Law suit dropped. But please don't let that stop the bickering.
It hasn't been dropped. The two parties are in settlement talks, which is a routine step most judges require before they agree to go through with a trial. Either side can still refuse to settle.
Well, those are all some rather silly assumptions, because I haven't supported Axanar, and I haven't been barred from the site, I'm simply participating in a discussion... Also, yes, people CAN ask for refunds... It's been mentioned somewhere back in the thread that Peters said people could contact for refunds, and they would be issued (if he felt like it)
That metaphor you wrote seemed awfully detailed as if you were a "personal" victim of that experience. Everything you have said up to this point lead me to that logical conclusion.
Well maybe if you wish hard enough it will flop and you can get your 'metaphorical' refund.
There's nothing metaphorical about someone saying they will issue refunds, opening a line of communication to facilitate said, and then refusing to do so, which, according to what folks have said, is what has happened... If folks want a refund on their donation, they should be able to get it... As has been mentioned, the project is stalled, and one of the key workers, is working on another unrelated project, so lawsuit aside, Axanar is not only dead in the water, but folks are already abandoning ship... What more do you need to acknowledge that Axanar (sadly) isn't going to get made? (And I say 'sadly' because I thought it sounded and looked like a fantastic project idea... I wanted Axanar to succeed, but I don't support egotistical TRIBBLE who spin lies to get a vanity project made on someone else's dime, or off the back of someone else's success...)
The updated headline says otherwise... (and unless Alex refuses the settlement then you cannot base any biased words to the contrary).
As above, time will tell how this pans out if there's no longer a lawsuit to delay production...
No it isn't... Buyer's remorse is when someone buys something they wanted, finds out that it doesn't 'capture their spirit' they way they'd hoped, and then regrets the purchase, but one key difference there, is that they actually have posession of the item they purchased... In this instance, there is no 'final project' which the person can claim to have bought or received. This is an instance of someone begging for money (because that's what crowd-funding amounts to) to do something, and then not doing it. People have then asked for their money back, and been told to jog on... That's not buyer's remorse, a
that's someone refusing to refund money they have received for X Product, and not received X Product...
That is someone saying "Give me $10 and I'll cook you The World's Best Burger!" (after I build a kitchen to cook it (and other meals which won't be your burger) in) Someone then getting sued for McDonalds for selling 'the Big Mick' so getting their kitchen closed down... So you ask for your $10 back, at which point you get kicked out of the restaurant and the doors locked so you can't come back in or even ask for your money back again... Do you seriously consider that (regardless of the field or venture) an acceptable business practice?
I don't know what systems KickStarter has in place to issue refunds to people after the money has been paid out (I know that if the amount isn't reached, the donated funds aren't released) but at the very least from a civil point of view, someone should have the ability to recover funds if they feel unsatisfied with a project's progress, and can show reasonable reasons for why they are unsatisfied or not confident in the project. (In this case, lack of a final script after a year's production, or as people are saying with Space Command, Marc Zicree flying round the world trying to sell a series, rather than just producing the original film originally discussed... Again, shifting goalposts... It's little more than bait-and-switch scamming, and IMHO, just as unacceptable...)
Reads to me like someone is very impatient for the film and is demanding it now and won't take no for an answer. And when you donate you can't ask for it back. This isn't McDonalds. You can't ask for a refund. Like @ryan218 you should have read the full page before dropping your credit card on their site. It's a crowdfund not a business. If you acted the same way you do here, no wonder the site barred you.
Well, those are all some rather silly assumptions, because I haven't supported Axanar, and I haven't been barred from the site, I'm simply participating in a discussion... Also, yes, people CAN ask for refunds... It's been mentioned somewhere back in the thread that Peters said people could contact for refunds, and they would be issued (if he felt like it)
Also, IndieGoGo has a refund policy if a project is never completed, I believe. (The problem of course being that as far as Peters is concerned Axanar is still in production, so IndieGoGo can't issue the refund.)
Exactly, hence why he is telling people to ask him for a refund, which he will then issue if he feels like it...
Ah, but, he isn't under any obligation to provide refunds - he has set out no official procedure saying he will do so if 'X' is true. Refunds are IndieGoGo's responsibility at the end of the day - they have to ask for it back from Peters. This also means people can't file a class-action lawsuit against Peters, BTW. They gave the money to IndieGoGo, who gave it to Axanar. If Axanar fail to return it to them at their request (which may or may not happen), then they can sue Axanar to get the money back and refund the donors.
TL:DR Peters is within his rights to withold refunds if he chooses to.
Perhaps legally so, but I wouldn't say morally so... If any backer contacts him and says "I'm not happy with how the project has progressed, I want my money back..." then he should simply issue a refund, not say "Nah, I don't have to do that, I think I'll just keep it..." As above, the difference between good and bad business practices, nothing more...
Two points there: Firstly, it wasn't actually my idea that Prelude was a bait scam, someone else made that suggestion/observation, I've simply come to agree that they may be correct. Secondly, the evidence has been discussed in various forms and depths over six months and 39 pages... I don't need to back up what has already been said...
As the person who (I think) brought it up, Here is what I said:
Honestly, At this point I am not sure Alec Peters ever had any real intention of making Axanar. I think he would probably make a few more "snippets" a la the vulcan scene, to convince donors that he was working on it. But in reality, he is just using the Star Trek IP to get rich and start his own production studio.
He has had a year to make Axanar, not even counting all the funding (which again is staggering in the amount) and he claims there isn't even a script yet. What exactly is taking so long? And if you are that behind schedule, What are you PAYING yourself for? What work have you done to actually justify that salary?
It is on Page 33 of this thread for those that want to look. My point was (and I freely admit) that with one year to make the film and 1.3 million dollars, he should have more then enough to make SOMETHING, and yet has not. It wasn't specifically at "Prelude". Personally, I think he did intend to make Axanar at the time of Prelude. But I maintain that somewhere between Prelude, maybe even the Vulcan scene and CBS/Paramount suing him, he stopped trying to make the film, and just flat out went to collecting however much money he could, to get rich.
Is that speculation on my part? Yes it is. That is why I don't really bring it up again. Because I want a discusssion about the facts of the case, and my personal opinion is not a fact. I don't know Peters or anyone connected with Axanar to definitively say one way or another what his intentions were or were not.
But as someone who knows someone who was scammed (unrelated to this discussion in any ways) you get wise to the signs when something is NOT above board, and it sets off warning bells for you. That is what Alec Peters and his action do for me, Which let me to that conclusion.
No it isn't... Buyer's remorse is when someone buys something they wanted, finds out that it doesn't 'capture their spirit' they way they'd hoped, and then regrets the purchase, but one key difference there, is that they actually have posession of the item they purchased... In this instance, there is no 'final project' which the person can claim to have bought or received. This is an instance of someone begging for money (because that's what crowd-funding amounts to) to do something, and then not doing it. People have then asked for their money back, and been told to jog on... That's not buyer's remorse, a
that's someone refusing to refund money they have received for X Product, and not received X Product...
That is someone saying "Give me $10 and I'll cook you The World's Best Burger!" (after I build a kitchen to cook it (and other meals which won't be your burger) in) Someone then getting sued for McDonalds for selling 'the Big Mick' so getting their kitchen closed down... So you ask for your $10 back, at which point you get kicked out of the restaurant and the doors locked so you can't come back in or even ask for your money back again... Do you seriously consider that (regardless of the field or venture) an acceptable business practice?
I don't know what systems KickStarter has in place to issue refunds to people after the money has been paid out (I know that if the amount isn't reached, the donated funds aren't released) but at the very least from a civil point of view, someone should have the ability to recover funds if they feel unsatisfied with a project's progress, and can show reasonable reasons for why they are unsatisfied or not confident in the project. (In this case, lack of a final script after a year's production, or as people are saying with Space Command, Marc Zicree flying round the world trying to sell a series, rather than just producing the original film originally discussed... Again, shifting goalposts... It's little more than bait-and-switch scamming, and IMHO, just as unacceptable...)
Reads to me like someone is very impatient for the film and is demanding it now and won't take no for an answer. And when you donate you can't ask for it back. This isn't McDonalds. You can't ask for a refund. Like @ryan218 you should have read the full page before dropping your credit card on their site. It's a crowdfund not a business. If you acted the same way you do here, no wonder the site barred you.
Well, those are all some rather silly assumptions, because I haven't supported Axanar, and I haven't been barred from the site, I'm simply participating in a discussion... Also, yes, people CAN ask for refunds... It's been mentioned somewhere back in the thread that Peters said people could contact for refunds, and they would be issued (if he felt like it)
Also, IndieGoGo has a refund policy if a project is never completed, I believe. (The problem of course being that as far as Peters is concerned Axanar is still in production, so IndieGoGo can't issue the refund.)
Exactly, hence why he is telling people to ask him for a refund, which he will then issue if he feels like it...
Ah, but, he isn't under any obligation to provide refunds - he has set out no official procedure saying he will do so if 'X' is true. Refunds are IndieGoGo's responsibility at the end of the day - they have to ask for it back from Peters. This also means people can't file a class-action lawsuit against Peters, BTW. They gave the money to IndieGoGo, who gave it to Axanar. If Axanar fail to return it to them at their request (which may or may not happen), then they can sue Axanar to get the money back and refund the donors.
TL:DR Peters is within his rights to withold refunds if he chooses to.
Perhaps legally so, but I wouldn't say morally so... If any backer contacts him and says "I'm not happy with how the project has progressed, I want my money back..." then he should simply issue a refund, not say "Nah, I don't have to do that, I think I'll just keep it..." As above, the difference between good and bad business practices, nothing more...
Oh, I completely agree. Similarly, EA shouldn't cut major content from blockbuster video games and then sell it for the same price as the released game itself. That doesn't stop them, of course - because it's not illegal. It may be slimish, reprehensible and arrogant, but you can't sue them for it.
Link? To my knowledge the lawsuit is still pending, so If you have evidence it has been dropped (or settled) I would appreciate it.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Link? To my knowledge the lawsuit is still pending, so If you have evidence it has been dropped (or settled) I would appreciate it.
Settlement talks do NOT equal case dropped. AT ALL. As stated, part of the legal proceedings included both sides trying to work on a possible settlement, to avoid a costly trail. It is mandated by the court and means really nothing from either side.
Even if a settlement IS reached, and don't count on Axanar being allowed to go forward if it is, it is not the same as dropping the case. It basically means both sides agree to a deal, again to avoid going to trail.
Link? To my knowledge the lawsuit is still pending, so If you have evidence it has been dropped (or settled) I would appreciate it.
Settlement talks do NOT equal case dropped. AT ALL. As stated, part of the legal proceedings included both sides trying to work on a possible settlement, to avoid a costly trail. It is mandated by the court and means really nothing from either side.
Even if a settlement IS reached, and don't count on Axanar being allowed to go forward if it is, it is not the same as dropping the case. It basically means both sides agree to a deal, again to avoid going to trail.
Yep, had to point this out until my fingers got tired in re: Cryptic and Marvel. When Marvel sued over characters in City of Heroes that violated trademark, the suit was eventually settled out of court (probably, IMO, because the character files they were using belonged to Marvel employees, which kind of muddied the waters a bit), but that did not mean that Cryptic "won" - hence their rather draconian policy toward trademark violation in Champions Online.
Similarly, in this case it seems likely to me that CBS already had Peters over a barrel and squealing like a pig, and decided they'd rather settle out of court than proceed with a lawsuit they'd almost certainly never finish getting paid back for (as even if Peters sold everything he owned and mortgaged his great-grandchildrens' future, he probably still couldn't have paid the legal fees of CBS' team of lawyers).
[/quote]
Perhaps legally so, but I wouldn't say morally so... If any backer contacts him and says "I'm not happy with how the project has progressed, I want my money back..." then he should simply issue a refund, not say "Nah, I don't have to do that, I think I'll just keep it..." As above, the difference between good and bad business practices, nothing more...
[/quote]
Well, the thing is, he's made good stuff already, and for free. You may not enjoy Prelude all that much, but I do... Until it's proven he's actually ceased effort on the project, things stay as follows, Also " they couldn't afford to spend" if you are not financially secure, you shouldn't be trying to fund someone else's business. It's common sense. "A year of having money and not working on a project, however, does fall under that catagory of 'lack of trying'", you have to prove they haven't tried. Getting sued by a corporate giant that has the ability to pink slip your buildings, and basically waste all the time of your on set personnel is pretty much a huge reason why all production would be stalled. It's common sense that you wouldn't continue building a house if there was an on going land dispute that could force you to have to demolish the house afterwords. " I don't need to back up what has already been said" regarding your evidence, it appears that your evidence wasn't strong enough to sway the opinions of key figures in this entire debate, so it's still moot. Even if said evidence exists, it's obviously not a factor to either parties. and finally regarding doing something about it, it's not half, it's a complete challenge to your complete challenge. Your postulation is that everyone who disagrees with you in regards to the progression of Axanar is wrong because there is substantial evidence out there, you should take up this slam dunk case. "maligned victim of the bullying" I don't know what Alec is, and I would bet you don't either, not unless you know him personally. I wouldn't be surprised if he is acting like a standard businessman who happened to like Trek, and is using this project to display is abilities. I'm grown up enough to understand that people don't always like to work for free. Nor should I think just because someone tells a story, should the entire planet should not be able to tell a similar story in the similar style.
What you are doing is essentially using legal standards of copyright, to argue it's not moral. That doesn't work. Legal copyright only works if it's un/lawful, I have moral opinions regarding the creative level of our copyright system, as a person who knows what it takes to get an invention patented, and that in order to make it original, you need to do all the research yourself and if you happen to build something that even looks similar, you may be sued for it. Thus I am completely and totally not surprised this fan film looks the way it does. How many millions would it cost to get the OK from CBS/Paramount to build this project completely protected? What would it look like after when the studio execs cut it's creativity to ribbons when they start to feel it's not performing optimally to their standards in a focus group? God forbid they support a niche fan base that has supported them in the past.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Link? To my knowledge the lawsuit is still pending, so If you have evidence it has been dropped (or settled) I would appreciate it.
Settlement talks do NOT equal case dropped. AT ALL. As stated, part of the legal proceedings included both sides trying to work on a possible settlement, to avoid a costly trail. It is mandated by the court and means really nothing from either side.
Even if a settlement IS reached, and don't count on Axanar being allowed to go forward if it is, it is not the same as dropping the case. It basically means both sides agree to a deal, again to avoid going to trail.
He wanted a link to the "SETTLEMENT" I provided it. What's your problem?
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Link? To my knowledge the lawsuit is still pending, so If you have evidence it has been dropped (or settled) I would appreciate it.
Settlement talks do NOT equal case dropped. AT ALL. As stated, part of the legal proceedings included both sides trying to work on a possible settlement, to avoid a costly trail. It is mandated by the court and means really nothing from either side.
Even if a settlement IS reached, and don't count on Axanar being allowed to go forward if it is, it is not the same as dropping the case. It basically means both sides agree to a deal, again to avoid going to trail.
Yep, had to point this out until my fingers got tired in re: Cryptic and Marvel. When Marvel sued over characters in City of Heroes that violated trademark, the suit was eventually settled out of court (probably, IMO, because the character files they were using belonged to Marvel employees, which kind of muddied the waters a bit), but that did not mean that Cryptic "won" - hence their rather draconian policy toward trademark violation in Champions Online.
Similarly, in this case it seems likely to me that CBS already had Peters over a barrel and squealing like a pig, and decided they'd rather settle out of court than proceed with a lawsuit they'd almost certainly never finish getting paid back for (as even if Peters sold everything he owned and mortgaged his great-grandchildrens' future, he probably still couldn't have paid the legal fees of CBS' team of lawyers).
@jonsills never ceases to amaze me with his internet degree in 'Law' and his baseless and vivid imagination of what is factually happening before the settlement talks and possibly the future.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Forty pages about some guy who is convinced he's waay smarter than a bunch of patsies wandering around a crowdfunding site while he's trying to pretend he's making a fanfic.. Aaaand, as an added bonus, how a bunch of suits at a couple of entertainment companies feel about that.
Oh yeah, this is real important to STO, ain't it? Wake me when we get to the part about STO, would you please? Wouldn't want to miss that. Oh, and one more thing: People can stick their head up their fourth point of contact all they want about the concept of 'Intellectual property'. This, however, does not make said laws and their consequences go away.
A six year old boy and his starship. Living the dream.
Link? To my knowledge the lawsuit is still pending, so If you have evidence it has been dropped (or settled) I would appreciate it.
Settlement talks do NOT equal case dropped. AT ALL. As stated, part of the legal proceedings included both sides trying to work on a possible settlement, to avoid a costly trail. It is mandated by the court and means really nothing from either side.
Even if a settlement IS reached, and don't count on Axanar being allowed to go forward if it is, it is not the same as dropping the case. It basically means both sides agree to a deal, again to avoid going to trail.
He wanted a link to the "SETTLEMENT" I provided it. What's your problem?
He would be me. And looking back, I did mention the settlement, so on that I apologize. But actually my original point still stands. the original post (that I quoted) stated that the case had been dropped. It has not.
He would be me. And looking back, I did mention the settlement, so on that I apologize. But actually my original point still stands. the original post (that I quoted) stated that the case had been dropped. It has not.
Give it another week and we might find out.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
He would be me. And looking back, I did mention the settlement, so on that I apologize. But actually my original point still stands. the original post (that I quoted) stated that the case had been dropped. It has not.
Give it another week and we might find out.
Right. But that doesn't change the facts as they stand now. As of this moment, they are in settlement talks, which is a standard and court mandated part of the litigation process. That is very different the someone boldly stating the case was dropped.
To boldly go where no one has gone before... oh sorry, couldn't resist.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
CBS and Paramount have zero incentive to drop the case. They have every reason to settle it, and all kinds of grounds to do so and none of it has to be disclosed. They have just as much reason to drive the Axanar project/crew into the ground. Settlement is the best case scenario here for the project ever being produced.
They don't have an awful lot of incentive to continue with it either. They be publicly shunned and it would leave a giant stain on their franchise.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
CBS and Paramount have zero incentive to drop the case. They have every reason to settle it, and all kinds of grounds to do so and none of it has to be disclosed. They have just as much reason to drive the Axanar project/crew into the ground. Settlement is the best case scenario here for the project ever being produced.
I think you are underestimating CBS/Paramount. Sure settlement might be considered better then Axanar outright losing, but saying it is the best case scenario is like saying 90 degree temperature over 100 degree temperature is the best case scenario for an ice cube. Yeah, it is colder then 100 degrees, but the ice cube is a goner either way.
CBS/Paramount have no reason to let Axanar go forward, and stand to lose much more by allowing it to do so, since they chose litigation. That said, I doubt they will agree to any settlement that doesn't shut Axanar down.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
This thread is becoming seriously Green ..., and not with envy.
<chuckle>
Anyway...,
Everybody here is just guessing, none of us know what is going to happen and we all only have a tiny bit of the necessary information to actually make a factual conclusion.
Only time will tell.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
If only we could somehow contact Picard... He has a time machine in his possession.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
People who call the studio evidence, have no clue what evidence is. If you don't think CBS already looked at that information as part of the case already, and you think you are some sort of super detectives, and you know how to utilize the law better than Paramount/CBS you don't. You are anonymous keyboard captains who are like everyone else who has ZERO experience in the actual practice of law. In fact, I keep seeing the phrase "Peters" attitude is bad, while simultaneously calling for unlawful prosecution, name calling, and more immature nonsense. Try and gain a little self respect and not acting like the cliche' version of Sheldon Cooper with emotional rants and raves that contradict your own arguments of having the moral high ground. You expect others to maintain a high moral character, while yourself, you are saying all that you can to insult a person that you don't know in real life, and only have heard and seen through limited interviews and blogs.
I watched a video with Peters the other day with an interviewer who was specifically trying to bring the controversy to light, and the video had been cut in so many places you can tell things were missing. I got major red flags at all the jump cuts that were shown that showed Peters upset about the way the interview was being conducted. To thin skinned people, they might see Peters as overly aggressive, and unruly, what I saw was pieces missing, which makes me think the interviewer was cutting out all the bait pieces of controversial questions in the hopes of gleaming something juicy for his story, and relatively unpopular youtube channel.
At this point though, I don't care, Peters has made Star Trek look pretty amazing in my eyes. Some of us want a little diplomacy, some thinking, some inspiration, and actual tactical action. If you don't think he has done it, well then the people who funded him, including me, probably would disagree with you, which means your opinion is entirely irrelevant to this functional and progressive project.
I pledged $75 towards the first Axanar feature; and I work in the LASC court system. I HAVE NOT been happy with Alec Peters handling of Axanar - and have to say that your assertion that Peters has somehow been unlawfully prosected is ridiculous. Also, the majority of people with legal background/experience correctly deduced that Judge Klausner would 100% deny the Axanar legal team's motion to dismiss.
And we should be hearing in a few weeks on Judge Klausner’s decision on our motion to dismiss. And despite a certain conspiracy nut’s claims, we expect to win at least part of that motion. (My money is on the judge dismissing at least the claim against the film Axanar, since we haven’t even begun production and so you can’t even judge a fair use defense).
^^^
So, yeah - there probably is an armchair lawyer you shouldn't be listening to.
Perhaps you'd also like to hear from a person who did ALL the green screen compositing work on "Prelude to Axanar" about his full experience with Alec Peters and how he handled that aspect of "Prelude to Axanar"?:
As to JJ Abram's comment. It's been mis-reported as "...the case is being dropped..." and that is not what Mr. Abrams said, which was: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZFycZqcQhQ
"...We went to the studio and pushed them to stop this lawsuit and now in a few weeks this will be going away..."
But was FURTHER clarified by a person at the CBS Legal department as:
"We're pleased to confirm that we are in settlement discussions and are also working on a set of fan film guidelines."
^^^
But if you read the other tweets: Mr. Peters was unaware and frantically texting his lawyers; which is interesting because his lawyers CAN'T sign any settlement for him - HE has to agree and sign any settlement (along with some Paramount and CBS execs with power of attorney). What this means is the lawyers ARE talking settlement but in the end Mr. Peters has to agree to said settlement offer; and neither JJ Abrams and Justin Lin have any control over that. If Mr. Peters refuses to agree (IE Mr. Peters and C/P CAN'T agree to settlement terms) - the case will not "go away". No matter how you read it though CBS/Paramount are NOT just dropping the case.
[Let me say I think the title is appropriate given the whole situation to date]
TLDR: Axanar/Peters deserved to be prosecuted - nothing unlawful about it as the 100% dismissal of their motion to dismiss demonstrated. Also JJ Abram's comment was misconstrued as "the lawsuit is being dropped" when in fact it's more "Both parties are in settlement negotiations" - BUT that means BOTH parties have to agree to a settlement or the case WON'T be going away, discovery will proceed, and it may still get to a Jury trial if they can't agree and neither JJ Abrams nor Justin Lin can control that.
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..."
Well, the thing is, he's made good stuff already, and for free. You may not enjoy Prelude all that much, but I do...Until it's proven he's actually ceased effort on the project, things stay as follows, Also " they couldn't afford to spend" if you are not financially secure, you shouldn't be trying to fund someone else's business. It's common sense. "A year of having money and not working on a project, however, does fall under that catagory of 'lack of trying'", you have to prove they haven't tried. Getting sued by a corporate giant that has the ability to pink slip your buildings, and basically waste all the time of your on set personnel is pretty much a huge reason why all production would be stalled. It's common sense that you wouldn't continue building a house if there was an on going land dispute that could force you to have to demolish the house afterwords. " I don't need to back up what has already been said" regarding your evidence, it appears that your evidence wasn't strong enough to sway the opinions of key figures in this entire debate, so it's still moot. Even if said evidence exists, it's obviously not a factor to either parties. and finally regarding doing something about it, it's not half, it's a complete challenge to your complete challenge. Your postulation is that everyone who disagrees with you in regards to the progression of Axanar is wrong because there is substantial evidence out there, you should take up this slam dunk case. "maligned victim of the bullying" I don't know what Alec is, and I would bet you don't either, not unless you know him personally. I wouldn't be surprised if he is acting like a standard businessman who happened to like Trek, and is using this project to display is abilities. I'm grown up enough to understand that people don't always like to work for free. Nor should I think just because someone tells a story, should the entire planet should not be able to tell a similar story in the similar style.
What you are doing is essentially using legal standards of copyright, to argue it's not moral. That doesn't work. Legal copyright only works if it's un/lawful, I have moral opinions regarding the creative level of our copyright system, as a person who knows what it takes to get an invention patented, and that in order to make it original, you need to do all the research yourself and if you happen to build something that even looks similar, you may be sued for it. Thus I am completely and totally not surprised this fan film looks the way it does. How many millions would it cost to get the OK from CBS/Paramount to build this project completely protected? What would it look like after when the studio execs cut it's creativity to ribbons when they start to feel it's not performing optimally to their standards in a focus group? God forbid they support a niche fan base that has supported them in the past.
I'm only going to address a couple of the 'points' you've raised, because most of what you've said, crypticarmsman has already answered more succinctly.
Point One: I've consistently said that I thought Axanar looked good. I would have thought, that someone would understand that, by extension, I also thought Prelude looked good, and that I enjoyed it. So you're misunderstanding the point I made. A backer (and oh look, an actual backer has already specifically addressed your 'point' by stating their lack of satisfaction with the current level of progress of Axanar/Alec Peter's behaviour...) may feel that with nothing done on Axanar in a year, that their money is being misused/not going to yield the result they wanted (as highlighted) so they may decide to withdraw their investment and ask for a refund. As someone who is financially backing a business, they are entitled to remove their backing if they're dissatisfied with the progress of the business...
Point Two: Proving he's ceased effort on the project... As I mentioned a page or so back, his right-hand woman, Diana Kingsbury, is directly working on another movie project as an actress. As I noted, it is possible that she is working on two projects simultaneously. It also means, however, that her Axanar duties aren't getting her full attention... Again, looking with the perspective as a business investor, if I saw a key member of someone's team taking on a new gig, I would be massively concerned by that, and I would take that as a sign that the original project is potentially not going forward, and that that team-member has removed themself and found a new job. Now while that might not 'prove' anything, it certainly raises serious red-flags. Red-flags which warrant investigation, and which raise serious questions which need to be directly answered:
A project a friend was signed to work on, was due to be shooting in April, but it hasn't. She's been told that shooting will occur later this year... She's hoping that the project goes ahead, and I hope (because I want to see my friend working on projects because that's her job) that it goes ahead, but on the other hand, I wouldn't be surprized if whatever reason (which I don't know) delayed filming in April, simply derails the project altogether... If I were an investor on that project, I might also wonder if my money is being squandered, and might withdraw my support... I only mention that, because it shows what can happen with crowd-funded projects...
Point Three: And so what? this is a discussion not a highschool debating club. It doesn't matter if someone agrees with me, or the points I've made, or not... Lack of agreement would not invalidate them, because they are opinions. However... The comment crypticarmsman has made is not only agreeing with the points I made, but shows that there are indeed backers of Axanar who are unhappy with the progress of the project. Some of those unhappy backers, have asked for their money back... Some of those unhappy backers (or even merely 'interested parties') who have questioned Alec Peters, have been barred from pages under his control. How's that for Customer Service? Someone says something you don't like, you don't just tell them to f**k off, you remove any means of them ever raising the point to you again... Oh yeah, that's real mature... That's not 'handling your business' like a pro... It's acting like a brat, and someone who clearly should not be taken seriously or supported...
Point Four: I don't know, but I do know that people do get films made... I read last night that Axanar is, essentially, a story Alec Peters has wanted to tell for twenty years. (Probably an idea he had soon after watching First Contact) It strikes me, that this is a story he's potentially pitched to Paramount and had rejected, so he's now trying to make the film himself. If it was just a case of 'telling a story', then great, strip out the Star Trek IP elements, and tell the story of Gareth Isaacs, the Space Command captain who's tactics won the battle of Aldebaran, against the evil Krillon Empire, thus allowing the Galactic Commonwealth to be established... It'll still be a f**king amazing story (and I would still want to see it) but it wouldn't be Star Trek, and it wouldn't be the 'I dictated a piece of Star Trek Canon' ego-boost which Alec Peters clearly needs it to be. If he didn't need it to be that, if he just wanted to tell that story he'd be telling the story of Gareth Isaacs...
Point Five: Hmmm, yes, because Star Trek really is the only string to CBS/Paramount's collective bow(s) so the only 'niche group' that matters...
Comments
It hasn't been dropped. The two parties are in settlement talks, which is a routine step most judges require before they agree to go through with a trial. Either side can still refuse to settle.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
As the person who (I think) brought it up, Here is what I said:
It is on Page 33 of this thread for those that want to look. My point was (and I freely admit) that with one year to make the film and 1.3 million dollars, he should have more then enough to make SOMETHING, and yet has not. It wasn't specifically at "Prelude". Personally, I think he did intend to make Axanar at the time of Prelude. But I maintain that somewhere between Prelude, maybe even the Vulcan scene and CBS/Paramount suing him, he stopped trying to make the film, and just flat out went to collecting however much money he could, to get rich.
Is that speculation on my part? Yes it is. That is why I don't really bring it up again. Because I want a discusssion about the facts of the case, and my personal opinion is not a fact. I don't know Peters or anyone connected with Axanar to definitively say one way or another what his intentions were or were not.
But as someone who knows someone who was scammed (unrelated to this discussion in any ways) you get wise to the signs when something is NOT above board, and it sets off warning bells for you. That is what Alec Peters and his action do for me, Which let me to that conclusion.
Link? To my knowledge the lawsuit is still pending, so If you have evidence it has been dropped (or settled) I would appreciate it.
Oh, I completely agree. Similarly, EA shouldn't cut major content from blockbuster video games and then sell it for the same price as the released game itself. That doesn't stop them, of course - because it's not illegal. It may be slimish, reprehensible and arrogant, but you can't sue them for it.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Settlement talks do NOT equal case dropped. AT ALL. As stated, part of the legal proceedings included both sides trying to work on a possible settlement, to avoid a costly trail. It is mandated by the court and means really nothing from either side.
Even if a settlement IS reached, and don't count on Axanar being allowed to go forward if it is, it is not the same as dropping the case. It basically means both sides agree to a deal, again to avoid going to trail.
Similarly, in this case it seems likely to me that CBS already had Peters over a barrel and squealing like a pig, and decided they'd rather settle out of court than proceed with a lawsuit they'd almost certainly never finish getting paid back for (as even if Peters sold everything he owned and mortgaged his great-grandchildrens' future, he probably still couldn't have paid the legal fees of CBS' team of lawyers).
Perhaps legally so, but I wouldn't say morally so... If any backer contacts him and says "I'm not happy with how the project has progressed, I want my money back..." then he should simply issue a refund, not say "Nah, I don't have to do that, I think I'll just keep it..." As above, the difference between good and bad business practices, nothing more...
[/quote]
Well, the thing is, he's made good stuff already, and for free. You may not enjoy Prelude all that much, but I do... Until it's proven he's actually ceased effort on the project, things stay as follows, Also " they couldn't afford to spend" if you are not financially secure, you shouldn't be trying to fund someone else's business. It's common sense. "A year of having money and not working on a project, however, does fall under that catagory of 'lack of trying'", you have to prove they haven't tried. Getting sued by a corporate giant that has the ability to pink slip your buildings, and basically waste all the time of your on set personnel is pretty much a huge reason why all production would be stalled. It's common sense that you wouldn't continue building a house if there was an on going land dispute that could force you to have to demolish the house afterwords. " I don't need to back up what has already been said" regarding your evidence, it appears that your evidence wasn't strong enough to sway the opinions of key figures in this entire debate, so it's still moot. Even if said evidence exists, it's obviously not a factor to either parties. and finally regarding doing something about it, it's not half, it's a complete challenge to your complete challenge. Your postulation is that everyone who disagrees with you in regards to the progression of Axanar is wrong because there is substantial evidence out there, you should take up this slam dunk case. "maligned victim of the bullying" I don't know what Alec is, and I would bet you don't either, not unless you know him personally. I wouldn't be surprised if he is acting like a standard businessman who happened to like Trek, and is using this project to display is abilities. I'm grown up enough to understand that people don't always like to work for free. Nor should I think just because someone tells a story, should the entire planet should not be able to tell a similar story in the similar style.
What you are doing is essentially using legal standards of copyright, to argue it's not moral. That doesn't work. Legal copyright only works if it's un/lawful, I have moral opinions regarding the creative level of our copyright system, as a person who knows what it takes to get an invention patented, and that in order to make it original, you need to do all the research yourself and if you happen to build something that even looks similar, you may be sued for it. Thus I am completely and totally not surprised this fan film looks the way it does. How many millions would it cost to get the OK from CBS/Paramount to build this project completely protected? What would it look like after when the studio execs cut it's creativity to ribbons when they start to feel it's not performing optimally to their standards in a focus group? God forbid they support a niche fan base that has supported them in the past.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
He wanted a link to the "SETTLEMENT" I provided it. What's your problem?
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
@jonsills never ceases to amaze me with his internet degree in 'Law' and his baseless and vivid imagination of what is factually happening before the settlement talks and possibly the future.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Oh yeah, this is real important to STO, ain't it? Wake me when we get to the part about STO, would you please? Wouldn't want to miss that. Oh, and one more thing: People can stick their head up their fourth point of contact all they want about the concept of 'Intellectual property'. This, however, does not make said laws and their consequences go away.
He would be me. And looking back, I did mention the settlement, so on that I apologize. But actually my original point still stands. the original post (that I quoted) stated that the case had been dropped. It has not.
Give it another week and we might find out.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Right. But that doesn't change the facts as they stand now. As of this moment, they are in settlement talks, which is a standard and court mandated part of the litigation process. That is very different the someone boldly stating the case was dropped.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
This is dangerously wishful thinking. Of course they will defend their IP.
I think you are underestimating CBS/Paramount. Sure settlement might be considered better then Axanar outright losing, but saying it is the best case scenario is like saying 90 degree temperature over 100 degree temperature is the best case scenario for an ice cube. Yeah, it is colder then 100 degrees, but the ice cube is a goner either way.
CBS/Paramount have no reason to let Axanar go forward, and stand to lose much more by allowing it to do so, since they chose litigation. That said, I doubt they will agree to any settlement that doesn't shut Axanar down.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
<chuckle>
Anyway...,
Everybody here is just guessing, none of us know what is going to happen and we all only have a tiny bit of the necessary information to actually make a factual conclusion.
Only time will tell.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
I pledged $75 towards the first Axanar feature; and I work in the LASC court system. I HAVE NOT been happy with Alec Peters handling of Axanar - and have to say that your assertion that Peters has somehow been unlawfully prosected is ridiculous. Also, the majority of people with legal background/experience correctly deduced that Judge Klausner would 100% deny the Axanar legal team's motion to dismiss.
Alec ("lawyer by training Peters") predicted:
http://www.axanarproductions.com/paramountcba-vs-axanar-trial-date-set/ ^^^
So, yeah - there probably is an armchair lawyer you shouldn't be listening to.
Perhaps you'd also like to hear from a person who did ALL the green screen compositing work on "Prelude to Axanar" about his full experience with Alec Peters and how he handled that aspect of "Prelude to Axanar"?:
https://www.facebook.com/tommykraftfilms/posts/1133891623340104
As to JJ Abram's comment. It's been mis-reported as "...the case is being dropped..." and that is not what Mr. Abrams said, which was:
"...We went to the studio and pushed them to stop this lawsuit and now in a few weeks this will be going away..."
But was FURTHER clarified by a person at the CBS Legal department as:
"We're pleased to confirm that we are in settlement discussions and are also working on a set of fan film guidelines."
^^^
But if you read the other tweets: Mr. Peters was unaware and frantically texting his lawyers; which is interesting because his lawyers CAN'T sign any settlement for him - HE has to agree and sign any settlement (along with some Paramount and CBS execs with power of attorney). What this means is the lawyers ARE talking settlement but in the end Mr. Peters has to agree to said settlement offer; and neither JJ Abrams and Justin Lin have any control over that. If Mr. Peters refuses to agree (IE Mr. Peters and C/P CAN'T agree to settlement terms) - the case will not "go away". No matter how you read it though CBS/Paramount are NOT just dropping the case.
Lastly - it looks like Ares Stud...er Valkyrie Studios has its first outside production/tenant (assuming said tenant's Kick Starter funds successfully):
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/529509339/star-thieves-a-sci-fi-webseries/posts/1569494
[Let me say I think the title is appropriate given the whole situation to date]
TLDR: Axanar/Peters deserved to be prosecuted - nothing unlawful about it as the 100% dismissal of their motion to dismiss demonstrated. Also JJ Abram's comment was misconstrued as "the lawsuit is being dropped" when in fact it's more "Both parties are in settlement negotiations" - BUT that means BOTH parties have to agree to a settlement or the case WON'T be going away, discovery will proceed, and it may still get to a Jury trial if they can't agree and neither JJ Abrams nor Justin Lin can control that.
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..."
I'm only going to address a couple of the 'points' you've raised, because most of what you've said, crypticarmsman has already answered more succinctly.
Point One: I've consistently said that I thought Axanar looked good. I would have thought, that someone would understand that, by extension, I also thought Prelude looked good, and that I enjoyed it. So you're misunderstanding the point I made. A backer (and oh look, an actual backer has already specifically addressed your 'point' by stating their lack of satisfaction with the current level of progress of Axanar/Alec Peter's behaviour...) may feel that with nothing done on Axanar in a year, that their money is being misused/not going to yield the result they wanted (as highlighted) so they may decide to withdraw their investment and ask for a refund. As someone who is financially backing a business, they are entitled to remove their backing if they're dissatisfied with the progress of the business...
Point Two: Proving he's ceased effort on the project... As I mentioned a page or so back, his right-hand woman, Diana Kingsbury, is directly working on another movie project as an actress. As I noted, it is possible that she is working on two projects simultaneously. It also means, however, that her Axanar duties aren't getting her full attention... Again, looking with the perspective as a business investor, if I saw a key member of someone's team taking on a new gig, I would be massively concerned by that, and I would take that as a sign that the original project is potentially not going forward, and that that team-member has removed themself and found a new job. Now while that might not 'prove' anything, it certainly raises serious red-flags. Red-flags which warrant investigation, and which raise serious questions which need to be directly answered:
A project a friend was signed to work on, was due to be shooting in April, but it hasn't. She's been told that shooting will occur later this year... She's hoping that the project goes ahead, and I hope (because I want to see my friend working on projects because that's her job) that it goes ahead, but on the other hand, I wouldn't be surprized if whatever reason (which I don't know) delayed filming in April, simply derails the project altogether... If I were an investor on that project, I might also wonder if my money is being squandered, and might withdraw my support... I only mention that, because it shows what can happen with crowd-funded projects...
Point Three: And so what? this is a discussion not a highschool debating club. It doesn't matter if someone agrees with me, or the points I've made, or not... Lack of agreement would not invalidate them, because they are opinions. However... The comment crypticarmsman has made is not only agreeing with the points I made, but shows that there are indeed backers of Axanar who are unhappy with the progress of the project. Some of those unhappy backers, have asked for their money back... Some of those unhappy backers (or even merely 'interested parties') who have questioned Alec Peters, have been barred from pages under his control. How's that for Customer Service? Someone says something you don't like, you don't just tell them to f**k off, you remove any means of them ever raising the point to you again... Oh yeah, that's real mature... That's not 'handling your business' like a pro... It's acting like a brat, and someone who clearly should not be taken seriously or supported...
Point Four: I don't know, but I do know that people do get films made... I read last night that Axanar is, essentially, a story Alec Peters has wanted to tell for twenty years. (Probably an idea he had soon after watching First Contact) It strikes me, that this is a story he's potentially pitched to Paramount and had rejected, so he's now trying to make the film himself. If it was just a case of 'telling a story', then great, strip out the Star Trek IP elements, and tell the story of Gareth Isaacs, the Space Command captain who's tactics won the battle of Aldebaran, against the evil Krillon Empire, thus allowing the Galactic Commonwealth to be established... It'll still be a f**king amazing story (and I would still want to see it) but it wouldn't be Star Trek, and it wouldn't be the 'I dictated a piece of Star Trek Canon' ego-boost which Alec Peters clearly needs it to be. If he didn't need it to be that, if he just wanted to tell that story he'd be telling the story of Gareth Isaacs...
Point Five: Hmmm, yes, because Star Trek really is the only string to CBS/Paramount's collective bow(s) so the only 'niche group' that matters...