren't a part of what the TrekUnited bullshit was back in the alleged scam days. You bought it through a nice little inside deal, and that's fine. But the only way I will start saying, "It's different!" would be with someone who owned it who had nothing to do with the alleged scam.

Not wanting to go near this particularly...but who ran the Star Trek generations convention that vanished in the UK in 95? In case you know, it sounds related.

 

[jespah]

you could do a good job of it; just bear in mind you would be entangling yourself in the arcana of various fanbases' worldview-battles. Do you have enough lifetimes for the subdiscussions that would accrue?

Digression is my middle name. Well, sort of.

 

[Search4]

At which point that is theft and the items should be returned or Burnett sues Alec



What do you mean he did shut down productions?

He literally would go in at the end of a production, notably Battlestar G, and take the costumes / set pieces / props for resale.

 

[wtriker1701]

To paraphrase: "That new car wasn't bought with donor's money, it stems from hard earned minimum wage salary!"

 

[JD]

That is incorrect. Paramount owns the movie rights. We've been over this. Paramount would not have standing to sue for copyright infringement if it was only a licensee.

Yeah, I believe the rights were seperated during one of the last big business shifts with CBS/Paramount/Viacom/whatever. I'm a little surprised CBS hasn't gotten them back for their CBS Films company yet.

I think he's still arrogant & deluded enough to think he can come out of this clean (which would jive with the delaying tactics his counsel seems to be taking) - he's also got his facade to maintain, the one that keeps his acolytes so fiercely loyal (and keeps the money flowing). DG seems to have a touch of arrogance about him as well.

That's the impression I've gotten too. He's so convinced he hasn't done anything wrong, and will come out of this with a win, that he isn't about to be seen acting in anyway that could indicate he's done something wrong. The only question I have is whether he is that clueless, or if it's just an act for his fans and supporters.

 

[Professor Zoom]

This is somewhat off topic, but, it's about Star Trek IP and CBS/Paramount and there are lawyers here...

I was talking in the forum that Shall Not Be Named, that I think that the new Star Trek show will probably be set in the movie universe, cause, corporate synergy, brand, etc, blah blah blah.

BUT, I'm wondering, without an agreement, COULD CBS just do that? Wouldn't all of the IP created in the movie universe belong to Paramount? CBS couldn't just use it because it's Star Trek.

I'm thinking sort of along the lines of MASH (the TV show) and TRAPPER JOHN, MD. Both had characters of Trapper John, but TRAPPER JOHN, MD was NOT a spin off of MASH the TV show. They were both derived from MASH the MOVIE. (Apparently, the courts decided this, so the producers of the Trapper John show didn't have pay royalties to the Producers of the MASH TV show.) More here.

thoughts?

 

[JD]

I don't know how it all works out on the legal side but they do use elements of both the movies and TV shows in the books, so there is some crossover allowed. They also do show both the Paramount and CBS logos in books using both movie and TV show elements, so they might just have to put in a credit recognizing Paramount or Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, ect. Maybe something like "based on the television series Star Trek created by Gene Rodenberry and the film Star Trek created by JJ Abrams, Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman".

 

[Tom]

I never was in the running to buy it. I was advising someone else who was interested in buying it, but my advice to them is "it's damaged goods -- even a few years later." Why? Because I won't let people forget what a travesty that is. You own it now, that's your choice. It's damaged goods, because once again, I will NOT let ANYONE forget the bullshit that happened there.

You can call it whatever you want now. But don't act like you weren't a part of what the TrekUnited bullshit was back in the alleged scam days. You bought it through a nice little inside deal, and that's fine. But the only way I will start saying, "It's different!" would be with someone who owned it who had nothing to do with the alleged scam.

Feel the love lol. I was thinking of writing reponse, but ya know, it's just not worth it. You have your opinions your entitled to. I know what happened. Who your mad at is Tim, there were many good people who worked on the site who don't deserve to be dragged though the miud. In much the same way with Axanar. Peters is the culprit, many of the others that helped just wanted to make a Star Trek film. There are/were good people at Tu (like Jespah here) who just want to be Star Trek fans.

 

[Michael Hinman]

Feel the love lol. I was thinking of writing reponse, but ya know, it's just not worth it. You have your opinions your entitled to. I know what happened. Who your mad at is Tim, there were many good people who worked on the site who don't deserve to be dragged though the miud. In much the same way with Axanar. Peters is the culprit, many of the others that helped just wanted to make a Star Trek film. There are/were good people at Tu (like Jespah here) who just want to Star Trek fans.

It's called facts, Tom. I know that's difficult for you to understand ... but facts are facts are facts are facts. And this Axanar thing is just another cycle of the bullshit.

And while you might try to associate Jespah here with all of that — there is a big difference. She isn't going to get conned into that again, as evidenced by her reactions to Axanar, which also is just taking fan's money.

I'm just waiting for Peters to come up with some fake producer named Al Vinci. Was that your idea, or Tim's?

 

[Tom]

She was never conned, not sure what your talking about? She can,of course, speak for herself. Never met Al Vinci, had nothing to do with him. As far as facts go I have nothing to hide. I have always been for the fans and I have a over a decade of posts here on Tbbs and Tu to prove that. Mike you really don't know me, and some of the things I have done as a fan and for the fans. I realize you view yourself as as a crusader for the just and nobel of Star Trek and scifi. You have a beef with Tim B and that's fine, it's nothing to do with me. I have not talked to Tim in 6 years. If you really knew me you would not be putting me in this context.

 

[Sgt_G]

Ah, guys? Newbie here. No idea what you all are fighting over and don't really care, but it looks like it's getting ugly. Can you all wrap it up and/or take it to private messaging, please?

 

[jespah]

Eek. I like you both. Don't want to get into the middle.

I am a member of TU (haven't posted there in years; might have posted on their FB group within the last year? Not sure). Never gave $$ to Tim B. That always struck me as odd and it was all moving rather quickly, IIRC. That tends to be the sort of thing that gets me to close my wallet more quickly than almost anything else - not giving me (or others) time to think things over. That sort of thing feels like hucksterism to me. Yes, I want(ed) a fifth season of ENT. But I wasn't (still wouldn't) about to pay a large corporation to do that when it was obvious they could afford it just fine. That had nothing to do with the parties involved; I just thought the whole idea was kinda nuts.

Does that answer any questions? God, I hope so.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

*hoists beer*

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

 

[urbandefault]

those look like toys, not props. Different customer base.

Hey, a sale is a sale.

Remember one of C/P's complaints in the amended filing is that Axanar (and Alec Peters personally) benefited from 'financial gain' by illegal use of Star Trek copyrighted material; so discovery related to that aspect is fair game for C/P to request from Axanar (and Mr. Peters personal accounts too, as he's a named defendant.)

Again, a sale is a sale.

This is somewhat off topic, but, it's about Star Trek IP and CBS/Paramount and there are lawyers here...

I was talking in the forum that Shall Not Be Named, that I think that the new Star Trek show will probably be set in the movie universe, cause, corporate synergy, brand, etc, blah blah blah.

BUT, I'm wondering, without an agreement, COULD CBS just do that? Wouldn't all of the IP created in the movie universe belong to Paramount? CBS couldn't just use it because it's Star Trek.

I'm thinking sort of along the lines of MASH (the TV show) and TRAPPER JOHN, MD. Both had characters of Trapper John, but TRAPPER JOHN, MD was NOT a spin off of MASH the TV show. They were both derived from MASH the MOVIE. (Apparently, the courts decided this, so the producers of the Trapper John show didn't have pay royalties to the Producers of the MASH TV show.) More here.

thoughts?

In this case CBS and Paramount might be operating as one, cooperating toward a mutually beneficial goal. It's like brothers who hate each other, but will risk life and limb to save the other.

 

[Tom]

Ah, guys? Newbie here. No idea what you all are fighting over and don't really care, but it looks like it's getting ugly. Can you all wrap it up and/or take it to private messaging, please?

Good idea, no use arguing about something that happened over a decade ago. Back on topic...