I wasn't old enough to vote when Wrath of Khan was new but its still, hands down my fav movie and era
I don't know about the fans but Gene Roddenberry hated that movie. Felt it was to militaristic, hated the uniforms...and the director Nicholas Meyer...never saw an episode of Star Trek before he was hired.
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 wasn't old enough to vote when Wrath of Khan was new but its still, hands down my fav movie and era
I don't know about the fans but Gene Roddenberry hated that movie. Felt it was to militaristic, hated the uniforms...and the director Nicholas Meyer...never saw an episode of Star Trek before he was hired.
I feel the same way, TWoK is overrated and waaaaay too military for me. I still roll me eyes at that one cadet shouting "SIR!" at Kirk during the inspection. TMP is the most Trek film in my book, and my favorite.
I feel it's nothing but PBS's ego being bruised. I myself am a BIG hater of the.....thing.....called JJ Trek. To me, JJ Trek is Trek in NAME ONLY. It feels nothing like Trek, and pretty much urinates on Gene's vision. It's nothing but dark, gritty action flicks, and big character butchering, plus I am NOT a reboot girl.
Stuff like Cawley's Phase 2 and Axanar are superior stuff because, unlike JJ Trek, they are made by FANS....not overrated directors who had no interest in Trek like JJ, plus he stated Trek was too smart for him when he was watching it as a kid (warning sign right there, folks), or bean counters who THINK they got talent (aka PBS/Paramount executives)....but FANS. And seeing the awesome stuff they make on small budgets, and sticking to what was made prior.....I feel PBS/Paramount are just bruised little brats who can't handle the idea that mere fans can make better stuff than they can.
If PBS/Paramount had any brains, they'd call up the Axanar folks and HELP them make this, it would really give Trek a boost and give something fans would like....not just cater to the average joe sixpack movie goer slob.
CBS.
And this is the fanboy reaction. "OMG they saw how good Axanar was going to be so they shut it down."
No.
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.”
Well, I don't see them sending law ninjas to break Cawley's legs, or the guy who made Exeter.
And when I see the name ROTHSCHILD, I already know something's bad.
I wasn't old enough to vote when Wrath of Khan was new but its still, hands down my fav movie and era
I don't know about the fans but Gene Roddenberry hated that movie. Felt it was to militaristic, hated the uniforms...and the director Nicholas Meyer...never saw an episode of Star Trek before he was hired.
I feel the same way, TWoK is overrated and waaaaay too military for me. I still roll me eyes at that one cadet shouting "SIR!" at Kirk during the inspection. TMP is the most Trek film in my book, and my favorite.
TMP is called "the Motionless Picture" for a reason. You could probably edit out an hour of boredom without impacting the story.
I wasn't old enough to vote when Wrath of Khan was new but its still, hands down my fav movie and era
I don't know about the fans but Gene Roddenberry hated that movie. Felt it was to militaristic, hated the uniforms...and the director Nicholas Meyer...never saw an episode of Star Trek before he was hired.
I feel the same way, TWoK is overrated and waaaaay too military for me. I still roll me eyes at that one cadet shouting "SIR!" at Kirk during the inspection. TMP is the most Trek film in my book, and my favorite.
TMP is called "the Motionless Picture" for a reason. You could probably edit out an hour of boredom without impacting the story.
Not to me, it was the most enjoyable one. I don't need constant explosions, and battles and so on to keep my attention....in fact, I get bored by that.....one reason I can never watch films like Empire Strike Back without getting bored. I'm more of the 2001 fan gal.
I wasn't old enough to vote when Wrath of Khan was new but its still, hands down my fav movie and era
I don't know about the fans but Gene Roddenberry hated that movie. Felt it was to militaristic, hated the uniforms...and the director Nicholas Meyer...never saw an episode of Star Trek before he was hired.
I know he did :P Tis why I wasn't surprised the pajamas returned from TMP to TNG :P I also felt that these movies were the 'most real' in terms of Starfleet being a professional service, and the uniforms well just on personal opinion, they TRIBBLE rock. Thats why I made the Oddy Dress Uniform like an update of them. I was also a fan of the fact they balanced the action with a good plot, issues that made you think, a nod to a great TOS episode, and Khan the gentleman villain(psyco-badass). Something Benedict Cumberbatch just didnt get... he does psycho well, but not gentleman villain. ST 2-4 were the best in so many ways.. 5... ick but it had its moments, and 6 was good but not great. Still I love that era best. Starfleet acted like a professional service, the universe had its seedy side and its bright and shiny polished side. But all this is really off topic even for a ten forward thread
I feel it's nothing but PBS's ego being bruised. I myself am a BIG hater of the.....thing.....called JJ Trek. To me, JJ Trek is Trek in NAME ONLY. It feels nothing like Trek, and pretty much urinates on Gene's vision. It's nothing but dark, gritty action flicks, and big character butchering, plus I am NOT a reboot girl.
Stuff like Cawley's Phase 2 and Axanar are superior stuff because, unlike JJ Trek, they are made by FANS....not overrated directors who had no interest in Trek like JJ, plus he stated Trek was too smart for him when he was watching it as a kid (warning sign right there, folks), or bean counters who THINK they got talent (aka PBS/Paramount executives)....but FANS. And seeing the awesome stuff they make on small budgets, and sticking to what was made prior.....I feel PBS/Paramount are just bruised little brats who can't handle the idea that mere fans can make better stuff than they can.
If PBS/Paramount had any brains, they'd call up the Axanar folks and HELP them make this, it would really give Trek a boost and give something fans would like....not just cater to the average joe sixpack movie goer slob.
CBS.
And this is the fanboy reaction. "OMG they saw how good Axanar was going to be so they shut it down."
No.
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.”
But if the Axanar producers were given permission, then it would be... I admit, it is their place to prove they had permission, and time will tell if they do, but given it has taken this long for CBS/Paramount to act, it's impossible to accept that they were unaware of the production, and that it was operating 'without permission' that whole time. If they've sued since Axanar released their financial records, perhaps CBS/Paramount should have actually cited that as their reason for suit, not just mentioned it as an 'fyi' in what reads as a straight up infringement suit...
Copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright law without permission, infringing certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works. The copyright holder is typically the work's creator, or a publisher or other business to whom copyright has been assigned. Copyright holders routinely invoke legal and technological measures to prevent and penalize copyright infringement[/b]
There's nothing in that which says that a profit, or any kind of commercial venture need occur for infringement to have occured.
What do you think "protected by copyright" and "infringing certain exclusive rights" means?
Your assertion that he would not have been allowed to do it in someone's garage with cardboard sets, is disproven by the fact that Continues not only infringes the Star Trek IP, but does so in an even greater manner, by using principle characters, but still has CBS support and moral backing.
Because they aren't making a profit off of the Star Trek IP.
I think the definition I posted sums it up pretty clearly. If you can show me a definition which states that something must be a commercial/profitable venture for something to be considered infringement, I'll consider changing my opinion. IMHO all the Kirk/Spock slashfic all over the net is, by the previously quoted definition, infringement, and not a cent has changed hands... IMHO any use (as cited in the quote) of a copyrighted/registered character by anything other than authorized uses, is infringement,irregardless of if money is involved... If you can show me something which states that money plays in a part in making something an infringement, as I said, I'll take that on board. But from what I can see, infringement is not about if money is made, but simply the use of copyrighted/registered material...
I wasn't old enough to vote when Wrath of Khan was new but its still, hands down my fav movie and era
I don't know about the fans but Gene Roddenberry hated that movie. Felt it was to militaristic, hated the uniforms...and the director Nicholas Meyer...never saw an episode of Star Trek before he was hired.
I feel the same way, TWoK is overrated and waaaaay too military for me. I still roll me eyes at that one cadet shouting "SIR!" at Kirk during the inspection. TMP is the most Trek film in my book, and my favorite.
TMP is called "the Motionless Picture" for a reason. You could probably edit out an hour of boredom without impacting the story.
This is all true...
But.
It also gave us Lieutenant Ilia
...But from what I can see, infringement is not about if money is made, but simply the use of copyrighted/registered material...
I'm amazed that you can understand this much, yet can't make that final step in logic to understand CBS' position. Yes, all the fan fics, fan films et al. can be considered copyright infringement.
Does CBS go after them all? Of course not. Non-profit fan projects help keep the IP relevant and it's free advertising for CBS.
Does CBS go after those who want to use their property to make money? Absolutely.
This isn't rocket science.
Because I simply do not believe that the Axanar producer's financial malfeasances are the motivation for the suit. If they were, they would have cited it in the suit. For example, they could have stated:
-Fan projects are permitted to raise $10k per project to cover production expences. Axanar Producers have breached that guideline by raising $1m.
They haven't done that. There is nothing. Anywhere. In the suit which complains about the monay Alec Peters has raised. Do they mention it? Yes. Do they take issue with it or cite it as a reason for damages? No. The suit solely specifies infringement of the Star Trek IP (Which as detailed above, is infringement even if no money is made on it.
The $1m is a complete red herring... As I said, my belief is that the suit is because of the proximity to Beyond and the new series. If folks don't agree, that's their prerogative. That Melinda Snodgrass thought the same thing and put that in the post which crypticarmsman posted, shows that I am not the only person who thinks that Beyond and the new series are motivating factors.
Now. I hear you asking, If that was the motivating factor, why didn't they specify that in the suit?
Because it would be laughed out of court.
If they sued because $1m was raised, while the judge would take it seriously, they could easily rule that any finances of Axanar Productions, are only the business of Axanar Productions, and that it is not CBS/Paramount's place to complain that the supporting donors have been bent over a barrel and shown the fifty states. They might order Axanar Productions to pay a license fee for the use of the IP, but I suspect, that would be about all, and I doubt it would be the kind of figure that the suit requests for each violation. Such a suit would not automatically be ruled in CBS/Paramount's favor, so they're not going to follow a 'maybe' option. They're going to go with the option with the greatest chance of being ruled in their favor.
So.
They sue for infringement: Unauthorized (allegedly) use of the IP of a cultural phenomenon.
There is no denying that the Axanar Works uses the Star Trek IP (infringement). The question which will be settled in court, is if it was unauthorized or not...
If CBS/Paramount can prove they gave no permission or guidelines to Alec Peters, they win the case. If Alec Peters can prove that he was given permissions or guidelines, he wins the case.
As I said upthread, if CBS/Paramount were making the case on behalf of the supporting donors because they have deeper pockets and more legal clout, they would not be demanding restitutions from Alec Peters which will have to come out of that $1m, they would simply have demanded an injunction freezing and demanding the termination of the project. That would have then allowed the supporting donors to sue to get their money back. If CBS/Paramount takes that money in damages, the supporting donors can't sue for it to be returned to them.
That CBS/Paramount are demanding such substantial damages, shows that they're after the money. They want their, to use the phrase, 'piece of the action', and as suggested by Melinda Snodgrass, want to make sure that theirs is the only major Trek event while Beyond and the new series are released.
Hence why I'm so adamant that it doesn't matter if money has been made or not. Infringement doesn't require money to stand as infringement, so that moves the $1m to 'red herring' status...
I hope that better clarifies my thoughts on the subject
Yes, Marcus, you believe that corporations act out because their feelings are hurt. That's interesting, albeit contrafactual. I'm afraid, however, that you're unlikely to convince anyone else of this, because some of us find it even more implausible that a major corporation is going to spend millions of dollars on their very expensive legal team just because someone else did some good special effects in a supposed "fan" film.
Yes, Marcus, you believe that corporations act out because their feelings are hurt. That's interesting, albeit contrafactual. I'm afraid, however, that you're unlikely to convince anyone else of this, because some of us find it even more implausible that a major corporation is going to spend millions of dollars on their very expensive legal team just because someone else did some good special effects in a supposed "fan" film.
When a legally trained writer of Star Trek has the same thoughts on a subject which I do, I take that as evidence that my thoughts on a subject are not entirely implausible. I don't believe, but understand, that corporations are made up of individuals who have egos (in the psychological, if not just literal sense of the word) and profit margins to consider... As Melinda Snodgrass pointed out, with a new movie and new series coming out, it it is understandable that CBS/Paramount will not stand for a project which threatens their take in terms of cinema ticket sales and subscription fees to their streaming service. Continues play by the rules. They are also not a threat in term of output, but they are, as I pointed out over the page, massively embraced by the fandom (as was Axanar, before the scam was revealed) Had Axanar been allowed to continue, that (admitedly IMHO) would have posed a threat to their standing...
If you wish to discuss the facts, I stated them very clearly in my above post:
The suit does not mention the $1m as anothing other than as an aside, and a coincidental fact.
The suit does not complain that Axanar Productions have raised $1m.
The suit does not claim that infringement can be proven to have taken place, because Axanar Productions raised $1m.
The suit does claim infringement of Star Trek IP
It is up to the parties to establish if permissions were ever granted or not.
... As Melinda Snodgrass pointed out, with a new movie and new series coming out, it it is understandable that CBS/Paramount will not stand for a project which threatens their take in terms of cinema ticket sales and subscription fees to their streaming service. ...
Not for profit fan films that charge zero money for viewing are no financial threat to CBS' ticket or streaming sales. If anything, the free advertising is an enticement to check out "official" productions.
I agree with your statement. But. Axanar Productions are not being sued for making profit. There is no mention of them being sued for making profit anywhere in the papers of the lawsuit. Ergo, that has to be discounted as reason for suit. I forget the exact Holmes quote about removing all the alternatives, and whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth, but that's the method I have used in disecting the case...
I think you are all arguing about different things rather than contradicting each other.
Whether a project makes money or not makes no difference as to whether it infringes on copyright. Free fanfic infringes just as much as Axanar in the eyes of the law. If there is money involved, a project is more likely to get the attention of the copyright holder, but it makes no difference as to the legality. You can sue someone for using your copyrighted material, but you can't sue them specifically for profiting from it (though if they do, it may strengthen your case).
Markus is not asserting (as far as I can tell) that CBS/Paramount are suing because "their feelings are hurt," but because they see Axanar as competition. This is a valid interpretation, since one of the main things that corporations do with copyright is exercise competitive exclusion--that is, to keep people from doing what the company does, to maintain a monopoly. Would Axanar steal ticket sales from ST Beyond? I dunno. But Axanar is doing something very similar to what CBS/Paramount do, and corporations don't like that.
Alternate interpretation: It's not Axanar that CBS/Paramount are trying to take down, but the class of projects to which Axanar belongs--independent "fan" productions which are becoming ever more common and coming ever closer to competing with studio releases, and which may eventually prompt a shift in any number of laws which currently favor corporations (copyright law in particular) toward laws which give corporations less special treatment. With the ubiquity of the internet, and the increasing sophistication and decreasing price of home studio software and equipment, we're seeing a shift in the creation of media toward material made by consumers for consumers, and I'm betting that the big corporations are very nervous about that.
I think you are all arguing about different things rather than contradicting each other.
Whether a project makes money or not makes no difference as to whether it infringes on copyright. Free fanfic infringes just as much as Axanar in the eyes of the law. If there is money involved, a project is more likely to get the attention of the copyright holder, but it makes no difference as to the legality. You can sue someone for using your copyrighted material, but you can't sue them specifically for profiting from it (though if they do, it may strengthen your case).
Markus is not asserting (as far as I can tell) that CBS/Paramount are suing because "their feelings are hurt," but because they see Axanar as competition. This is a valid interpretation, since one of the main things that corporations do with copyright is exercise competitive exclusion--that is, to keep people from doing what the company does, to maintain a monopoly. Would Axanar steal ticket sales from ST Beyond? I dunno. But Axanar is doing something very similar to what CBS/Paramount do, and corporations don't like that.
Alternate interpretation: It's not Axanar that CBS/Paramount are trying to take down, but the class of projects to which Axanar belongs--independent "fan" productions which are becoming ever more common and coming ever closer to competing with studio releases, and which may eventually prompt a shift in any number of laws which currently favor corporations (copyright law in particular) toward laws which give corporations less special treatment. With the ubiquity of the internet, and the increasing sophistication and decreasing price of home studio software and equipment, we're seeing a shift in the creation of media toward material made by consumers for consumers, and I'm betting that the big corporations are very nervous about that.
My point precisely, thank you The reason why I believe that specifically, rather your alternate interpretation that CBS/Paramount are going after the fan productions, is because in the past, CBS actively supported Continues against YouTube. I believe that if they had been going after fan productions in general, they would not have supported Continues against YouTube, but would have been happy that something infringing their IP had been removed... This isn't (from looking at the papers of the suit) a complex case, but there are certainly other external events to it which are related to the case, in terms of determining how CBS/Paramount behave towards fan projects... Thanks again for understanding my point
I agree with your statement. But. Axanar Productions are not being sued for making profit. There is no mention of them being sued for making profit anywhere in the papers of the lawsuit. Ergo, that has to be discounted as reason for suit. I forget the exact Holmes quote about removing all the alternatives, and whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth, but that's the method I have used in disecting the case...
They're being sued for copyright infringement because they used CBS' copyrighted property to make a profit.
No, it does not, because as I pointed out yesterday, cash transfer is not required for infringement to occur. Free infringement is still infringement. If CBS/Paramount were suing because of profit made, it would have been specifically stated, not just an "FYI, they made $1m bucks..." All they have ststed, is that they are suing for infringement. Nothing more, nothing less...
I think this is just a semantics argument. It's a reasonable supposition that Axanar is being targeted because it made a profit, but the lawsuit itself does not seem to hinge upon that fact. Infringement is infringement, regardless of commercialization.
So profit may be what triggered of the lawsuit, but the lawsuit is not about the profit.
To me, it's a fan film. Don't see what the whining and crying is about, still.
Enh... Axanar is more a scam than a fan film at this point. Alec Peters apparently used almost half the funds raised to build a film-studio that he plans to KEEP and use for other films later. Then there's how he's been doing licensing deals for "Star Trek: Axanar" merchandise. Which are sold for "fund raising".
Then there's how one of the main actors left the project.... apparently Peters has been intentionally delaying production so he can raise more funds instead of actually making the film.
I think this is just a semantics argument. It's a reasonable supposition that Axanar is being targeted because it made a profit, but the lawsuit itself does not seem to hinge upon that fact. Infringement is infringement, regardless of commercialization.
So profit may be what triggered of the lawsuit, but the lawsuit is not about the profit.
To me, it's a fan film. Don't see what the whining and crying is about, still.
Enh... Axanar is more a scam than a fan film at this point. Alec Peters apparently used almost half the funds raised to build a film-studio that he plans to KEEP and use for other films later. Then there's how he's been doing licensing deals for "Star Trek: Axanar" merchandise. Which are sold for "fund raising".
Then there's how one of the main actors left the project.... apparently Peters has been intentionally delaying production so he can raise more funds instead of actually making the film.
Exactly... That's why I hope the supporting donors can file a class action against him for their funds, as they were fraudulently acquired. If CBS/Paramount gets their hooks into that $1m for the damages they're seeking, byt the times the donors come to their action, he won't even have the funds to return :-\ This will mean that those folks got screwed over not just by Alec Peters, but by CBS/Paramount, who then 'acauire' those funds before they could potentially be returned... :-\ I can see why Tony Todd tweeted what he did, and I agree with him completely...
I think this is just a semantics argument. It's a reasonable supposition that Axanar is being targeted because it made a profit, but the lawsuit itself does not seem to hinge upon that fact. Infringement is infringement, regardless of commercialization.
So profit may be what triggered of the lawsuit, but the lawsuit is not about the profit.
I concur, Alex. They do not need to show the fact that Anaxar exceeded the 10k limit on a lawsuit paper. As Alex here said, Infringement is Infringement, regardless of commercialization. And US Law currently supports Corporations under the Copyright Laws.
As evidenced in Anaxar's funds report,
They raised a million or more for Anaxar, half of that money being used for a studio, and also exceeding the 10k limit.
Additionally,
CBS and Paramount have the support of the law in the lawsuit. They don't have to state the money thing. The IP Copyright laws will still sting Anaxar Productions. The abuse of funds will also give them an even bigger sting.
Comments
I don't know about the fans but Gene Roddenberry hated that movie. Felt it was to militaristic, hated the uniforms...and the director Nicholas Meyer...never saw an episode of Star Trek before he was hired.
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 feel the same way, TWoK is overrated and waaaaay too military for me. I still roll me eyes at that one cadet shouting "SIR!" at Kirk during the inspection. TMP is the most Trek film in my book, and my favorite.
Well, I don't see them sending law ninjas to break Cawley's legs, or the guy who made Exeter.
And when I see the name ROTHSCHILD, I already know something's bad.
My character Tsin'xing
Not to me, it was the most enjoyable one. I don't need constant explosions, and battles and so on to keep my attention....in fact, I get bored by that.....one reason I can never watch films like Empire Strike Back without getting bored. I'm more of the 2001 fan gal.
I know he did :P Tis why I wasn't surprised the pajamas returned from TMP to TNG :P I also felt that these movies were the 'most real' in terms of Starfleet being a professional service, and the uniforms well just on personal opinion, they TRIBBLE rock. Thats why I made the Oddy Dress Uniform like an update of them. I was also a fan of the fact they balanced the action with a good plot, issues that made you think, a nod to a great TOS episode, and Khan the gentleman villain(psyco-badass). Something Benedict Cumberbatch just didnt get... he does psycho well, but not gentleman villain. ST 2-4 were the best in so many ways.. 5... ick but it had its moments, and 6 was good but not great. Still I love that era best. Starfleet acted like a professional service, the universe had its seedy side and its bright and shiny polished side. But all this is really off topic even for a ten forward thread
I think the definition I posted sums it up pretty clearly. If you can show me a definition which states that something must be a commercial/profitable venture for something to be considered infringement, I'll consider changing my opinion. IMHO all the Kirk/Spock slashfic all over the net is, by the previously quoted definition, infringement, and not a cent has changed hands... IMHO any use (as cited in the quote) of a copyrighted/registered character by anything other than authorized uses, is infringement,irregardless of if money is involved... If you can show me something which states that money plays in a part in making something an infringement, as I said, I'll take that on board. But from what I can see, infringement is not about if money is made, but simply the use of copyrighted/registered material...
But.
It also gave us
-Fan projects are permitted to raise $10k per project to cover production expences. Axanar Producers have breached that guideline by raising $1m.
They haven't done that. There is nothing. Anywhere. In the suit which complains about the monay Alec Peters has raised. Do they mention it? Yes. Do they take issue with it or cite it as a reason for damages? No. The suit solely specifies infringement of the Star Trek IP (Which as detailed above, is infringement even if no money is made on it.
The $1m is a complete red herring... As I said, my belief is that the suit is because of the proximity to Beyond and the new series. If folks don't agree, that's their prerogative. That Melinda Snodgrass thought the same thing and put that in the post which crypticarmsman posted, shows that I am not the only person who thinks that Beyond and the new series are motivating factors.
Now. I hear you asking, If that was the motivating factor, why didn't they specify that in the suit?
Because it would be laughed out of court.
If they sued because $1m was raised, while the judge would take it seriously, they could easily rule that any finances of Axanar Productions, are only the business of Axanar Productions, and that it is not CBS/Paramount's place to complain that the supporting donors have been bent over a barrel and shown the fifty states. They might order Axanar Productions to pay a license fee for the use of the IP, but I suspect, that would be about all, and I doubt it would be the kind of figure that the suit requests for each violation. Such a suit would not automatically be ruled in CBS/Paramount's favor, so they're not going to follow a 'maybe' option. They're going to go with the option with the greatest chance of being ruled in their favor.
So.
They sue for infringement: Unauthorized (allegedly) use of the IP of a cultural phenomenon.
There is no denying that the Axanar Works uses the Star Trek IP (infringement). The question which will be settled in court, is if it was unauthorized or not...
If CBS/Paramount can prove they gave no permission or guidelines to Alec Peters, they win the case. If Alec Peters can prove that he was given permissions or guidelines, he wins the case.
As I said upthread, if CBS/Paramount were making the case on behalf of the supporting donors because they have deeper pockets and more legal clout, they would not be demanding restitutions from Alec Peters which will have to come out of that $1m, they would simply have demanded an injunction freezing and demanding the termination of the project. That would have then allowed the supporting donors to sue to get their money back. If CBS/Paramount takes that money in damages, the supporting donors can't sue for it to be returned to them.
That CBS/Paramount are demanding such substantial damages, shows that they're after the money. They want their, to use the phrase, 'piece of the action', and as suggested by Melinda Snodgrass, want to make sure that theirs is the only major Trek event while Beyond and the new series are released.
Hence why I'm so adamant that it doesn't matter if money has been made or not. Infringement doesn't require money to stand as infringement, so that moves the $1m to 'red herring' status...
I hope that better clarifies my thoughts on the subject
If you wish to discuss the facts, I stated them very clearly in my above post:
The suit does not mention the $1m as anothing other than as an aside, and a coincidental fact.
The suit does not complain that Axanar Productions have raised $1m.
The suit does not claim that infringement can be proven to have taken place, because Axanar Productions raised $1m.
The suit does claim infringement of Star Trek IP
It is up to the parties to establish if permissions were ever granted or not.
Whether a project makes money or not makes no difference as to whether it infringes on copyright. Free fanfic infringes just as much as Axanar in the eyes of the law. If there is money involved, a project is more likely to get the attention of the copyright holder, but it makes no difference as to the legality. You can sue someone for using your copyrighted material, but you can't sue them specifically for profiting from it (though if they do, it may strengthen your case).
Markus is not asserting (as far as I can tell) that CBS/Paramount are suing because "their feelings are hurt," but because they see Axanar as competition. This is a valid interpretation, since one of the main things that corporations do with copyright is exercise competitive exclusion--that is, to keep people from doing what the company does, to maintain a monopoly. Would Axanar steal ticket sales from ST Beyond? I dunno. But Axanar is doing something very similar to what CBS/Paramount do, and corporations don't like that.
Alternate interpretation: It's not Axanar that CBS/Paramount are trying to take down, but the class of projects to which Axanar belongs--independent "fan" productions which are becoming ever more common and coming ever closer to competing with studio releases, and which may eventually prompt a shift in any number of laws which currently favor corporations (copyright law in particular) toward laws which give corporations less special treatment. With the ubiquity of the internet, and the increasing sophistication and decreasing price of home studio software and equipment, we're seeing a shift in the creation of media toward material made by consumers for consumers, and I'm betting that the big corporations are very nervous about that.
My point precisely, thank you
So profit may be what triggered of the lawsuit, but the lawsuit is not about the profit.
Then there's how one of the main actors left the project.... apparently Peters has been intentionally delaying production so he can raise more funds instead of actually making the film.
My character Tsin'xing
I concur, Alex. They do not need to show the fact that Anaxar exceeded the 10k limit on a lawsuit paper. As Alex here said, Infringement is Infringement, regardless of commercialization. And US Law currently supports Corporations under the Copyright Laws.
As evidenced in Anaxar's funds report,
They raised a million or more for Anaxar, half of that money being used for a studio, and also exceeding the 10k limit.
Additionally,
CBS and Paramount have the support of the law in the lawsuit. They don't have to state the money thing. The IP Copyright laws will still sting Anaxar Productions. The abuse of funds will also give them an even bigger sting.