Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing,
It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Are we still talking about that article that's whole story is based on the word of some anonymous person, with no corroboration what so ever?
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing,
It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Are we still talking about that article that's whole story is based on the word of some anonymous person, with no corroboration what so ever?
Why let fact checking get in the way of hate
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.
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
That does shed some light on some of the confusion I had regarding the merch. I have to wonder if some Disney merch licenser forgot to mention the characters existed when handing out licenses.
I think Monopoly's official line was because it's a mystery that she's the force user in the movie they werent allowed to use her with the lightsaber
Yeah, but why leave her out entirely? I kinda get not showing her with a lightsaber, it's the total exclusion that is weird.
Also, Leia and Phasma.... they're both significant characters, and apparently also left out of some of the stuff. for more data you could look it up on boardgamegeek.
It had as minis, Luke, Vader, Kylo, and Finn. Which is odd because Monopoly usually has more than 4 player tokens. 6 or 8 is normal.
oooh... pretty:
Yeah, given her having learned to fight with a quarterstaff, I can totally see her with the double-bladed saber.
EDIT: Stupid autosave...
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Well, this isn't suprising.
I read the article on "The Wrap", and with a few quotes from a Lawyer on CBS saying this:
“With a small, not particularly commercial fan work … [the copyright holder] might simply say, ‘it’s not worth the time,’ said Bandlow. “But when you are going out and doing crowdfunding and making a million-dollar picture … that’s not going to be allowed.”
With that said, ofcourse they are not going to allow it when CBS is doing a reboot of the series. How would it be if Axanar is just running away with quality over CBS show?
With that said..
Since now that CBS is in the works of creating a new series, I wouldn't be suprised it will be held in the JJ verse before/present/after JJ verse timeline of the movies and Axanar is damaging their general idea of the new series and don't want to risk of making the fans "confused" (Let's be honest, most corporate suites don't think much of the fans intellect).
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP. Thats all that needs to be said as far as infringement goes.
If their lawyer is really this stupid and making this the basis of their defense, axanar is going to get a legal butt reaming in court
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP. Thats all that needs to be said as far as infringement goes.
If their lawyer is really this stupid and making this the basis of their defense, axanar is going to get a legal butt reaming in court
I don't think they're meant to get the judge to say "No, this suit by CBS is invalid," but rather to draw out the process--make it more expensive and time-consuming. It's pretty much all they can do at this point aside from concede and cancel the project, since they don't really have any legal ground to stand on.
As to why they might do that, two motivations come to mind:
1. They might be hoping that if CBS sees that the process will become long and expensive, they'll drop the suit since the Axanar probably won't really cost CBS anything.
2. They might just be going "You guys SUCK. If you want to take us down, WE'LL MAKE YOU PAY FOR IT!!!"
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP.
Not to mention the long shot of the Axanar shipyards - showing two Constitution-class starships under construction, one of which is clearly displaying hull number NCC-1701.
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP.
Not to mention the long shot of the Axanar shipyards - showing two Constitution-class starships under construction, one of which is clearly displaying hull number NCC-1701.
And that ship appeared in... three series? TOS, DS9, and ENT?
It's very simple: Axanar got greedy, even emptied out some of the fundraised cash to pay himself, and thus exploited his project commercially. CBS got pissed (and rightly so). The End.
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP.
Not to mention the long shot of the Axanar shipyards - showing two Constitution-class starships under construction, one of which is clearly displaying hull number NCC-1701.
There actually might be something to this. In all likelihood, CBS/Paramount will out-spend & out-lawyer Axanar just because they can--forcing Axanar to end, not because of wrong-doing or judgment against them, but because they simply run out of money to keep fighting and producing.
Copyright, in US law, protects "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression". It does not protect "any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work". (17USC102)
"Day of Dove" is copyrighted. "The Wrath of Khan" is copyrighted. "Who Watches the Watchers" is copyrighted. "Star Trek", the franchise, as a whole, is not copyrighted. It is an idea: a concept from which the copyrighted material is derived... but Star Trek, itself, is not copyrighted, nor is it copyrightable. So, unless AXANAR is producing it's version of an existing episode or movie, it's not violating copyright.
It doesn't count as a derivative work either, because "A 'derivative work' is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted." (17USC101)
A film version of the novel "Vulcan Academy Murders" is a derivative work. A novelization of "First Contact" is a derivative work. It's the same story presented in a different way.
AXANAR is making a brand new story that's never been told before. Yes, it's using, and making reference to, pre-existing elements of multiple copyrighted works, but since only the final product has copyright, and not the individual components that make up final product, it's not a infringement. Kirk is not copyrighted. Spock is not copyrighted. The Federation is not copyrighted. Klingons are not copyrighted. The U.S.S. Enterprise is not copyrighted.
To put it simply... no matter what the IP owners & their lawyers would like you to believe, Intellectual Property, as an umbrella term, does not exist and is not protected under the law. Don't believe me? Just ask Microsoft Corp. & Apple, Inc. Remember the "look and feel" copyright that Apple claimed that Windows violated? How did that end up?
Trademark is another matter completely... AXANAR is breaking trademark left and right.
Kirk is not copyrighted. Spock is not copyrighted. The Federation is not copyrighted. Klingons are not copyrighted. The U.S.S. Enterprise is not copyrighted.
They are, however, trademarked. (Well, not "USS Enterprise" - the US Navy had that first, but abandoned the trademark. All the rest is trademarked, however.)
And your claim that there's "no such thing as IP" is one of the things that keeps copyright and trademark lawyers wealthy, because some laymen believe that nonsense.
Not to mention the long shot of the Axanar shipyards - showing two Constitution-class starships under construction, one of which is clearly displaying hull number NCC-1701.
The trailers and short just look amazing. If someone broke the law, of course we cannot allow that. But man, I keep thinking about a guy who buys a dog toy but won't let his puppy play with it - for 10 years - because he'll ruin it. The guy doesn't admire or even care about the dog toy. There's no one who would appreciate it more than the puppy.
Mirror, Mirror warns against a future where a Terran Empire ravages the galaxy led by the ISS Enterprise.
In the 2000s, the biggest space station we build is called the ISS.
I am concerned.
My take as to why they made this move after some digging is a comment by either Alec Peters or by Terry McIntosh (their PR guy). I can't find the exact quote, but it came down to the statement that Axanar and CBS/Paramount had agreed that as long as Axanar did not file a reply towards the copyright claim, they would cease all production on the movie.
Since they now filed a rather annoying reply for CBS, in which they basically have to list every single work infringed OR find the judge on their side to declare this response utter nonsence, Axanar can once again resume production on the feature film. Which is exactly what they are doing.
Who knows? If we're lucky Axanar gets finished, after which the producers will have to continue dealing with CBS. Maybe Axanar will just remain what it should have been: an one-time fantastic project. Maybe the part where Ares Studios was gonna become the next big thing in making more movies, based off the wealth they got with making a Trek movie, will not happen.
In any case, I just hope they find enough time to at least make the bloody movie, then they can continue fighting out the legal aspects.
Maybe the part where Ares Studios was gonna become the next big thing in making more movies, based off the wealth they got with making a Trek movie, will not happen.
You can pretty much count on this - if they insist on going to trial, the punitive judgement will wipe Ares Studios out completely. (It's pretty cut and dried here; they have plainly used names and characters from trademarked and copyrighted Trek works, specifically including Soval from ENT and an image of NCC-1071. Then they announced in the statement in December, which seems to have precipitated all this brouhaha, that Peters was planning on using some of the Kickstarter money he raised using the Trek IP to fund his private studio, which he stated that he wanted to use to produce for-profit works in the future. Not a lot of wiggle room after that.)
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP. Thats all that needs to be said as far as infringement goes.
If their lawyer is really this stupid and making this the basis of their defense, axanar is going to get a legal butt reaming in court
When you have no real/valid defense you grasp and any and all potential 'straws' you can find. The problem is, most Judges really don't care for that level of legal BS. And copyright does indeed extend into aspects of 'look and feel' too. 'infringement' is not so narrowly defined as 'lifting verbatim' from a given work - but if you want a concrete example - there's the character of 'Ambassador Soval' (who was even reprised by the same actor - Gary Graham) in a 3 minute scene already filmed for the Axanar feature - so the whole "Axanar has made the movie yet - so infringement can't be claimed determined.." is moot, because they (by their own admission in Blogs, at Con panels, etc stated this three minute scene on Vulcan with Soval talking to an aide WILL be in the completed 'Axanar' feature <--- so there's your concrete proof of infringement from the Axanar feature right there.
About the best result the Axanar legal team might get is (after discovery for both sides is completed) - if an order from the Judge for Paramount/CBS to specifically detail everything they believe is an infringement (again, after they're conducted discovery against Axanar productions) - and then the Axanar legal team will have a chance to argue why <alleged infringement X> actually ISN'T copyright infringement - and the Judge will adjudicate each instance - and then (assuming the Judge finds for CBS/Paramount on one or more of these items; will conduct another set of hearings and decide on financial damages.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
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.
Haha, wow...pretty stupid of Alex Peters to challenge Paramount's lawyers on that one. I mean, these people are getting paid to do that all day.
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.
Awesome That pic of himself in a Starfleet uniform is going to become the thing of Alec Peters' nightmares... What a chump to try and insist on a lack of specifity as a grounds for dismissal
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
Yeah, it was even pointed out in that article that there's still such a thing as fair use.
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.
... its going to be illegal to speak klingon....
.
.
.
.
.
just.... wow
Only if you try and make money off of it.
It's...amazing...how so many people don't grasp that basic concept. It's the *making money* part that gets you in trouble. It could never be "illegal to speak klingon".
Not to mention the long shot of the Axanar shipyards - showing two Constitution-class starships under construction, one of which is clearly displaying hull number NCC-1701.
The trailers and short just look amazing. If someone broke the law, of course we cannot allow that. But man, I keep thinking about a guy who buys a dog toy but won't let his puppy play with it - for 10 years - because he'll ruin it. The guy doesn't admire or even care about the dog toy. There's no one who would appreciate it more than the puppy.
To word this a bit differently, I would gladly let someone else's puppy play with one of my dog's toys, but if that other puppy uses my dog's toy to get doggy treats he wouldn't get otherwise, I might start to get upset. Ok, I'm not that heartless, but that's essentially what happened.
Actually on the Klingon part I honestly don't believe its possible to copyright a "language" even a fictional one. Language is a form of expression and thus I'm pretty sure it falls under the freedom of speech.
At most I think they could stop people from marketing things as "Klingon".
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid." - Q
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP. Thats all that needs to be said as far as infringement goes.
If their lawyer is really this stupid and making this the basis of their defense, axanar is going to get a legal butt reaming in court
Yeah, no.
For starters, you can't copyright an 'idea.' What is copyright protectable, however, is the specific execution of an idea. In other words, if you intend to show copyright infringement, you need to be specific as to what execution of an idea you deem infringed upon.
JUDGE: "What works of yours do you feel Axanar infringed on?"
CBS/PARAMOUNT LAWYER: "Thousands of episodes and 12 movies."
JUDGE: "Can you be a bit more specific?!"
CBS/PARAMOUNT LAWYER: "Nah. Lazarus51166 said this would suffice."
JUDGE: "Then lazarus51166 was wrong!
Seriously. Though it should prove quite easy to demonstrate Axanar infringed upon Trek IP (even using 1 character, like Kirk, would suffice), still, CBS/Paramount will need to spell that out specifically. You can't just go like "You know, the whole Star Trek thingy!" In all area of Law, charges/complaints need to be specific. If someone stole a bike of yours, the thief can't be charged with just 'theft' in general: the DA will have to charge him with theft of your bike. So, if CBS/Paramount think they can get away with just suing Axanar for 'You know, just copyright infringement!', then they might find themselves sorely mistaken.
It's...amazing...how so many people don't grasp that basic concept. It's the *making money* part that gets you in trouble. It could never be "illegal to speak klingon".
A copyright violation means you're infringing on certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, etc. It's a common misconception that you're only in violation when you're making money. That is not true, however (though often ethically only perceived as such when you're making money off of it). CBS/Paramount would never, in their right mind, go after someone who posts a small youtube vid, showing him/herself in a self-made Trek shirt. If you're Axanar, however, and raise money for an unauthorized Trek movie, paying yourself a handsome salary out of it, and intend to cash in on someone else's IP, then IP rightholders will generally pursue the matter. And rightly so.
Comments
Are we still talking about that article that's whole story is based on the word of some anonymous person, with no corroboration what so ever?
Why let fact checking get in the way of hate
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, given her having learned to fight with a quarterstaff, I can totally see her with the double-bladed saber.
EDIT: Stupid autosave...
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
I read the article on "The Wrap", and with a few quotes from a Lawyer on CBS saying this:
“With a small, not particularly commercial fan work … [the copyright holder] might simply say, ‘it’s not worth the time,’ said Bandlow. “But when you are going out and doing crowdfunding and making a million-dollar picture … that’s not going to be allowed.”
With that said, ofcourse they are not going to allow it when CBS is doing a reboot of the series. How would it be if Axanar is just running away with quality over CBS show?
With that said..
Since now that CBS is in the works of creating a new series, I wouldn't be suprised it will be held in the JJ verse before/present/after JJ verse timeline of the movies and Axanar is damaging their general idea of the new series and don't want to risk of making the fans "confused" (Let's be honest, most corporate suites don't think much of the fans intellect).
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/star-trek-fans-want-paramount-868691
In short it comes down to Axanar responding to the lawsuit by saying
a) We infringed on your works you say, now we want to know exactly which of your thousands of episodes and 12 movies we infringed on
b) We want to know which of these works is Paramount, which is CBS
c) How can you proove there is copyright in a movie that hasn't been made yet?
On these 3 terms, Axanar lawyers basically asked the court to just forget the case altogether.
Join the Deltas today!
I find it hard to believe any competent lawyer would even consider asking questions that are as stupid as these. They didn't have permission to make the movie and the movie is based on the star trek IP. Thats all that needs to be said as far as infringement goes.
If their lawyer is really this stupid and making this the basis of their defense, axanar is going to get a legal butt reaming in court
As to why they might do that, two motivations come to mind:
1. They might be hoping that if CBS sees that the process will become long and expensive, they'll drop the suit since the Axanar probably won't really cost CBS anything.
2. They might just be going "You guys SUCK. If you want to take us down, WE'LL MAKE YOU PAY FOR IT!!!"
And that ship appeared in... three series? TOS, DS9, and ENT?
Oh, but that's not copyright infringement...
It's very simple: Axanar got greedy, even emptied out some of the fundraised cash to pay himself, and thus exploited his project commercially. CBS got pissed (and rightly so). The End.
Copyright, in US law, protects "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression". It does not protect "any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work". (17USC102)
"Day of Dove" is copyrighted. "The Wrath of Khan" is copyrighted. "Who Watches the Watchers" is copyrighted. "Star Trek", the franchise, as a whole, is not copyrighted. It is an idea: a concept from which the copyrighted material is derived... but Star Trek, itself, is not copyrighted, nor is it copyrightable. So, unless AXANAR is producing it's version of an existing episode or movie, it's not violating copyright.
It doesn't count as a derivative work either, because "A 'derivative work' is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted." (17USC101)
A film version of the novel "Vulcan Academy Murders" is a derivative work. A novelization of "First Contact" is a derivative work. It's the same story presented in a different way.
AXANAR is making a brand new story that's never been told before. Yes, it's using, and making reference to, pre-existing elements of multiple copyrighted works, but since only the final product has copyright, and not the individual components that make up final product, it's not a infringement. Kirk is not copyrighted. Spock is not copyrighted. The Federation is not copyrighted. Klingons are not copyrighted. The U.S.S. Enterprise is not copyrighted.
To put it simply... no matter what the IP owners & their lawyers would like you to believe, Intellectual Property, as an umbrella term, does not exist and is not protected under the law. Don't believe me? Just ask Microsoft Corp. & Apple, Inc. Remember the "look and feel" copyright that Apple claimed that Windows violated? How did that end up?
Trademark is another matter completely... AXANAR is breaking trademark left and right.
And your claim that there's "no such thing as IP" is one of the things that keeps copyright and trademark lawyers wealthy, because some laymen believe that nonsense.
The trailers and short just look amazing. If someone broke the law, of course we cannot allow that. But man, I keep thinking about a guy who buys a dog toy but won't let his puppy play with it - for 10 years - because he'll ruin it. The guy doesn't admire or even care about the dog toy. There's no one who would appreciate it more than the puppy.
Mirror, Mirror warns against a future where a Terran Empire ravages the galaxy led by the ISS Enterprise.
In the 2000s, the biggest space station we build is called the ISS.
I am concerned.
Since they now filed a rather annoying reply for CBS, in which they basically have to list every single work infringed OR find the judge on their side to declare this response utter nonsence, Axanar can once again resume production on the feature film. Which is exactly what they are doing.
Who knows? If we're lucky Axanar gets finished, after which the producers will have to continue dealing with CBS. Maybe Axanar will just remain what it should have been: an one-time fantastic project. Maybe the part where Ares Studios was gonna become the next big thing in making more movies, based off the wealth they got with making a Trek movie, will not happen.
In any case, I just hope they find enough time to at least make the bloody movie, then they can continue fighting out the legal aspects.
Join the Deltas today!
When you have no real/valid defense you grasp and any and all potential 'straws' you can find. The problem is, most Judges really don't care for that level of legal BS. And copyright does indeed extend into aspects of 'look and feel' too. 'infringement' is not so narrowly defined as 'lifting verbatim' from a given work - but if you want a concrete example - there's the character of 'Ambassador Soval' (who was even reprised by the same actor - Gary Graham) in a 3 minute scene already filmed for the Axanar feature - so the whole "Axanar has made the movie yet - so infringement can't be claimed determined.." is moot, because they (by their own admission in Blogs, at Con panels, etc stated this three minute scene on Vulcan with Soval talking to an aide WILL be in the completed 'Axanar' feature <--- so there's your concrete proof of infringement from the Axanar feature right there.
About the best result the Axanar legal team might get is (after discovery for both sides is completed) - if an order from the Judge for Paramount/CBS to specifically detail everything they believe is an infringement (again, after they're conducted discovery against Axanar productions) - and then the Axanar legal team will have a chance to argue why <alleged infringement X> actually ISN'T copyright infringement - and the Judge will adjudicate each instance - and then (assuming the Judge finds for CBS/Paramount on one or more of these items; will conduct another set of hearings and decide on financial damages.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Paramount/CBS list all the infringements
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.
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.
.
.
.
.
.
just.... wow
Only if you try and make money off of it.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
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.
It's...amazing...how so many people don't grasp that basic concept. It's the *making money* part that gets you in trouble. It could never be "illegal to speak klingon".
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
To word this a bit differently, I would gladly let someone else's puppy play with one of my dog's toys, but if that other puppy uses my dog's toy to get doggy treats he wouldn't get otherwise, I might start to get upset. Ok, I'm not that heartless, but that's essentially what happened.
At most I think they could stop people from marketing things as "Klingon".
Yeah, no.
For starters, you can't copyright an 'idea.' What is copyright protectable, however, is the specific execution of an idea. In other words, if you intend to show copyright infringement, you need to be specific as to what execution of an idea you deem infringed upon.
JUDGE: "What works of yours do you feel Axanar infringed on?"
CBS/PARAMOUNT LAWYER: "Thousands of episodes and 12 movies."
JUDGE: "Can you be a bit more specific?!"
CBS/PARAMOUNT LAWYER: "Nah. Lazarus51166 said this would suffice."
JUDGE: "Then lazarus51166 was wrong!
Seriously. Though it should prove quite easy to demonstrate Axanar infringed upon Trek IP (even using 1 character, like Kirk, would suffice), still, CBS/Paramount will need to spell that out specifically. You can't just go like "You know, the whole Star Trek thingy!" In all area of Law, charges/complaints need to be specific. If someone stole a bike of yours, the thief can't be charged with just 'theft' in general: the DA will have to charge him with theft of your bike. So, if CBS/Paramount think they can get away with just suing Axanar for 'You know, just copyright infringement!', then they might find themselves sorely mistaken.
A copyright violation means you're infringing on certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, etc. It's a common misconception that you're only in violation when you're making money. That is not true, however (though often ethically only perceived as such when you're making money off of it). CBS/Paramount would never, in their right mind, go after someone who posts a small youtube vid, showing him/herself in a self-made Trek shirt. If you're Axanar, however, and raise money for an unauthorized Trek movie, paying yourself a handsome salary out of it, and intend to cash in on someone else's IP, then IP rightholders will generally pursue the matter. And rightly so.