• 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.
Feeding a skewed story to the faithful followers might make them and him feel good, but it does nothing to influence the outcome of the case. The judge doesn't give half a damn about all the posturing and hoohah put out by the defense.

It's been shown by AP's own words that he intended to profit from IP to which he had no rights. It's in the public record that he used the IP of CBS and Paramount to build out a studio and pay salaries to staff. I'm sure that it's in the accounting that he used donor money, collected on the promise of a film which he had no rights to produce, to travel and promote said film.

There is no question that Alec Peters received financial benefit in the form of a salary and union dues from donor funds.

All the blustering from AP and surrogates is irrelevant. The facts are the facts.
 
urbandefault said:
All the blustering from AP and surrogates is irrelevant. The facts are the facts.
Click to expand...

This sounds like their swan song preview. It was totally reasonable compared to other projects and thus no willful exploitation was intended, except that some judge came along and imposed his uninformed opinion to the contrary.

All ya gotta do is leave out all the specific ways Axanar was egregiously more intent on "personal gain" from the IP than any other project (i.e., the entire case). Then conclude its an even battle of equally valid opinions, so the judge's ruling is just one more opinion, with no more basis in truth than any other.

That and a chicken sandwich will pay the judgment, I am sure.
 
Last edited:
urbandefault said:
Feeding a skewed story to the faithful followers might make them and him feel good, but it does nothing to influence the outcome of the case. The judge doesn't give half a damn about all the posturing and hoohah put out by the defense.

It's been shown by AP's own words that he intended to profit from IP to which he had no rights. It's in the public record that he used the IP of CBS and Paramount to build out a studio and pay salaries to staff. I'm sure that it's in the accounting that he used donor money, collected on the promise of a film which he had no rights to produce, to travel and promote said film.

There is no question that Alec Peters received financial benefit in the form of a salary and union dues from donor funds.

All the blustering from AP and surrogates is irrelevant. The facts are the facts.
Click to expand...

The other thing that often gets overlooked is that Peters and Burnett constantly posted screeds on social media talking about how Axanar was the true bearer of the mantle of Star Trek and they were taking it back from JJ Abrams, that dirty usurper to the throne. Any first-year law student could tell you that's textbook tortious interference.
 
Timby said:
The other thing that often gets overlooked is that Peters and Burnett constantly posted screeds on social media talking about how Axanar was the true bearer of the mantle of Star Trek and they were taking it back from JJ Abrams, that dirty usurper to the throne. Any first-year law student could tell you that's textbook tortious interference.
Click to expand...
ohhh. Another of those words I've always known, known it was 'something' to do with something legal, but have had no clue as to the meaning:
tort- a wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to civil legal liability
and now to tortious interference- also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff's contractual or other business relationships

Which relates to, or maybe is the same thing as intentional market 'harm'?

The very first production writing I found on December 31st last year when I began looking into this:
2015
"Axanar is not just an independent Star Trek film; it is the beginning of a whole new way that fans can get the content they want, by funding it themselves. Why dump hundreds or thousands of dollars a year on 400 cable channels"
"Hollywood is changing. Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and other providers are redefining content delivery, and Axanar Productions/Ares Studios hopes to be part of that movement."

Which even though I was still an avid supporter/donor at that time and thinking the production and producer were being misunderstood and attacked, even I was posting that if I owned the product in question I would logically move to injunction and bring a lawsuit if I felt it necessary because I could see those words do look like an intentional credible threat to my property. I mean if I owned it and all. And was later to find that that quote came directly from the Indiegogo write-up to ST fans to solicit donations from us to make all this happen.

And found the producer's log in January 2015 announcing the Ares Studio Launch in which the producer said "The Axanar team is happy to announce that we have signed a lease on 16,000sf warehouse in Valencia, CA. The new home of Axanar Productions will be called “Ares Studios” and you are all part of it because of your donations to the Axanar Kickstarter. We intend to turn this warehouse and office space into a fully functional sound stage. This will allow us to not only make “Axanar” but other Star Trek projects after Axanar and other Sci-Fi projects. (Robert Burnett and I have already acquired the rights to a fantastic book series by David Gerrold.)"

But on January 7th this year, when reading the production's new FAQ that called everything said before the lawsuit came down as speculative nonsense... I went huh uh. You said what you are doing is a way for us to get what we want by circumventing the owners and make our own. You said you are going to make more ST after you finish this production. You said we wouldn't need to pay for cable to get what we want. You said you want to be part of this new method of distribution like Netflix & Hulu does. You said you are going to make more ST and more sci-fi with this studio. You called it a studio. YOU did. You signed a three year lease on this building to make a, what, 90 minute ST film? Why did you sign a three year lease to make a 90 or so minute film? To do as you said, make more ST, make other sci-fi. You said this. You 'said' you've built this 'studio' with the money you solicited from we ST fans. Solicited using the lure of ST to us. Using the owner's product to attract us to give you money. You said this yourself in your blogs and videos. You said this yourself in your production log.

You said this. So many places and for a very long time.

And that, I've come to learn, is 'not' Fair Use. It is intended market harm. And maybe tortious interference?



And, Ms. Ranahan, when I was watching Prelude to Axanar I was seeing the Vulcan Ambassador Soval. I don't care if you decided that lettering on his clothes is Chinese, or whatever. I can't read Vulcan anyway. That guy was the Vulcan Ambassador Soval and you know it. He IS a famous Star Trek character. And I was watching a Klingon and Klingon spaceships. And they ARE from Star Trek. Klingons and those ships are a Huge part of Star Trek. All of it. I was watching Garth. And he IS a Star Trek character. That may be one episode, but it is a well known stand out Star Trek episode. They were talking about the Federation/Klingon war. And that IS from Star Trek. A FAMOUS part of Star Trek. There are plenty of references to it in Star Trek. So I was watching a Star Trek show. You know I was watching a Star Trek show. I knew I was watching a Star Trek show. Everybody knew... and knows that was a Star Trek show. And the coming promised show was going to be, was said to be by the producer, an in-depth enactment of that well known Star Trek history. Another Star Trek show. The producer knows it. I know it. All the donors know it. It was advertised to be. And you know it too.

We have, Star Trek has, lots of One Episode very famous episodes... The Carbomite Maneuver, City On The Edge Of Forever, Balance of Terror, Charlie X, What Are Little Girls Made Of, The Squire of Gothos, This Side of Paradise, Amok Time, Turnabout Intruder.. just to start a list......... that had one character... who IS famous in Star Trek... and who is never seen again... just like Garth of Izar. Most of them are never mentioned after their one episode.

But that does not make them insignificant to Star Trek.... they were, are, and remain famous in Star Trek, one episode or not.
 
Last edited:
OtherGene said:
"Hollywood is changing. Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and other providers are redefining content delivery, and Axanar Productions/Ares Studios hopes to be part of that movement."


Bowel movement, maybe
Click to expand...

11935088_502327576592013_508127552554708324_n.jpg



Meanwhile, I wonder if some donors inadvertently found their way to Terrible Terrence's NSFW version of Ares Digital.......... :guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:

 
Timby said:
The other thing that often gets overlooked is that Peters and Burnett constantly posted screeds on social media talking about how Axanar was the true bearer of the mantle of Star Trek and they were taking it back from JJ Abrams, that dirty usurper to the throne. Any first-year law student could tell you that's textbook tortious interference.
Click to expand...

The podcasts are even richer, a stream of consciousness flow of Axanar goodness.
 
Last edited:
Tortious interference (with contract, actually) and market harm - similar yet not the same.

Tortious interference: "...a common law tort allowing a claim for damages against a defendant who wrongfully interferes with the plaintiff's contractual or business relationships."

Common law (generally) means this is super-old stuff. As in, some of it is from the time of King Henry VIII. Hell, trespass to land and trespass to chattels (that's just non-land property, yo') are even older.

Market harm: "... all sources understand this fair use factor to require analysis only of the deleterious economic effects of the defendant’s use on the market for or value of the plaintiff’s work of authorship."

See also: Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: "...the fair use of a copyrighted work... is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—...
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."

TL;DR tortious interference refers to contractual and business relationships, and it could conceivably apply here if plaintiffs felt defense was interfering with their business relationships. E. g. if Axa paid more money for costumes and started badmouthing CBS and Paramount to Anovos, then it might be tortious interference. C/P already have agreements with Anovos to produce licensed costume merchandise.

Market harm relates to sales but I believe it also relates to perception in the marketplace. A segment of the fans bad mouth the Kelvin timeline films all the time, but they are exercising their rights to their opinions and those are not actionable (and they are not defamation, etc.). However, when that's coupled with an infringer producing a product and convincing potential customers to purchase their product (or ancillary products relating to their main product; e. g. patches or costumes vis a vis the film) instead of the licensed product (whether the main product, e. g. films or cable subscriptions, or ancillary products like costumes, patches, models, and the like), then there is a rather direct demonstration of market harm.

And, BTW, that's why asking for everyone's salary or for anticipated film earnings from the plaintiffs should be a nonstarter.

All plaintiffs need to show is that Joe or Susie Fan bought an Axanar patch (or 'donated' and received it in exchange for consideration), instead of buying a licensed patch, and market harm is proven.
 
RedForman said:
Meanwhile, I wonder if some donors inadvertently found their way to Terrible Terrence's NSFW version of Ares Digital.......... :guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:

Click to expand...

Y'know, on one hand, can't really blame them for this one.

On the other hand, not only does it show what kind of people they once associated with (that whole NSFW thing was pretty low-class to begin with), but that post was... Axanormal enough... to make me wonder if Alec got his hands on Diana Prime's passwords...
 
Ion said:
Y'know, on one hand, can't really blame them for this one.

On the other hand, not only does it show what kind of people they once associated with (that whole NSFW thing was pretty low-class to begin with), but that post was... Axanormal enough... to make me wonder if Alec got his hands on Diana Prime's passwords...
Click to expand...

Indeed it was, can't argue with that. I would venture to say though that this makes the remaining donors look even more stupid than they already do (for sticking with this farce that has been heaped on so egregiously)
 
Ion said:
that post was... Axanormal enough... to make me wonder if Alec got his hands on Diana Prime's passwords...
Click to expand...
I'll just bet that happens alot. How hard would it be for Alec to crack her code ("IH4RTALEC4EVA" or "DIEKR1SSTALDIE!!") if he didn't know it too?

But in this instance I don't think it was Alec because I don't think I've ever read a social media post where he hasn't abused someone. And in this case Scumbag Terry would surely be in line for a solid dose of his impotent wrath.
 
Noname Given said:
Well, it depends on whether he's a good attorney, or a bad attorney. As I said I work for a court, and I'm sure Jespah would have similar stories in that sometimes in watching certain attorneys conduct their cases you are left wondering: "Did this guy GO to law school??/How in the Hell did he pass the Bar exam??" ;)

EG Alec peters could be n "Attorney by training..." <--- he's just a very BAD one.:ack:
Click to expand...
I worked for a major law firm. Most of the attorneys were sharp as a tack--many were faster thinkers than me. There was one guy who made me wonder how he even got his associate position as he was not stupid but not top law school level.

Anybody guess the punchline yet? His father was a judge.
 
jespah said:
I also tackled the ole Supplemental Memoranda:
http://www.gandtshow.com/supplemental-memoranda-axanar-compel-disc/
Click to expand...
Luv the opening paragraphs.
Excerpt: "In all seriousness, people, enough trees have died already.......However, there are more documents. And I am here to get us all through them."
:D Much appreciation that you are doing that too.


Edited... Plaintiff attorney speaking:
" As for your assertion that there is nothing privileged that
has been withheld by Alec Peters and Axanar, I am not sure that is correct as Alec has publicly stated that he has spoken
with other attorneys other than you ‐ both before and after you were retained. If you are demanding a privilege log, the
defendants need to provide one as well."
Click to expand...

Your commentary: "Yet again, I remind all readers: The Internet is Forever."


:lol: Indeed. And back in my early team 'a' days I was posting 'I just wish they would use some self-monitoring in saying all this stuff. At least until all this is over.'

And as the world turns:
words -> circle back -> bite -> defendant


Edit: Just finished it. To quote you
"And so the lawsuit continues …."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
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