Axanar - Crowdfunded 'Star Trek' Movie Draws Lawsuit from Paramount, CBS

Wes R said:
He handled things badly but he made a Trek that I was actually interested in seeing for the first time since Next Gen went off the air and for me to actually watch something made after the 90s is a big deal. It's a shame it's ending this way, the fact he made so much money proves that he had at least had a clue to what fans wanted.
Click to expand...

I can't say I had any interest in Axanar whatsoever. But it certainly doesn't sound like you are alone in your sentiments. Which is why one would hope, in an ideal world, that an accommodation could be reached where, say, Paramount/CBS recognized that Axanar offered something that fans perceived to be of value and perhaps invited certain of the people involved in Axanar to assist in Paramount/CBS' own ST offerings going forward. But I don't see that happening anytime soon as long as Axanar is taking the outright adversarial approach they were taking as of yesterday - an approach which I don't think does any good either for the people involved in Axanar or for other fan projects generally.

M
 
Yeah . . like I said, "outright adversarial approach". From their Facebook page:

10414911_887727981341726_5688788796064840445_n.jpg
 
The people involved in this project I've followed for a long time. Bill Hunt, who actually took part in the writing of this project was on the DVD front dating all the way back to it's jewel case beginnings. I had a lot of respect for these individuals so of course I backed it.

My thoughts? Regardless of who's right and who's wrong, I cannot see anything positive coming from as a result. Going after the fanbase like this on the eve of it's 50th Anniversary year? And on Christmas?! It's all a bummer.
 
Jeyl said:
The people involved in this project I've followed for a long time. Bill Hunt, who actually took part in the writing of this project was on the DVD front dating all the way back to it's jewel case beginnings. I had a lot of respect for these individuals so of course I backed it.

My thoughts? Regardless of who's right and who's wrong, I cannot see anything positive coming from as a result. Going after the fanbase like this on the eve of it's 50th Anniversary year? And on Christmas?! It's all a bummer.
Click to expand...

That is the risk with the entire fanbase/hobby. You get a little room and fans push and push to see how far things can go. Sooner or later the IP holder will flex their muscle after years of tolerance and they finally say they need to put their foot down. Then everyone looks at them and cannot believe they would do such a thing to their fans and try to paint the studio in a bad light. Fact is they have been tolerant and everyone should be gracious that these studios do step back and give fans some room to express their love of the product. And when the day comes where they feel they need to start enforcing their rights, deal with it and close that door. To approach it like this company and trying to "stand strong" and strong arm the studio is not going to work. The more you push back the harder they will come at you. It already said that the studio is seeking monetary damages and with each snide remark this company makes and for each day they mock the threat and ignore it, the studio tolerance drops even more and that monetary amount probably increases.
 
The thing is the studios don't care anymore, they'd rather alienate the older fans than not gain any new ones even if the new ones are more fans of the older material. To Paramount any trek except JJ's doesn't exist now. They've been tolerant of the smaller productions because it's older fans having fun with limited resources aimed at a small audience. Sadly he's making some bad choices fighting them when he could have maybe found a way to work with him. This will give the studio a small back eye but they don't give two hoots.
 
mkstewartesq said:
While I don't doubt that Axanar is not necessarily the only action we see from Paramount/CBS, I won't adopt a "sky is falling" view until I actually see more action. As I suspected in an earlier post, Axanar really brought this on themselves by positioning their product as direct competition to "professional" Star Trek films produced by the studio. CBS confirmed this in a statement they gave to the Hollywood Reporter after HR's original article was published:

""Star Trek is a treasured franchise in which CBS and Paramount continue to produce new original content for its large universe of fans. The producers of Axanar are making a Star Trek picture they describe themselves as a fully professional independent Star Trek film. Their activity clearly violates our Star Trek copyrights, which, of course, we will continue to vigorously protect."

In addition, Axanar/Ares Studios' own statements that the Axanar film was intended to lead to a larger operation of offering non-Star Trek content didn't help, as it seemed to be a public statement that they were appropriating Paramount's IP in order to further their own larger business interests. Though I have no personal knowledge to confirm it, I've seen various other reports on the Web stating that this was in fact Ares Studios' plan - to eventually grow into more of a "real" studio. I've also seen reports that the crowdfunded amounts were used to start up Ares Studios and pay salaries, which (again, if true), also looks like appropriation of Paramount IP for income/profit and to launch a larger business endeavor. So I can see why, if all that is the case, Paramount felt the need to step in here - or, at least, to make Axanar the first target.

And let's look at one other thing here - the statement "The producers of Axanar are making a Star Trek picture they describe themselves as a fully professional independent Star Trek film". A lot of folk are stating this should be okay because, as fans, Axanar shouldn't need a license. What if we take that exact same sentence and replace "the producers of Axanar" with "Sony" or "Universal". Would anyone here be saying Sony or Universal doesn't need Paramount's permission - or that Paramount has no right to object - if they read the sentence "Sony are making a Star Trek picture they describe themselves as a fully professional independent Star Trek film". True fan films may be one thing - but when you claim to be a functional studio (with future expansion plans) professing to make a "fully professional independent film" based on IP owned by another studio, you are crossing the line (IMHO) and infringing (IMLO). You can't play both sides of the fence - you can't be a "professional studio" project when you're trying to promote and raise cash for your film, then claim to be a mere "poor little fan labor of love getting squashed by the Man" when you get dinged for it.

M
Click to expand...

Short version:

The Axanar folks either had no legal department, their attorney got their degree from a Cracker Jack box, or they actively ignored or did not solicit the advice of counsel.

No lawyer with even a scintilla of knowledge about copyright law would say "Sure, I think you guys will be fine." More likely it'd be like "Are you INSANE?! Would you throw rocks at an 800lb gorilla? Because that's exactly what you're doing here."

Wes R said:
The thing is the studios don't care anymore, they'd rather alienate the older fans than not gain any new ones even if the new ones are more fans of the older material. To Paramount any trek except JJ's doesn't exist now. They've been tolerant of the smaller productions because it's older fans having fun with limited resources aimed at a small audience. Sadly he's making some bad choices fighting them when he could have maybe found a way to work with him. This will give the studio a small back eye but they don't give two hoots.
Click to expand...

This isn't about "screwing the fans," though. I mean, ok, some fans wanted Axanar to come out so they could enjoy it. But these guys clearly went well beyond that, intending to use Paramount's IP as a springboard to launch other content of their own. I mean, this is basically a business that just flat-out stole another, much bigger business' IP, and basically dared the bigger business to come after them.
 
Solo4114 said:
Short version:

The Axanar folks either had no legal department, their attorney got their degree from a Cracker Jack box, or they actively ignored or did not solicit the advice of counsel.

No lawyer with even a scintilla of knowledge about copyright law would say "Sure, I think you guys will be fine." More likely it'd be like "Are you INSANE?! Would you throw rocks at an 800lb gorilla? Because that's exactly what you're doing here."
Click to expand...

Well, just in case you didn't know - Alec Peters is himself a lawyer, and posted on the Facebook page yesterday (can't find it now - maddening comment system) that he "knows [his] stuff", so take that as you see fit.

M

M
 
The bottom line is Paramount and CBS hold the rights to Star Trek, if they tell you to stop infringing on their property then shut up and stop. Make your own story with different characters and settings if you really want to make a movie.
 
Reading through comments on their FB and various sites, it's amazing how many people don't understand the most basic of copyright/trademark infringement laws, and think these fan films are all good as long as they're not making a profit, or criticize these companies for protecting themselves. These are probably the same people who think all copyright is the work of the devil.

The fact is, these fan films are all infringing on Paramount's/CBS's property, and have no legal leg to stand on, and it has only been because of the very lenient unofficial stance towards these fan films that they've been allowed to go ahead as it is, and crowd funding has made things a lot murkier over the last few years. So I have no criticism of CBS/Paramount here for doing what they had the legal right to do the entire time, but hadn't until now.

I haven't seen evidence of other fan films being shut down, even the ones of equal quality, so I don't believe it's a matter of this being "better" than anything official, or just because of raising funds. Star Trek Continues has excellent production values and writing, but I get the impression they're in regular contact with people in charge to make sure they're doing right by them. They recently had to change their logo, and still have never spoken a bad word towards CBS/Paramount or the current product.

I understand it must be difficult to create a fan film when there aren't any hard rules or guidelines to let you know what each copyright holder will unofficially let you do with their backs turned, but the way the Axanar team and fans have responded to this so far says a lot to me.
 
Nothing to add comment-wise, as mkstewartesq and Solo4114 have more than ably covered it. However, I am very curious why they haven't alleged trademark infringement at this juncture. Of course they can amend their complaint later, but I'm just curious as to why the opening salvo is copyright-only.
 
asalaw said:
Nothing to add comment-wise, as mkstewartesq and Solo4114 have more than ably covered it. However, I am very curious why they haven't alleged trademark infringement at this juncture. Of course they can amend their complaint later, but I'm just curious as to why the opening salvo is copyright-only.
Click to expand...

Hey, Aureliano! Long time no speak! (Like, since the early 2000s).

My best guess on the trademark issue is that the most apparent trademark Axanar would be using is "Star Trek", and I remember reading about a year or so ago that, at CBS' request/demand, Axanar dropped all uses of the phrase "Star Trek" from their title and other marketing, which is why it is now simply titled "Axanar". Sure, that doesn't mean that a claim still couldn't be brought on the prior use up to the applicable statute of limitations, but it wouldn't really support one of the things that the current complaint seems to ask for, which is an injunction against an ongoing or imminent infringement. That's my best guess.

Of course, there are still other potential trademark claims arising out of the overall similarity of ship designs etc. on a theory of "trade dress " but there are hoops to be jumped through there because the trade dress is most likely not registered – plaintiff would need to prove not only likelihood of confusion but also that the trade dress had acquired "secondary meaning" (i.e., that when someone looked at this designs they immediately associated them with Star Trek and not just some generic sci-if). Seems like that wouldn't be much of an obstacle but I guess the studio thought, with the low – hanging fruit of the copyright claim, why waste the time and put themselves to the extra burden of additional claims?

M
 
mkstewartesq said:
...I remember reading about a year or so ago that, at CBS' request/demand, Axanar dropped all uses of the phrase "Star Trek" from their title and other marketing, which is why it is now simply titled "Axanar". Sure, that doesn't mean that a claim still couldn't be brought on the prior use up to the applicable statute of limitations, but it wouldn't really support one of the things that the current complaint seems to ask for, which is an injunction against an ongoing or imminent infringement. That's my best guess.
Click to expand...

Not having any significant legal background (other than watching lots of "Law and Order,") I find it odd that Paramount would insist they drop "Star Trek" from the name, but let the production continue, THEN go after the production itself. Sounds like they originally were going to ignore it otherwise.

Under those circumstances, I could see Peters believing that they were in the clear.
 
SmilingOtter said:
Not having any significant legal background (other than watching lots of "Law and Order,") I find it odd that Paramount would insist they drop "Star Trek" from the name, but let the production continue, THEN go after the production itself. Sounds like they originally were going to ignore it otherwise.

Under those circumstances, I could see Peters believing that they were in the clear.
Click to expand...

Well, first, I may be assuming too much when I say it was done at CBS' request - I just remember Alec posted that they had removed Star Trek for the name to avoid infringing on the studio's rights by making more use of the IP than was necessary. I can't say for certain it was done at anyone's request – in fact, it may have simply been a preemptive attempt to avoid the type of claims that have come down now

I really suspect the motivating factors behind this – in addition to attempting to protect the general space for the upcoming studio productions – are, first, the fact that Axanar was touting itself as, in essence, making a "professional" film in competition with those that the studio would make; second, that it appeared to be trading off of the studio IP to launch a larger venture; and third, that I understand that Axanar's own financial reports released to backers disclosed that Alec and others were actually taking a salary from the funds. While the salary wasn't necessarily huge – I understand Alec's was somewhere in the neighborhood of $38,000 based on the excerpt I read, while the other salaries seem to be much lower in the $5000 range and still others were deferred – that certainly looks like someone is making an income off of the alleged copyright infringement.

M
 
SmilingOtter said:
I agree, but Paramount has apparently given a pass to ST New Voyages, ST Continues, Of Gods and Men, Renegades... some of which were funded by Kickstarter campaigns. Not to mention that New Voyages used some unproduced scripts written for TOS and TNG.

Other than (IMO) the quality of the production, what's different now?

Edit: in other words, what Mobius said... ;)
Click to expand...

i think with the " fan" made shows such as Renagades Gods And men, and a couple others, Paramount simply wont get involved because if you've watched them. Are either Directed, Sponsored or featured members of of any Star Trek TV shows and Films. For example, Gods And Men was directed by Tim Russ, Featured the guy from Generations, And From Ferris Bueller :) Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, Garret Wang, The guy who played Charlie from TOS of course. They aren't going to sue someone near and dear to them, Its a simple fact. And Renagades also with some cast members. You got Chris Doohan in continues the son of James Doohan from TOS who actually plays his Fathers role. Why would paramount screw there own people over ?

I've never watched Axanar nor Do I know who was involved so I could be wrong, But I do know one thing, is that Paramount won't turn on their own
 
now what if paramount and cbs encouraged it a bit, give the makers of that movie some props especialy designed for that movie but keep the merchandise sales themselfs? they wouldnt have the huge costs to produce a movie so if it fails it fails but do have a rather high amount of income from merchandise i it works out to be good. would make alot more people happy i think.
 
This thread is more than 6 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

JiminSTLouis
Paramount Plans Another New STAR TREK Film, Set ‘Decades’ Before TREK ’09
2 3
Replies
57
Views
2,623
Nerdywan01
Nerdywan01
CB2001
Star Trek: Prodigy one of several shows cancelled and to be removed from Paramount+.
Replies
8
Views
955
CB2001
CB2001
Captain Dunsel
Possible Warner Bros, Discovery, and Paramount Merger
Replies
18
Views
910
Lightning
Lightning
Captain Dunsel
Star Trek: Discovery Season 5
2
Replies
21
Views
949
edge10
edge10
TazMan2000
Rare Star Trek TNG SPFX video
Replies
3
Views
473
pengbuzz
P
Back
Top