CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
The "fan film" thing keeps coming up.
A "fan film" is obvious in its content, portrayal, presentation, etc. What AP & Co-conspirators tried to do was, as stated, produce a film that would directly compete with officially licensed Star Trek.
AP then collected donations which he used for his personal benefit in travel, meals, vehicle costs, building a for-profit studio, etc., all shown in unredacted documents that refer to testimony under oath.
It is then shown in court documents that AP contacted Netflix and Amazon, to negotiate an agreement that would allow him to produce unlicensed Star Trek series.
The Axanar "donor store" is continuing to market unlicensed intellectual property.
There are many more infringements by AP that we could discuss, but I think I've made my point.
I am not "trained as an attorney" but just this short list would convince me that AP and Axanar needs to be shut down and punished to the full extent of the law.
(To the "HE DID IT SO WHY CAN'T I? crowd: No other fan production has pushed the limits so far as to warrant legal action. Take a breath and look at the facts.)
A "fan film" is obvious in its content, portrayal, presentation, etc. What AP & Co-conspirators tried to do was, as stated, produce a film that would directly compete with officially licensed Star Trek.
AP then collected donations which he used for his personal benefit in travel, meals, vehicle costs, building a for-profit studio, etc., all shown in unredacted documents that refer to testimony under oath.
It is then shown in court documents that AP contacted Netflix and Amazon, to negotiate an agreement that would allow him to produce unlicensed Star Trek series.
The Axanar "donor store" is continuing to market unlicensed intellectual property.
There are many more infringements by AP that we could discuss, but I think I've made my point.
I am not "trained as an attorney" but just this short list would convince me that AP and Axanar needs to be shut down and punished to the full extent of the law.
(To the "HE DID IT SO WHY CAN'T I? crowd: No other fan production has pushed the limits so far as to warrant legal action. Take a breath and look at the facts.)
And I just read sommmmeewwhhheerrrrre the defendant talking about selling 30 or so Bluerays and close to all of the DVDs.
Oh. I 'think' it was on the production's site in one of the blogs about one of the conventions the defendant attended, I 'think' it was this year. So that's additional unlicensed IP selling outside of the donor store.
Last edited:
Okay so now I'm thinking about where did the alleged $400K go that allegedly was not pay to owners of props in the MGM v prop company bankruptcy.
-the auction is set up (it's the defendant who's somehow in charge of it, responsible for the sales and payments. Do I have this right?)
-the auction happens
-people pay for the items
-they get their payed for items (albeit with irregularities in, shipping costs, added non-[something] stuff to complete [somethingoranother]
Then the lawsuit happens.... because some/most/all of the sellers didn't get paid for the merchandise they consigned(?) to the prop company to sell for them? Is that accurate? The money lost and not recovered belonged to the sellers who didn't get paid?
So where did 'that' money go? The buyers sent the money in or they wouldn't have been sent the items. But the money didn't get to some/most/all of the sellers? Is that correct?
How did the money the buyers paid out.... not get to the seller(s)?
-the auction is set up (it's the defendant who's somehow in charge of it, responsible for the sales and payments. Do I have this right?)
-the auction happens
-people pay for the items
-they get their payed for items (albeit with irregularities in, shipping costs, added non-[something] stuff to complete [somethingoranother]
Then the lawsuit happens.... because some/most/all of the sellers didn't get paid for the merchandise they consigned(?) to the prop company to sell for them? Is that accurate? The money lost and not recovered belonged to the sellers who didn't get paid?
So where did 'that' money go? The buyers sent the money in or they wouldn't have been sent the items. But the money didn't get to some/most/all of the sellers? Is that correct?
How did the money the buyers paid out.... not get to the seller(s)?
Last edited:
Thanks, @Kytee !
The trouble with what the legal implications of the money Jonathan Lane might have raised via GoFundMe is that it's far from clear whether he is an actual employee of Axanar Productions. To begin with, according to their own FAQ, Axanar has no employees; all its workers are independent contractors. Lane's self-identification on his declaration to the court that he is a writer for Axanar Productions Inc. by itself doesn't confirm whether he is either an employee or a contractor.
His employment status would likely affect the connection between any money he might have raised via GoFundMe and Axanar itself. I'd be surprised if Jonathan is paid anything for the work he does on Axanar's behalf; I think he would disclose if he were being paid. Just my opinion, however. As with all things Axanar the details remain opaque.
From what I've been told by Axanar insiders, Bawden's advice regarding placing money into escrow was disregarded. And the trial balloon about money having been placed into escrow was floated by an Axanar surrogate, who was quickly told to retract the statement. I have no doubt the studios will shake the trees for any money given they know how much was raised from crowdfunding and generated via Axanar's various commercial endeavors; their court filings indicate they're going after every penny.
Yeah
To put things in perspective, I travel to Europe occasionally on business. A coach ticket to London is usually about $1500, if the meeting is important I fly business class and the ticket is closer to $8000. I'd possibly believe he got bumped due to being a frequent flier, but the cupcake thing is 100% bullshit. However, that sort of spending is a good way to burn through a small fortune pretending to be a big shot Hollywood producer
ohhhhh. thanks!
Last edited:
As I mentioned yesterday, willful copyright infringement--such as trafficking in counterfeit goods--is a federal crime. And it does get prosecuted. The 11th Circuit in Atlanta just upheld a criminal copyright conviction of a man who sold counterfeit Viagra. The defendant, who did not have a prior criminal record, got 5 years and 3 months in prison.
So the donor store is still going?
And there was more crowdsourcing on top of Kickstarter and IndieGoGO?
It is like Peters is begging to get smacked down hard. He better hope the IRS or State of California don't get involved, or he's likely going away for a while.
Alec claimed that's what happens sometimes in business, it cost more than it should have to operate and that was the reason. And besides, he said, MGM had just gotten done bankrupting something or stiffing some other group, so if they have the right, he does too.
What a quality individual some fans hitched their wagon to.
Latest from AxaMonitor: Our monthly Top 10 articles, plus top tweets and site stats.
October-November Top 10 Articles »
October-November Top 10 Articles »
The GoFundMe was aborted after Alec Peters found out Jonathan Lane went rogue in starting the campaign.
However, Axanar has raised money on top of its crowdfunding proceeds that it has never disclosed. This include such sources as direct donations on their website, "retroactive" donations (actually Blu-ray/DVD sales of Prelude to Axanar) and merchandise sales. Estimates for these undisclosed funds total ~$200,000.
^^^^
You gotta wonder if that is part of the "$150,000 of his own money" claim <--- Where Alec Peters now claims he paid back to Axanar somehow.
Last edited:
There are also (possibly) direct donations at conventions, that sort of thing.
Oh and I just read this bit from one of their experts (Oki Declaration, Exhibit 3, Jenkins opinion):
Oh and I just read this bit from one of their experts (Oki Declaration, Exhibit 3, Jenkins opinion):
But, at its core, Prelude to Axanar is doing what all fan films tend
to do and in that sense, it does not deserve to be singled out for legal sanction in a context where so
much grassroots cultural production has been tolerated through the years. Not unlike a landowner
who allows people to cut across his property for five decades, there is something arbitrary and
punitive about choosing one particular trespasser and throwing the book at them.
Except that is exactly how copyright law works in America. An IP holder can bring suit against one, any, or all, or none of the parties infringing on the IP. The lawsuits can seem strategic, unfair, stupid, or downright mean. But cherry picking enforcement is absolutely allowed.to do and in that sense, it does not deserve to be singled out for legal sanction in a context where so
much grassroots cultural production has been tolerated through the years. Not unlike a landowner
who allows people to cut across his property for five decades, there is something arbitrary and
punitive about choosing one particular trespasser and throwing the book at them.
So can they subpoena Peters personal financial records? Seems like bank activity would be the quickest way to figure things out.
I suspect those donations were deposited in Peters' left trouser pocket and then invested directly into the Hilton guest bar, er "work expenses".
- Status