cbs: can i haz your stuff?
axanar: here you go *promotes cbs to leader*
*CBS kicks axanar out and sells off everything axanar related*
cbs: there, sorted. now there is no need for the lawsuit..
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Also, One other thing. I would like to see a poll seeing if CBS/Paramount was right in filing this lawsuit against ANAXAR or not and a second poll stating this. If you were in charge of the Star Trek Legacy for CBS/Paramount. WOULD YOU HAVE FILED SUIT AGANST ANAXAR ??
It's not a matter which can be answered with a simple 'Yes' or 'No' poll though, it's considerably more complex than that... Points to consider:
1) CBS/Paramount have the right to sue someone (anyone) for infringing their copyright. That is not debatable.
2) CBS/Paramount have let other 'violations' slide because the projects complied with specific guidelines. This weakens their case for 'vigorous defence', but may be actionable if the Axanar production can be proven to have deliberately breached given guidelines.
3) Alec Peters remuneration as Producer (and a principle actor) (in my opinion) is as much a 'production cost' as Richard Hatch and Tony Todd's fees and building a set.
4) Alec Peters building a Ares Studios to use on other projects is an abuse of the funds and good will of the supporters. It might come under grounds for criminal prosecution for obtaining funds by deception/fraud.
5) Are CBS/Paramount really suing because they care about any infringement or financial malfeasance, or, are they scared (and with good cause) that Axanar productions was on track to provide a project which threatens the take on Beyond and the new series (and thus the streaming service subscriptions) because it would be providing fandom with a project they actually want and believe in, without the need for any alternate universe malarky or streaming subscriptions, and simply hiding behind the legislature of 'copyright infringement'?
I think CBS/Paramount have the right to sue, but I think they're making a PR blunder, and will alienate a significant amount of the fanbase who is already in two minds about Beyond, or signing up for their streaming service. They should have simply let them get on with it, got on with their own projects, and then let the fans decide what they want to see, and what they like...
I think Alec Peters should be prosecuted for using the raised funds to start Ares Studios, but that is not CBS/Paramount's complaint to make, and needs to be taken up by the supporting donors as a class action for obtaining funds by deception.
I don't think picking up Axanar would be the right move for CBS IF the allegations of fraud and violating the agreement are true. That sends a message that you can lie, cheat, and you will still be rewarded with all the fame and glory and this time with an official stamp of approval on it. If Peters did something wrong, I say squash Axanar and make sure it never sees the light of day so that no one else gets that kind of idea.
I think the idea intended, was that CBS pick up the intellectual rights to Axanar, make the project themselves, with their own facilities and funds, and hang Alec Peters out to dry for the supporting donors to take action against... I don't believe it was intended to suggest that they hire the Axanar production crew and give them a job...
Look, it has raised about a million bucks. They have a "Gift" "Donation" shop where you can buy t-shirts and stuff that are based on the Axanar/Star Trek IP; Paramount needed to do something...
That said, perhaps they should consider working "With them" and make it finish.
Look, it has raised about a million bucks. They have a "Gift" "Donation" shop where you can buy t-shirts and stuff that are based on the Axanar/Star Trek IP; Paramount needed to do something...
That said, perhaps they should consider working "With them" and make it finish.
Why? I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
Look, it has raised about a million bucks. They have a "Gift" "Donation" shop where you can buy t-shirts and stuff that are based on the Axanar/Star Trek IP; Paramount needed to do something...
That said, perhaps they should consider working "With them" and make it finish.
Why? I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
Alec Peters is the head of Axanar, and he was personally making money off of it.
At any rate.... I'm pretty sure the law doesn't require you to either A: prosecute every infringement, or B: ignore them. It does have the option to allow you to declare something "authorized"... even if that happens after the project is already running. If you choose to do so, then it was defended from misuse. The key here is "unauthorized".
Alec Peters is the head of Axanar, and he was personally making money off of it.
And as above, I believe that can be justified as a production expense, just as Richard Hatch and Tony Todd's fees are production expenses. I think it's a pretty weak move to take payment for a project he wanted to do, but I believe it might be justifiable as an expense. However. Setting up a studio which can be used on future projects as a business, on the other hand, that is definitely not kosher, and I hope he swings for it, metaphorically speaking...
At any rate.... I'm pretty sure the law doesn't require you to either A: prosecute every infringement, or B: ignore them. It does have the option to allow you to declare something "authorized"... even if that happens after the project is already running. If you choose to do so, then it was defended from misuse. The key here is "unauthorized".
According to jonsill's example of asprin, it does... Like I said, I don't know if Disney actually sandblast hospital walls or if that's just an urban legend, but they are pathological in their defence of their IP...
For example, there's a brand of watches available called Alpha. The name is clearly a pun on Omega, and the stylings of their watches are 90% copies of various Omega and Rolex watches. The differences are little more than the branding on the dial, and in the instance of their copy of the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean, it does not have the helium escape valve at the 11 o clock position like the Omega has. It's pretty obvious to anyone who looks at the watches what they are copies of, and that they have changed just enough details (ie branding) to not get sued for counterfeiting, but they had not changed enough details that the design lineage is not immediately obvious.
Axanar, for example, is not doing what Alpha do with their watches, they are doing what the factories who produce the 1:1 counterfeits are doing, or more correctly, what those factories do when the release a 'fantasy model' ie a watch which has all the stylings and brandings of say a Rolex, but which is not a model which Rolex themselves released. An example would be, say, the DeepGMT, which combines the aesthetic and case-design of the Deep Sea Sea-Dweller, but with a GMT-functioning movement (and thus 24 hour markings on the bezel and an extra GMT hand) To any lay-person seeing one in a bar, the DeepGMT would look like a Rolex, and likely not even raise suspicion of its authenticity (other than having the R Word on the dial) but to a collector, or someone who was familiar with the range Rolex offers, they would know straight away that it wasn't a legit watch... To the lay-person flicking through YouTube, Axanar would look like any other Star Trek show/film. It's only the fan, who would know it wasn't an official release.
In that regard, as I said, CBS/Paramount do have the right to sue, but the strength of their case is weakened by every other fan production which they have allowed. Now to be fair, I doubt anyone would consider Renegades to be an official Star Trek production, just like someone wearing a cheap-knock off Rolex where the gold is rubbing off is going to easily be identified as someone wearing a fake. But a production of the level of Axanar, or Star Trek Continues, they look just like the real thing...
Alec Peters is the head of Axanar, and he was personally making money off of it.
And as above, I believe that can be justified as a production expense, just as Richard Hatch and Tony Todd's fees are production expenses. I think it's a pretty weak move to take payment for a project he wanted to do, but I believe it might be justifiable as an expense. However. Setting up a studio which can be used on future projects as a business, on the other hand, that is definitely not kosher, and I hope he swings for it, metaphorically speaking...
Actually his personal salary was ~80% of the money being paid directly to individuals. But another thing was the extent of his "fundraising". He was pretty Ferengi about it... The Axanar brand coffee seems like a particularly egregious one.
At any rate.... I'm pretty sure the law doesn't require you to either A: prosecute every infringement, or B: ignore them. It does have the option to allow you to declare something "authorized"... even if that happens after the project is already running. If you choose to do so, then it was defended from misuse. The key here is "unauthorized".
According to jonsill's example of asprin, it does... Like I said, I don't know if Disney actually sandblast hospital walls or if that's just an urban legend, but they are pathological in their defence of their IP...
Actually, you missed the key distinction: "unauthorized". In the aspirin example they literally did nothing. The important part is whether you put in writing that you have chosen to allow a use of your IP. It's much like the licensing deals for merch, but with no money changing hands. It doesn't necessarily have to be a triple notarized legal document.
Actually his personal salary was ~80% of the money being paid directly to individuals. But another thing was the extent of his "fundraising". He was pretty Ferengi about it... The Axanar brand coffee seems like a particularly egregious one.
Are you sure on the 80%? Not to be awkward, but if they've raised a million bucks, $35'000 isn't 80%... I admit, I haven't gone over the financial release with a calculator though... As above though, while it is certainly a pretty TRIBBLE way of getting himself (what would be for many folks) a good year's pay, if it can be justified as the production cost... It might or might not be a breach, but I think it is a defendable point, or at least, a stance which one could make a defence (which may or may not be successful)
Actually, you missed the key distinction: "unauthorized". In the aspirin example they literally did nothing. The important part is whether you put in writing that you have chosen to allow a use of your IP. It's much like the licensing deals for merch, but with no money changing hands. It doesn't necessarily have to be a triple notarized legal document.
I intentionally overlook it (but am aware of) in so much as CBS/Paramount didn't shut the project down immediately. They had meetings, presumeably gave guidelines, and let the project go ahead. From that stance, the use of the IP was authorized... That the Axanar producers later apparently did something to draw the suit (which as I speculate, might simply be the proximity to Beyond and the new series under development) is not the same as the entire project simply being unauthorized. That the project has done something which breaches the guidelines, which then makes it 'actionable', is still slightly different.
A few years back a friend released an indy horror film. Initially, it was not given a UK certification due to the content. However, he just had to re-edit and lose a few bits, and the film was then certificated. Just because it didn't meet the censor's requirements first time round, he wasn't made to destroy the rushes and abandon the project, he just had to either i) edit it to comply with the certification guidelines, or ii) not release it in the UK...
Bearing that in mind, if this violation is a case of CBS/Paramount objecting to the inclusion of, for instance, Soval and Garth, then Alec just has to re-edit and remove any reference to Soval and Garth, and then it would be once more within compliance. If the breach is simply because it's 'Star Trek IP', well, they already let that slide with Continues, Renegades, and others, so could have a hard time defending their objection in this soecific instance... If the breach is that they are not allowed to make a profit on the project, then as mentioned before, if they show that money goes to production costs, then that is not profit (and as before, I strongly object to his use of the funds to start Ares Studios) and they wouldn't be in breach. If they were to refund any surplus moneys, then they would equally, not be 'making a profit'. The Axanar merch, is a slightly stickier wicket. Axanar, and the associated logo, is Alec Peters' IP, not CBS's, and as such the coffee is being branded off that, not necessarily off Star Trek... That would then be an independant revinue stream, and likely/possibly not subject to the same financial guidelines as the crowdfunding... I admit, it's seriously splitting hairs, and shows a very devious mind to consider taking the decision to behave thus, but the Libran in me can see the perspective they're trying to come from (rightly or wrongly) I can see what they're trying to do, or at least, the internal consistency of their argument (but again, that doesn't make it right, nor that I agree with it) CBS/Paramount, on the other hand, are fighting from the weaker corner of a previously authorized (as in allowed to continue) project, and notable examples of instances where other projects have not been sued for the same thing (IP Violation) CBS/Paramount might have more money behind them, and better lawyers, but their stance is weakened by past precedents of turning a blind eye... The TRIBBLE in me actually hopes that the Axanar lawyers are successful in proving that point, because it would be fun to see CBS/Paramount shown up, and also hopefully then open up the IP to other projects...
I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
And is, apparently, the issue that drove this, as it would seem that this was only revealed in the most recent earnings statement. Once he started diverting some of the funds to anything that wasn't Axanar, he was in violation of copyright law, as well as the trademark law he'd been violating. And the behemoth awoke...
I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
And is, apparently, the issue that drove this, as it would seem that this was only revealed in the most recent earnings statement. Once he started diverting some of the funds to anything that wasn't Axanar, he was in violation of copyright law, as well as the trademark law he'd been violating. And the behemoth awoke...
In that case, silly silly man... Ironically, it's not CBS/Paramount's case to complain about 'misuse of funds', that really should be a class action from the supporting donators, but how ironic that that was what made them act
Actually his personal salary was ~80% of the money being paid directly to individuals. But another thing was the extent of his "fundraising". He was pretty Ferengi about it... The Axanar brand coffee seems like a particularly egregious one.
Are you sure on the 80%? Not to be awkward, but if they've raised a million bucks, $35'000 isn't 80%... I admit, I haven't gone over the financial release with a calculator though... As above though, while it is certainly a pretty TRIBBLE way of getting himself (what would be for many folks) a good year's pay, if it can be justified as the production cost... It might or might not be a breach, but I think it is a defendable point, or at least, a stance which one could make a defence (which may or may not be successful)
No, I meant 80% of the part of the budget devoted to salaries. But in hindsight.. I think it was actually more like 60%. the other 3 guys who actually got a salary were something like 9k, 4.5k, and 6k.
I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
And is, apparently, the issue that drove this, as it would seem that this was only revealed in the most recent earnings statement. Once he started diverting some of the funds to anything that wasn't Axanar, he was in violation of copyright law, as well as the trademark law he'd been violating. And the behemoth awoke...
In that case, silly silly man... Ironically, it's not CBS/Paramount's case to complain about 'misuse of funds', that really should be a class action from the supporting donators, but how ironic that that was what made them act
It's not ironic. CBS made it clear that his project was only authorized as long as he didn't get a profit off of it. Thus his misappropriation is a violation of that agreement.
I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
And is, apparently, the issue that drove this, as it would seem that this was only revealed in the most recent earnings statement. Once he started diverting some of the funds to anything that wasn't Axanar, he was in violation of copyright law, as well as the trademark law he'd been violating. And the behemoth awoke...
In that case, silly silly man... Ironically, it's not CBS/Paramount's case to complain about 'misuse of funds', that really should be a class action from the supporting donators, but how ironic that that was what made them act
Actually it is...technically Peters is making money off the Star Trek name without paying CBS/Paramount.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
And is, apparently, the issue that drove this, as it would seem that this was only revealed in the most recent earnings statement. Once he started diverting some of the funds to anything that wasn't Axanar, he was in violation of copyright law, as well as the trademark law he'd been violating. And the behemoth awoke...
In that case, silly silly man... Ironically, it's not CBS/Paramount's case to complain about 'misuse of funds', that really should be a class action from the supporting donators, but how ironic that that was what made them act
Actually it is...technically Peters is making money off the Star Trek name without paying CBS/Paramount.
But if he paid the vig, would they still object?
As I said before, I don't think CBS/Paramount actually cares about the money he's made (My objection is how it's been used on a non-exclusive film studio) I think they're scared they'll be shown up over Beyond and the series so trying to shut it down before that happens, but they know full well that going to a judge with that would get them laughed out of court... So instead, they're using the "He made moneyz off our stuffs..." line, which is not only true, but also significantly more actionable than a mere infringement beef, which could simply be satisfied by either i) removing the infractions ii) giving credit (and I don't doubt that the titles will read 'based upon Star Trek, created by Gene Roddenberry) iii) paying a licensing fee iv) making a donation of the money in CBS/Paramount's name v) Any other to be decided upon restitutory acts. On paper it's solid, just like Alec Peter's actor/producer's fee, but that doesn't mean it's 'spirit of the law' true, and not guaranteed to be supported in court...
Again, corporations aren't people. They don't have emotions, they have bottom lines. The only reason they'd fire up their highly-expensive legal machine would be to protect that bottom line. "Showing them up" doesn't even enter into it.
I don't care if they've raised a million dollars or twenty, if those funds are being used to produce Axanar, they are not profit, just another revenue stream to finance the production. Yes, it's an IP violation, but so what? So is using the characters and settings of the Star Trek franchise... Activities which CBS/Paramount have previously alternately turned a blind eye to, and in one instance, even supported. They cannot claim IP violation as their sole motivating factor and not get laughed out of court, because they have not defended their IP in EVERY instance. This is why Disney sandblasts hospital walls (if they actually do that, and it's not just an urban myth) because if they don't go after each and every violation each and every time it happens, they can lose the rights (as illustrated upthread by jonsills mention of asprin) The second that they make commercial gain/profit, that is when it becomes truly actionable. Until then, it's just production money...
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
And is, apparently, the issue that drove this, as it would seem that this was only revealed in the most recent earnings statement. Once he started diverting some of the funds to anything that wasn't Axanar, he was in violation of copyright law, as well as the trademark law he'd been violating. And the behemoth awoke...
In that case, silly silly man... Ironically, it's not CBS/Paramount's case to complain about 'misuse of funds', that really should be a class action from the supporting donators, but how ironic that that was what made them act
Actually it is...technically Peters is making money off the Star Trek name without paying CBS/Paramount.
But if he paid the vig, would they still object?
As I said before, I don't think CBS/Paramount actually cares about the money he's made (My objection is how it's been used on a non-exclusive film studio) I think they're scared they'll be shown up over Beyond and the series so trying to shut it down before that happens, but they know full well that going to a judge with that would get them laughed out of court... So instead, they're using the "He made moneyz off our stuffs..." line, which is not only true, but also significantly more actionable than a mere infringement beef, which could simply be satisfied by either i) removing the infractions ii) giving credit (and I don't doubt that the titles will read 'based upon Star Trek, created by Gene Roddenberry) iii) paying a licensing fee iv) making a donation of the money in CBS/Paramount's name v) Any other to be decided upon restitutory acts. On paper it's solid, just like Alec Peter's actor/producer's fee, but that doesn't mean it's 'spirit of the law' true, and not guaranteed to be supported in court...
By August, Peters was giving interviews expressing confidence that the project would survive any legal heat. He spoke to The Wrap that month and reported having a meeting with CBS. He says he was told the film couldn't make money — and evidently, he took that to be a good sign that his film would be tolerated as long as it wasn't a commercial endeavor. "CBS has a long history of accepting fan films,” Peters told the entertainment site. “I think Axanar has become so popular that CBS realizes that we’re just making their brand that much better.”
The official line from CBS and Paramount, which manage the TV and film rights to the ‘Star Trek’ franchise, respectively, is not to endorse such a production.
“CBS has not authorized, sanctioned or licensed this project in any way, and this has been communicated to those involved,” a representative from the network told TheWrap. “We continue to object to professional commercial ventures trading off our property rights and are considering further options to protect these rights.” (Paramount did not return TheWrap’s request for comment.)
Commercial ventures. They are suing because it was making money. The one rule they were given.
and an Entertainment Lawyer's perspective:
While the filmmakers of “Star Trek: Axanar” appear confident that they’re operating in safe copyright territory, attorney Lincoln Bandlow, a partner at Fox Rothschild, LLP, insists otherwise.
“If it’s based on characters or other protectable elements of the ‘Star Trek’ work, then what they are doing is a derivative work and that’s a copyright infringement that is highly unlikely to be a protected fair use,” he said.
He added: “Just because there are a lot of these fan versions being done doesn’t make it legal.”
Bandlow urged Peters to tread carefully. “If you have permission from a copyright holder to do a fan-made film, there’s no problem,” said Bandlow. “But it’s real risky to be relying on an alleged oral licensing agreement to do such a work."
“An argument that this kind of use is not an infringement at all because no profit will be made is just flat wrong,” he continued. “That’s not the law … You will be depriving the copyright owners of a licensing fee where you have to presume there is a heavy licensing history … So arguing that they won’t make money off of it, that’s not going to be a slam dunk.”
Add to all that there seems to be a real reason why Tony Todd left the production: @TonyTodd54: Wish #Startrekfans all the best, but, There' are reasons I withdrew from #Axanar beyond #creativedifferences #Tellthetruth
Tony Todd @TonyTodd54 30 Dec 2015 @nickyjmorgan if u know me im not intimated easily. My issues came long before lawsuit. #Axanar should've been completed long ago.
Tony Todd @TonyTodd54 30 Dec 2015 @PhilsStalkers #Startrekfans I left 3 months ago
No longer supportive of #Crowdfunding no accountability
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Now that I've revisited their page to try and repost my comment, it seems that my comment wasn't only removed, but I've been banned. Nice to know that they don't want their die hard fan base to know about this.
If you really what to hear an ear full. Listen to the latest G & T Show for the last hour of their show they blast AXANAR. I let you guys and gals decide. If they went over the deep end or not.
Props to the G&T show for providing a transcript. Few podcasters take the time to do that, and it is appreciated.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Now that I've revisited their page to try and repost my comment, it seems that my comment wasn't only removed, but I've been banned. Nice to know that they don't want their die hard fan base to know about this.
Not surprised considering that this was his reaction to Tony Todd's tweets:
Alec Peters: "No Accountability? How about Tony Todd can't read."
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Yeah, that half-baked expense report that Alec Peters made public was the most incriminating evidence available... you don't NEED anything more than that to know he was misusing funds.
Yeah, that half-baked expense report that Alec Peters made public was the most incriminating evidence available... you don't NEED anything more than that to know he was misusing funds.
On the other claw, he spelled it out for anyone to see. So he must really think he's doing no wrong here. I like to know if people who donated did so in knowledge where the funds go, like "If you donate to Axanar you are supporting building the infrastructure for a new studio" or anything like that.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
If you really what to hear an ear full. Listen to the latest G & T Show for the last hour of their show they blast AXANAR. I let you guys and gals decide. If they went over the deep end or not.
Sweet Jesus I didn't realize what was completely involved...I'm seriously reconsidering my Star Trek Fan fic.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Yeah, that half-baked expense report that Alec Peters made public was the most incriminating evidence available... you don't NEED anything more than that to know he was misusing funds.
On the other claw, he spelled it out for anyone to see. So he must really think he's doing no wrong here. I like to know if people who donated did so in knowledge where the funds go, like "If you donate to Axanar you are supporting building the infrastructure for a new studio" or anything like that.
He did not say anything about funding for Ares studio up-front. In truth, I think what he was trying to do was "cook" the expense report so it looked like everything was spent on Axanar. He released the report as a way of showing his crowd funding backers what he'd spent their 1.1M on. But yeah it does seem like he didn't realize that people would notice that it wasn't legit...
I really have to wonder if Peters was acting as the accountant for Axanar. If so that would explain Todd's remark about "no accountability ". If there really was NO actual accountant handling the 1.1M... yeah... that would explain a lot. Especially seeing as he didn't bother trying to make the listed expenses add up...
Again, corporations aren't people. They don't have emotions, they have bottom lines. The only reason they'd fire up their highly-expensive legal machine would be to protect that bottom line. "Showing them up" doesn't even enter into it.
Corporations have people working for them. Flawed, fallible, emotional people. Are you guys seriously trying to say that no one at CBS isn't aware of the mixed feelings toward the JJ Movies, the idea of Kurtzman as EP, the idea of a streaming subscription? They have focus groups, polls, maybe even a team who's job is to analyse social media for references to their projects to keep their finger on the pulse.
Think of the scene in Trading Places where Billy-Ray tells the Duke brothers how the bottom-end of the industry is going to be reacting due to the time of year, and how the average guy was worried that he wouldn't "be able to buy my son the G.I Joe with the kung fu grip, and my wife and gonna fu- my wife isn't gonna want to make love to me 'cause I ain't got no money..."
There will be someone like that (maybe even a team of someones) at CBS, and they will have said to the Big Wigs, "Hey, look what some guy's doing on Kickstarter... It's got a lot of interest and support online..." *Runs Prelude to Axanar* *Big Wigs think about their coming plans and look uncomfortable...*
So yes, I believe that would make them unleash the legal hounds to protect their bottom line...
Khan, I don't think fanfic writers who do things the usual way (just post it up on the Internet without any hard copies or charging for it) are likely to be in any trouble. Now if you went the full blown self-publish route and made and tried to distribute hard copies, I think that could be a LOT riskier as you would then be in direct competition with the officially licensed books.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Reading the lawsuit (as onward linked in your link) it is purely written as detailing the use of Star Trek IP. Profit is not mentioned. A mention of the million dollars is in there, but in what Judge Judy would dismiss as hearsay, rather than a properly cited fact for consideration. They aren't suing Peters because he made a million bucks, nor that he paid himself a salary, or even that he set up a film studio which could be used on future projects. They're suing him, because he's doing a commercial project set in the Star Trek universe, featuring Star Trek races and locations. As I said in my upthread comments before reading that, and I will now repeat... I think they've gone down the wrong route, and will have to justify why they didn't sue every other production. And s above, while that may be the reason they have put on paper for the suit, I find it hard to believe that the upcoming Beyond and series have nothing whatsoever in the way of motivation...
By August, Peters was giving interviews expressing confidence that the project would survive any legal heat. He spoke to The Wrap that month and reported having a meeting with CBS. He says he was told the film couldn't make money — and evidently, he took that to be a good sign that his film would be tolerated as long as it wasn't a commercial endeavor. "CBS has a long history of accepting fan films,” Peters told the entertainment site. “I think Axanar has become so popular that CBS realizes that we’re just making their brand that much better.”
The official line from CBS and Paramount, which manage the TV and film rights to the ‘Star Trek’ franchise, respectively, is not to endorse such a production.
“CBS has not authorized, sanctioned or licensed this project in any way, and this has been communicated to those involved,” a representative from the network told TheWrap. “We continue to object to professional commercial ventures trading off our property rights and are considering further options to protect these rights.” (Paramount did not return TheWrap’s request for comment.)
Commercial ventures. They are suing because it was making money. The one rule they were given.
As above, the coffee was based off Axanar, not Star Trek. It's splitting hairs, I agree, but it's the kind of issues which will be brought up in court and determined if it constitutes a 'focused revenue stream' as opposed to a 'commercial venture'. They were making money to make Axanar (and for Alec Peters to then scam himself a film studio on everyone else's dime...)
While the filmmakers of “Star Trek: Axanar” appear confident that they’re operating in safe copyright territory, attorney Lincoln Bandlow, a partner at Fox Rothschild, LLP, insists otherwise.
“If it’s based on characters or other protectable elements of the ‘Star Trek’ work, then what they are doing is a derivative work and that’s a copyright infringement that is highly unlikely to be a protected fair use,” he said.
He added: “Just because there are a lot of these fan versions being done doesn’t make it legal.”
Bandlow urged Peters to tread carefully. “If you have permission from a copyright holder to do a fan-made film, there’s no problem,” said Bandlow. “But it’s real risky to be relying on an alleged oral licensing agreement to do such a work."
“An argument that this kind of use is not an infringement at all because no profit will be made is just flat wrong,” he continued. “That’s not the law … You will be depriving the copyright owners of a licensing fee where you have to presume there is a heavy licensing history … So arguing that they won’t make money off of it, that’s not going to be a slam dunk.”
No, it doesn't make it legal, but it does prove precedents where CBS/Paramount failed to vigorously defend the IP. As I've said throughout this discussion, it might not be enough to exonerate the Axanar producers, but it does put CBS/Paramount in a less-than-perfect position, and that given the terms of the suit (not the million bucks or salary or film studio) is what the suit will be decided upon and it'll be considerably examined...
Add to all that there seems to be a real reason why Tony Todd left the production: @TonyTodd54: Wish #Startrekfans all the best, but, There' are reasons I withdrew from #Axanar beyond #creativedifferences #Tellthetruth
Tony Todd @TonyTodd54 30 Dec 2015 @nickyjmorgan if u know me im not intimated easily. My issues came long before lawsuit. #Axanar should've been completed long ago.
Tony Todd @TonyTodd54 30 Dec 2015 @PhilsStalkers #Startrekfans I left 3 months ago
No longer supportive of #Crowdfunding no accountability
I totally agree with Tony Todd's tweets, especially the last one. I've seen how sleazes use crowdfunding (which if done on the street would be considered pan-handling) to manipulate people, both in terms of actors, and the goodwill of their fans, to get their vanity projects produced, and I would never support another, because, as Mister Todd so clearly points out: No accountability...
Now that I've revisited their page to try and repost my comment, it seems that my comment wasn't only removed, but I've been banned. Nice to know that they don't want their die hard fan base to know about this.
Not surprised considering that this was his reaction to Tony Todd's tweets:
Alec Peters: "No Accountability? How about Tony Todd can't read."
Comments
axanar: here you go *promotes cbs to leader*
*CBS kicks axanar out and sells off everything axanar related*
cbs: there, sorted. now there is no need for the lawsuit..
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
1) CBS/Paramount have the right to sue someone (anyone) for infringing their copyright. That is not debatable.
2) CBS/Paramount have let other 'violations' slide because the projects complied with specific guidelines. This weakens their case for 'vigorous defence', but may be actionable if the Axanar production can be proven to have deliberately breached given guidelines.
3) Alec Peters remuneration as Producer (and a principle actor) (in my opinion) is as much a 'production cost' as Richard Hatch and Tony Todd's fees and building a set.
4) Alec Peters building a Ares Studios to use on other projects is an abuse of the funds and good will of the supporters. It might come under grounds for criminal prosecution for obtaining funds by deception/fraud.
5) Are CBS/Paramount really suing because they care about any infringement or financial malfeasance, or, are they scared (and with good cause) that Axanar productions was on track to provide a project which threatens the take on Beyond and the new series (and thus the streaming service subscriptions) because it would be providing fandom with a project they actually want and believe in, without the need for any alternate universe malarky or streaming subscriptions, and simply hiding behind the legislature of 'copyright infringement'?
I think CBS/Paramount have the right to sue, but I think they're making a PR blunder, and will alienate a significant amount of the fanbase who is already in two minds about Beyond, or signing up for their streaming service. They should have simply let them get on with it, got on with their own projects, and then let the fans decide what they want to see, and what they like...
I think Alec Peters should be prosecuted for using the raised funds to start Ares Studios, but that is not CBS/Paramount's complaint to make, and needs to be taken up by the supporting donors as a class action for obtaining funds by deception.
I think the idea intended, was that CBS pick up the intellectual rights to Axanar, make the project themselves, with their own facilities and funds, and hang Alec Peters out to dry for the supporting donors to take action against... I don't believe it was intended to suggest that they hire the Axanar production crew and give them a job...
That said, perhaps they should consider working "With them" and make it finish.
Alec Peters taking a skim of that to establish Ares Studios, however, is a whole separate issue...
At any rate.... I'm pretty sure the law doesn't require you to either A: prosecute every infringement, or B: ignore them. It does have the option to allow you to declare something "authorized"... even if that happens after the project is already running. If you choose to do so, then it was defended from misuse. The key here is "unauthorized".
My character Tsin'xing
According to jonsill's example of asprin, it does... Like I said, I don't know if Disney actually sandblast hospital walls or if that's just an urban legend, but they are pathological in their defence of their IP...
For example, there's a brand of watches available called Alpha. The name is clearly a pun on Omega, and the stylings of their watches are 90% copies of various Omega and Rolex watches. The differences are little more than the branding on the dial, and in the instance of their copy of the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean, it does not have the helium escape valve at the 11 o clock position like the Omega has. It's pretty obvious to anyone who looks at the watches what they are copies of, and that they have changed just enough details (ie branding) to not get sued for counterfeiting, but they had not changed enough details that the design lineage is not immediately obvious.
Axanar, for example, is not doing what Alpha do with their watches, they are doing what the factories who produce the 1:1 counterfeits are doing, or more correctly, what those factories do when the release a 'fantasy model' ie a watch which has all the stylings and brandings of say a Rolex, but which is not a model which Rolex themselves released. An example would be, say, the DeepGMT, which combines the aesthetic and case-design of the Deep Sea Sea-Dweller, but with a GMT-functioning movement (and thus 24 hour markings on the bezel and an extra GMT hand) To any lay-person seeing one in a bar, the DeepGMT would look like a Rolex, and likely not even raise suspicion of its authenticity (other than having the R Word on the dial) but to a collector, or someone who was familiar with the range Rolex offers, they would know straight away that it wasn't a legit watch... To the lay-person flicking through YouTube, Axanar would look like any other Star Trek show/film. It's only the fan, who would know it wasn't an official release.
In that regard, as I said, CBS/Paramount do have the right to sue, but the strength of their case is weakened by every other fan production which they have allowed. Now to be fair, I doubt anyone would consider Renegades to be an official Star Trek production, just like someone wearing a cheap-knock off Rolex where the gold is rubbing off is going to easily be identified as someone wearing a fake. But a production of the level of Axanar, or Star Trek Continues, they look just like the real thing...
My character Tsin'xing
I intentionally overlook it (but am aware of) in so much as CBS/Paramount didn't shut the project down immediately. They had meetings, presumeably gave guidelines, and let the project go ahead. From that stance, the use of the IP was authorized... That the Axanar producers later apparently did something to draw the suit (which as I speculate, might simply be the proximity to Beyond and the new series under development) is not the same as the entire project simply being unauthorized. That the project has done something which breaches the guidelines, which then makes it 'actionable', is still slightly different.
A few years back a friend released an indy horror film. Initially, it was not given a UK certification due to the content. However, he just had to re-edit and lose a few bits, and the film was then certificated. Just because it didn't meet the censor's requirements first time round, he wasn't made to destroy the rushes and abandon the project, he just had to either i) edit it to comply with the certification guidelines, or ii) not release it in the UK...
Bearing that in mind, if this violation is a case of CBS/Paramount objecting to the inclusion of, for instance, Soval and Garth, then Alec just has to re-edit and remove any reference to Soval and Garth, and then it would be once more within compliance. If the breach is simply because it's 'Star Trek IP', well, they already let that slide with Continues, Renegades, and others, so could have a hard time defending their objection in this soecific instance... If the breach is that they are not allowed to make a profit on the project, then as mentioned before, if they show that money goes to production costs, then that is not profit (and as before, I strongly object to his use of the funds to start Ares Studios) and they wouldn't be in breach. If they were to refund any surplus moneys, then they would equally, not be 'making a profit'. The Axanar merch, is a slightly stickier wicket. Axanar, and the associated logo, is Alec Peters' IP, not CBS's, and as such the coffee is being branded off that, not necessarily off Star Trek... That would then be an independant revinue stream, and likely/possibly not subject to the same financial guidelines as the crowdfunding... I admit, it's seriously splitting hairs, and shows a very devious mind to consider taking the decision to behave thus, but the Libran in me can see the perspective they're trying to come from (rightly or wrongly) I can see what they're trying to do, or at least, the internal consistency of their argument (but again, that doesn't make it right, nor that I agree with it) CBS/Paramount, on the other hand, are fighting from the weaker corner of a previously authorized (as in allowed to continue) project, and notable examples of instances where other projects have not been sued for the same thing (IP Violation) CBS/Paramount might have more money behind them, and better lawyers, but their stance is weakened by past precedents of turning a blind eye... The TRIBBLE in me actually hopes that the Axanar lawyers are successful in proving that point, because it would be fun to see CBS/Paramount shown up, and also hopefully then open up the IP to other projects...
My character Tsin'xing
Actually it is...technically Peters is making money off the Star Trek name without paying CBS/Paramount.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
As I said before, I don't think CBS/Paramount actually cares about the money he's made (My objection is how it's been used on a non-exclusive film studio) I think they're scared they'll be shown up over Beyond and the series so trying to shut it down before that happens, but they know full well that going to a judge with that would get them laughed out of court... So instead, they're using the "He made moneyz off our stuffs..." line, which is not only true, but also significantly more actionable than a mere infringement beef, which could simply be satisfied by either i) removing the infractions ii) giving credit (and I don't doubt that the titles will read 'based upon Star Trek, created by Gene Roddenberry) iii) paying a licensing fee iv) making a donation of the money in CBS/Paramount's name v) Any other to be decided upon restitutory acts. On paper it's solid, just like Alec Peter's actor/producer's fee, but that doesn't mean it's 'spirit of the law' true, and not guaranteed to be supported in court...
My character Tsin'xing
I don't think that is the case. They met with Peters. Peters in an interview said they didn't give him any rules but one...don't make a profit.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/crowdfunded-star-trek-movie-draws-851474
By August, Peters was giving interviews expressing confidence that the project would survive any legal heat. He spoke to The Wrap that month and reported having a meeting with CBS. He says he was told the film couldn't make money — and evidently, he took that to be a good sign that his film would be tolerated as long as it wasn't a commercial endeavor. "CBS has a long history of accepting fan films,” Peters told the entertainment site. “I think Axanar has become so popular that CBS realizes that we’re just making their brand that much better.”
http://www.thewrap.com/how-1-1-million-star-trek-fan-movie-has-escaped-studio-shutdown-so-far/
The official line from CBS and Paramount, which manage the TV and film rights to the ‘Star Trek’ franchise, respectively, is not to endorse such a production.
“CBS has not authorized, sanctioned or licensed this project in any way, and this has been communicated to those involved,” a representative from the network told TheWrap. “We continue to object to professional commercial ventures trading off our property rights and are considering further options to protect these rights.” (Paramount did not return TheWrap’s request for comment.)
Commercial ventures. They are suing because it was making money. The one rule they were given.
and an Entertainment Lawyer's perspective:
While the filmmakers of “Star Trek: Axanar” appear confident that they’re operating in safe copyright territory, attorney Lincoln Bandlow, a partner at Fox Rothschild, LLP, insists otherwise.
“If it’s based on characters or other protectable elements of the ‘Star Trek’ work, then what they are doing is a derivative work and that’s a copyright infringement that is highly unlikely to be a protected fair use,” he said.
He added: “Just because there are a lot of these fan versions being done doesn’t make it legal.”
Bandlow urged Peters to tread carefully. “If you have permission from a copyright holder to do a fan-made film, there’s no problem,” said Bandlow. “But it’s real risky to be relying on an alleged oral licensing agreement to do such a work."
“An argument that this kind of use is not an infringement at all because no profit will be made is just flat wrong,” he continued. “That’s not the law … You will be depriving the copyright owners of a licensing fee where you have to presume there is a heavy licensing history … So arguing that they won’t make money off of it, that’s not going to be a slam dunk.”
Add to all that there seems to be a real reason why Tony Todd left the production:
@TonyTodd54: Wish #Startrekfans all the best, but, There' are reasons I withdrew from #Axanar beyond #creativedifferences #Tellthetruth
Tony Todd @TonyTodd54 30 Dec 2015
@nickyjmorgan if u know me im not intimated easily. My issues came long before lawsuit. #Axanar should've been completed long ago.
Tony Todd @TonyTodd54 30 Dec 2015
@PhilsStalkers #Startrekfans I left 3 months ago
No longer supportive of #Crowdfunding no accountability
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Join the Deltas today!
In MY OWN POV I think they did by a large measure. Here is the show link. http://www.gandtshow.com/g-t-show-218-axa-uh-oh/
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Not surprised considering that this was his reaction to Tony Todd's tweets:
Alec Peters: "No Accountability? How about Tony Todd can't read."
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
http://aroundtown.geekytechguy.net/index.php?category=10&topic=45&article=257
This guy somehow seems to think that calling people names makes them wrong.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
My character Tsin'xing
On the other claw, he spelled it out for anyone to see. So he must really think he's doing no wrong here. I like to know if people who donated did so in knowledge where the funds go, like "If you donate to Axanar you are supporting building the infrastructure for a new studio" or anything like that.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Sweet Jesus I didn't realize what was completely involved...I'm seriously reconsidering my Star Trek Fan fic.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I really have to wonder if Peters was acting as the accountant for Axanar. If so that would explain Todd's remark about "no accountability ". If there really was NO actual accountant handling the 1.1M... yeah... that would explain a lot. Especially seeing as he didn't bother trying to make the listed expenses add up...
My character Tsin'xing
Think of the scene in Trading Places where Billy-Ray tells the Duke brothers how the bottom-end of the industry is going to be reacting due to the time of year, and how the average guy was worried that he wouldn't "be able to buy my son the G.I Joe with the kung fu grip, and my wife and gonna fu- my wife isn't gonna want to make love to me 'cause I ain't got no money..."
There will be someone like that (maybe even a team of someones) at CBS, and they will have said to the Big Wigs, "Hey, look what some guy's doing on Kickstarter... It's got a lot of interest and support online..." *Runs Prelude to Axanar* *Big Wigs think about their coming plans and look uncomfortable...*
So yes, I believe that would make them unleash the legal hounds to protect their bottom line...
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
And based on that, I can see why he's saying that...
As above, the coffee was based off Axanar, not Star Trek. It's splitting hairs, I agree, but it's the kind of issues which will be brought up in court and determined if it constitutes a 'focused revenue stream' as opposed to a 'commercial venture'. They were making money to make Axanar (and for Alec Peters to then scam himself a film studio on everyone else's dime...)
No, it doesn't make it legal, but it does prove precedents where CBS/Paramount failed to vigorously defend the IP. As I've said throughout this discussion, it might not be enough to exonerate the Axanar producers, but it does put CBS/Paramount in a less-than-perfect position, and that given the terms of the suit (not the million bucks or salary or film studio) is what the suit will be decided upon and it'll be considerably examined...
I totally agree with Tony Todd's tweets, especially the last one. I've seen how sleazes use crowdfunding (which if done on the street would be considered pan-handling) to manipulate people, both in terms of actors, and the goodwill of their fans, to get their vanity projects produced, and I would never support another, because, as Mister Todd so clearly points out: No accountability...