JJ Abrams attended a Star Trek Fan Event at Paramount Studios promoting Star Trek Beyond and said these words. This was broadcasted live on the internet by the way.
"A few months back there was a fan movie, Axanar that was being fan made, and there was this lawsuit between the studio and these fans. And Justin was sort of outraged by this as a longtime fan. And, we started talking about it and realized this was not an appropriate way to deal with the fans. The fans should be celebrating this thing, we all as fans are part of this world. So he went to the studio and pushed them to stop this lawsuit and now within the last few weeks it will be announced that this is going away and the fans will be able to continue their productions."
Emphasis mine. I'd hardly qualify this statement as Abrams having zero involvement and knowledge of this issue. Which leaves me with some questions. Did this meeting between Justin and the studios actually happen to the point where both Justin and Abrams were convinced that the studios were going to drop the suit, or... Did Abrams say this to try and win over the fans in order to get them to go see Star Trek Beyond? After all, he didn't tell us when the studios would drop the suit, he simply said it will be announced. So even if it hasn't been dropped by the time the movie is out, it wouldn't matter because he got more people in the theater. Has the date for the drop been announced? No. Have things gotten any better? No.
I think the bigger question is "what does this have to do with anything at all?" So what if JJ stated that the lawsuit was going to be dropped? If he had no authority to speak on behalf of the studios, then his statement is pointless.
I can make a public statement that the lawsuit is going to be dropped. But who cares? I don't have any authority to speak on behalf of the studio either.
The defendants are trying to drag him in on two different theories, I understand, both of which are pointless IMHO:
1. "JJ said the lawsuit was going to be dropped, which is proof that the studio supported – or at least tolerated – fan films, so the defendants were justified in proceeding with making their film because they believed that the studio would not have a problem with it." Again, we've seen nothing so far to indicate that JJ had any authority to speak on behalf of the studio – in fact, the studio seemed as surprised by this as everyone else, and had to scramble the next day to follow up with a meek statement that "settlement discussions are ongoing." Furthermore, how can this public statement lead someone to believe that what they were doing would not run afoul of the studios, when the lawsuit was filed in December 2015, and the statement was made in May 2016? Did Axanar get their DeLorean up to 88 and go into the future to hear this statement before deciding to proceed with their film a few years earlier?
2. "JJ's statement proves that fan activities only help the studio, and therefore the defendants have caused the studio no financial harm. This supports both a lack of damages on copyright infringement grounds and also supports the claim of fair use." Again, unless it can be established otherwise, I see no grounds for imputing any statement made by JJ to the studio. But, to take this to its logical conclusion, there is absolutely no requirement under copyright law that the plaintiff actually suffer any financial harm for the defendant to be liable for damages. This is why the law prescribes that the plaintiff is entitled to both its actual damages
and the defendants profits – even if the plaintiff suffered no actual damages, it is still entitled to any profits of the defendant. Furthermore, even if the plaintiff has suffered no actual financial harm, it can still elect to pursue statutory damages of up to $150,000 per infringement – which is, I understand, the route the studios are going here. Lastly, while financial effect on the plaintiff is one of the factors to be considered in the fair use analysis, it is only one of the factors, and a fair use defense can be denied - and the infringing use be deemed unfair - if the other three fair use factors militate against the defendants.
So, yeah, deposing JJ is just one more attempt by the defense to drag this out ( which they have been prone to do) and, as a side benefit, possibly put the studio in a rough situation with a very successful director as an attempt to gain leverage in settlement discussions. That's it.
M
lol
