CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[Professor Zoom]

It's just what I've been taught by those that went before me and I've grown to respect it, it has become my comfort zone. When i got back into writing I asked for advice from a few people and basically got the same answer, "Protect your work before passing it around". Fortunately I've never been given cause to distrust anyone I've dealt with, including original works.

Yes. A way of protecting your work is registering it. But, the act of registering it does not grant copyright. You had that at the moment of creation.

It's not theft of work that is the biggest problem: it's contracts one signs when they are selling it or licensing it. That's when you should get someone who really knows contracts. Not a friend who says they know. But either a guild or a lawyer.

It is possible that some owners of intellectual property could encourage derivative work and grant copyright assignment.

It's possible. Sure. But generally MONEY is exchanged. As you you are giving the owner some money so you can do it.

Someone else might know if the Star Trek franchise ever withdrew the right of assignment in the past, I don't know their full history. From my non professional research you have copyright assignment until it is withdrawn.

I'm going out on a limb and bet: CBS/Paramount has never granted copyright to anyone regarding Star Trek. Looking now at "How Much For Just the Planet?" by John Ford, the copyright is assigned to Paramount Pictures. Paramount sold Pocket Books a license to make Star Trek novels. I suspect the writers of said novels were under Writers For Hire, so, they don't own anything they create.

The owners of Star Trek could pull their license, like they did with FASA.

So, the reason you aren't finding someone's copyright assignment being pulled, it's because you aren't finding a time CBS/Paramount GAVE someone a copyright.

Once the guidelines came out, rule # 9 concerned me greatly it is not a "Guideline" because an IP holder can either grant copyright assignment or they don't. If they expressly forbid assignment there is no copyright and hence no ownership to your derivative work.

I don't think you can own derivative period, regardless of Rule #9.
Warner Brothers haven't put out any guidelines regarding Harry Potter, that doesn't mean I can write a Harry Potter novel and own the stuff I create. It's all from a poisoned tree. Even if I COULD copyright my Harry Potter novel, I can't sell it, I can't publish it, I might get the shit sued out of me. The most I can really do is give it so some friends to read.

Why are you so concerned about protecting work that isn't yours? By that I mean: why are you so worried about copyright on a Star Trek script? Are you worried another fan film might "steal" it? I don't think a copyright on derivative work that isn't yours is going to offer protection anyway--that would be one for a lawyer with more familiarity of copyright.

Perhaps you could consider the framers of the guidelines didn't even consider the ramifications this would have on script writers, perhaps it was meant for something else. Maybe I have it all wrong but that's what it says and it exceeds my knowledge at that point.

I'm sorry to be blunt: but I'm not sure what the ramifications actually are and how they are a problem.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I'm going out on a limb and bet: CBS/Paramount has never granted copyright to anyone regarding Star Trek. Looking now at "How Much For Just the Planet?" by John Ford, the copyright is assigned to Paramount Pictures. Paramount sold Pocket Books a license to make Star Trek novels. I suspect the writers of said novels were under Writers For Hire, so, they don't own anything they create.

I very much doubt it was a work-for-hire. Book writers are rarely employees. The vast majority of them are self-employed independent contractors.

The procedure for original work (as opposed to working in a licensed universe is) I've seen is:

1. Writer initially owns copyright to his book
2. As part of Writer's contract with Publisher, Writer assigns his copyright to Publisher who among other things will take care of registering it.
3. The contract may also provide that if Publisher lets the book go out of print the copyright reverts to Author.

I'm guessing that in a licensed universe it works the same way. After all, since CBS/P granted a license to Publisher they're not going to mind Publisher registering the copyright.

 

[seigezunt]

Jonathan Lane continues to be a fair and balanced, strictly neutral observer of the Axanar lawsuit. Yes indeedy, he isn't biased AT ALL and certainly isn't a mouthpiece for Alec OR a way for Alec to leak carefully crafted rumors so as to keep churning his shrinking pool of potential donors.

http://fff.trekbloggers.com/2016/09/06/axanar-enters-discovery-part-1/

Oh for the love of Apollo. Slow Lane.

"I come to bury Peters, not to praise him."

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

Accept third party cookies

 

[Jedi_Master]

Oh for the love of Apollo. Slow Lane.

"I come to bury Peters, not to praise him."

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

Accept third party cookies

He is particularly transparent, that one.

 

[dmac]

I'm sorry to be blunt: but I'm not sure what the ramifications actually are and how they are a problem.

You'll hear a lot of "They are just guidelines" and that is one way of looking at it. I look at them as tools, not everybody uses every tool in the box, not everybody uses each tool for the same purpose and some tool boxes never get opened.

If you run across anything else on the subject please pass it on.

Seems all these "Focus Groups" first concern is about how much money they get to raise. $50 grand for a max 15 min episode seems like twice more than the standard Fan Funded Film requires now

 

[Professor Zoom]

I very much doubt it was a work-for-hire. Book writers are rarely employees. The vast majority of them are self-employed independent contractors.

The procedure for original work (as opposed to working in a licensed universe is) I've seen is:

1. Writer initially owns copyright to his book
2. As part of Writer's contract with Publisher, Writer assigns his copyright to Publisher who among other things will take care of registering it.
3. The contract may also provide that if Publisher lets the book go out of print the copyright reverts to Author.

I'm guessing that in a licensed universe it works the same way. After all, since CBS/P granted a license to Publisher they're not going to mind Publisher registering the copyright.

There are some authors of Star Trek novels here, hopefully they can step forward and clear it up.

However, authors of original work DO NOT assign their copyright to the publisher. They license it. Looking at my copy of World War Z, it's copyright Max Brooks. Looking at my copy of The Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, it's copyright Michael Chabon. They license the publisher the exclusive right to publish and distribute it. They don't give them the copy right.

It's the publishing rights that lapse. That's the industry standard--at least currently.

Now, there might be publishers who put in their contracts the assignment of copyright: DO NOT SIGN IT.

I suspect with franchise novels, expanded universe stuff, it might be more like the studio model, they accept book proposals, and in the contract they are also buying the copyright. Admittedly, the Star Trek novels I have lying around are old, but, it quite clearly says Copyright (c) Paramount Pictures in both.

So, I do think CBS/Paramount would mind the publisher registering the copyright. Unless you mean in CBS/Paramounts name?

You'll hear a lot of "They are just guidelines" and that is one way of looking at it. I look at them as tools, not everybody uses every tool in the box, not everybody uses each tool for the same purpose and some tool boxes never get opened.

I don't know how you can look at them as tools. That fundamentally doesn't make any sense to me. They are dos and don't. To me a tool in script writing would be voice over or intercutting or non-linear structure or a dream sequence. But, being told not to register your script... I don't know how that is a tool you use or not.

They are guidelines so CBS/Paramount won't bring a lawsuit for playing in their sandbox.

It's like a speed limit. A speed limit isn't a tool. It's... well, in this case, it's the law. Your accelerator is a tool.

If you run across anything else on the subject please pass it on.

Seems all these "Focus Groups" first concern is about how much money they get to raise. $50 grand for a max 15 min episode seems like twice more than the standard Fan Funded Film requires now

50K is an extraordinary amount of money in my mind to make a short film.

 

[jespah]

Jonathan Lane continues to be a fair and balanced, strictly neutral observer of the Axanar lawsuit. Yes indeedy, he isn't biased AT ALL and certainly isn't a mouthpiece for Alec OR a way for Alec to leak carefully crafted rumors so as to keep churning his shrinking pool of potential donors.

http://fff.trekbloggers.com/2016/09/06/axanar-enters-discovery-part-1/

Christ, it's a freakin' deposition subpoena! That means it's not "the studios might set up a deposition" - it means they already are.

PS I am a published author albeit not for Trek. My publishing contract gives the publisher limited publication rights but I retain the IP and the publication rights revert after a few years.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Slow Lane's next blog will discuss how record breaking temperatures in August are "great indicators that summer has officially begun."

 

[muCephi]

Seems all these "Focus Groups" first concern is about how much money they get to raise. $50 grand for a max 15 min episode seems like twice more than the standard Fan Funded Film requires now

Time and money and talent and story arcs and copyright - all the means they could exploit to make a profit are locked up now. They can argue the advantages of giving them access all they want. Locked. Up.

 

[muCephi]

Christ, it's a freakin' deposition subpoena! That means it's not "the studios might set up a deposition" - it means they already are.

Don't forget, the deposition process "is starting *now*" in late August, conclusion drawn since Terry recently leaked that he got a demand.

Guess it makes the arguments appear current to see it this way.

 

[dmac]

deposition process

Damn old eyes read it as deportation and I got excited for a minute.
Peters: (15 years later)
This is Ceti Alpha 5

 

[Steve Roby]

From the copyright page of a recent Star Trek novel:

™, ® and © 2016 by CBS Studios Inc. STAR TREK and related marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.​

To the best of my knowledge, based on what Trek novelists have said, Star Trek novels are work for hire. The authors retain no copyright in the works, nor do they claim any. That belongs to CBS (now) or Paramount in the days before the split. CBS could base a new TV series on, say, the Vanguard novels without owing anything at all to the writers of the Vanguard books, because CBS owns everything in those books outright.

It's different with the Doctor Who books in the UK, where authors' original elements remain theirs, so Paul Cornell can licence his Doctor Who novel character Bernice Summerfield for non-Doctor Who books, Lawrence Miles can licence his book creation Faction Paradox, etc. But nothing in a Star Trek novel remains the property of the author. It all belongs to CBS.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

Once the guidelines came out, rule # 9 concerned me greatly it is not a "Guideline" because an IP holder can either grant copyright assignment or they don't. If they expressly forbid assignment there is no copyright and hence no ownership to your derivative work.

Perhaps you could consider the framers of the guidelines didn't even consider the ramifications this would have on script writers, perhaps it was meant for something else. Maybe I have it all wrong but that's what it says and it exceeds my knowledge at that point.

I came to the conclusion that #9 was meant to keep established writers from contributing their material to fan films.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

What I would do? I'd write the story I want to tell as a completely original work, not a Star Trek tale, and I register the copyright for that. Then I'd adapt the story as a Star Trek fan script. That way you've registered your own creations in an original, protected work.

What a great idea! Brilliant.

 

[dmac]

What I would do? I'd write the story I want to tell as a completely original work, not a Star Trek tale, and I register the copyright for that. Then I'd adapt the story as a Star Trek fan script. That way you've registered your own creations in an original, protected work.

Wasn't attempting to skirt any of Star Trek guidelines but on occasion it's what might have possibly happened (attempt at future deniability....LoL) because I write in a personal universe unrelated to Star Trek and register the work, latter the story could have even possibly been lent to another writer to adapt for Star Trek. Sometimes it's only a character that you grab from prior registered work. I mean like geez who says a body has to be organized to write, that's what good editors are for.

 

[Wowbagger]

Note that Star Trek faces potential liability from allowing fan film makers to assert their copyrights. That's got to be one reason for the decision to discourage it.

Example: Suppose Star Trek Discovery makes an episode about a character who dies, but is "resurrected" as an advanced hologram of himself, and has to come to terms with that.

The morning after it airs, Eric Busby files a lawsuit against CBS/Paramount alleging copyright infringement of "The Sum of One's Memories," episode 2 of The Section 31 Files from Darker Projects. (Busby would never in a million years do this, and especially not now that he has distanced DP from fan works -- I am only using him as an example.) Now, I'm willing to bet darseks to doughnuts that only a tiny fraction of the people in this thread have ever heard of The Section 31 Files, much less listened to "The Sum of One's Memories" (my favorite episode of theirs, for what it's worth). And, if a bunch of hardcore nerds like you haven't heard of it, how many people at CBS have?

Yet Busby does own the copyright on all original elements* in "The Sum of One's Memories," because that's how the Berne Convention works. So he could conceivably have just enough grounds to litigate. (He'd lose in the end, because he'd never be able to prove CBS had prior knowledge of his work, but the litigation would be costly.) And that would be an enormous headache for CBS.

This is one of the reasons, incidentally, why Star Trek eventually had to shut down its open script submission program, though they valiantly kept it open for years after the lawyers told them to close it. A freelance writer would submit a script; the writing staff on Star Trek -- without ever having any contact with the open submission department -- would make an episode with similar elements; the freelance writer would decide Paramount stole his idea and sue; Paramount would invariably make the problem go away, but at no small expense.

I always thought Trek should bring back the submission program, but with the stipulation that you forfeit all rights to sue Paramount over anything related to it if they don't purchase it.

Anyway, I'm going off-topic. Point is, there's a strong CYA element at play in the provisions against copyright assertion. I can't blame CBS for including it.

*Just the original elements, not the Star Trek elements. Separating the two is a court case in and of itself, but suffice to say that there are some copyrightable and therefore copyrighted elements in any episode of unlicensed fan fiction, which, under current IP law, are owned by the author, not the IP holder.

 

[dmac]

I came to the conclusion that #9 was meant to keep established writers from contributing their material to fan films.

Or just the exchange of money for the creation of derivative work without getting a written copyright assignment.
Now I've read too much, did you know that dance steps could put you in violation of copy protected works?

 

[Wowbagger]

My read of this is slightly different:

He seems to take issue with desktop-wallpapers with the STC-cast in costume (plus Enterprise and the words "Star Trek") offered as "thank you" to donors of $10 or more, which he thinks are infringing on CBS's IP...

Bless you, sir, for paying attention for longer than I did. I defer to your superior conclusions.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

Or just the exchange of money for the creation of derivative work without getting a written copyright assignment. Now I've read too much, did you know that dance steps could put you in violation of copy protected works?

Frankly, it just doesn't matter to most fans. Having published hundreds of fanzines from 1979 until 2013, I've run into plenty of zine pirates who gladly buy a copy of your latest issue, and run to the nearest penny a copy place and print out hundreds of copies to sell at conventions. *shrug* I ran into some pirated DVDs of Project: Potemkin at a convention in June. They weren't produced by us. But there's nothing I can do about it.

CBS/Paramount is making it clear that fans are free to make fan films. But we cannot register the scripts or production. We cannot get professional actors involved with Star Trek (or CBS, Paramount or Viacom). It's apparent that they want these productions to be FAN films, and they've taken steps to make that so. And you know, it's their property, and I'm just glad to make these little films that our production teams have FUN producing.

To get back on topic, there's a production out there that made it clear that they were "professional." They solicited funds in the name of Star Trek and created a studio in a rented warehouse with those funds with the goal of making a profit. CBS/P had no choice but to step in and and put an end to it. And I still think it's quite a possibility that the studio may lose.

This week's seen a number of attacks on STC and NV/P2. Sadly, I think that's only going to get worse.

 

[dmac]

Frankly, it just doesn't matter to most fans. Having published hundreds of fanzines from 1979 until 2013, I've run into plenty of zine pirates who gladly buy a copy of your latest issue, and run to the nearest penny a copy place and print out hundreds of copies to sell at conventions. *shrug* I ran into some pirated DVDs of Project: Potemkin at a convention in June. They weren't produced by us. But there's nothing I can do about it.

CBS/Paramount is making it clear that fans are free to make fan films. But we cannot register the scripts or production. We cannot get professional actors involved with Star Trek (or CBS, Paramount or Viacom). It's apparent that they want these productions to be FAN films, and they've taken steps to make that so. And you know, it's their property, and I'm just glad to make these little films that our production teams have FUN producing.

To get back on topic, there's a production out there that made it clear that they were "professional." They solicited funds in the name of Star Trek and created a studio in a rented warehouse with those funds with the goal of making a profit. CBS/P had no choice but to step in and and put an end to it. And I still think it's quite a possibility that the studio may lose.

This week's seen a number of attacks on STC and NV/P2. Sadly, I think that's only going to get worse.

Believe me I have seen first hand how quickly and nasty the infighting can get once it gets rolling. I think that's where and why I became concerned after listening to a few podcasts. I not worried about people acting out of logic, it's the ones acting out of spite.