Axanar meets legal resistence from CBS

[Ryujin]

Not when accompanied by an explicit statement that they *weren't* given a list of what was okay, and what wasn't. All it really says is that if they try to make a profit, CBS *will* shoot them down. It gives no guarantee otherwise. CBS was being intentionally vague, and not committing to allow anything in particular. So, no, not anywhere near an agreement. Nobody who works with Hollywood should think of that as an agreement or understanding for a *million dollar* project.

Really, think of that scale for a moment. Consider how clear and unambiguous that agreement should have been before committing to a project that large.

I can't say that you're wrong there. All that I can say is that previous efforts of the sort were passed and the only real difference here is scale.

 

[Ryujin]

OK, I'm new to this whole idea of 'fan films' but I have been an avid roleplayer since I was 8 years old, and that is a market I follow. How is this any different then an RPG company that has no problem with Me, Tabitha, putting out an adventure on the web for free, but stopping Monte cook from putting up a kickstarter for an adventure?

The difference would be if said RPG company had permitted 20 people before Monte to do so, without making a profit, and Monte was also making no profit but could draw on his greater fan following to make it prettier, and longer.

 

[Cor Azer]

The difference would be if said RPG company had permitted 20 people before Monte to do so, without making a profit, and Monte was also making no profit but could draw on his greater fan following to make it prettier, and longer.

That's simplistic, if not an outright strawman.

A business entity is under no obligation to enter into contracts with everyone using the same terms, as long as none of those terms are discriminatory (among a few other restrictions).

Further, I wouldn't be surprised if lawyers thought there's a grey area in whether this was non-profit or not - even with open books. It sounds like a lot of professionals are being paid, even if at reduced rates, and I'm sure better legal minds than I could argue some sort of (un)intention shenanigans that those reduced rates hide what profit it could have warranted - ie: just because a business fails to make money, it doesn't mean it's a non-profit (without saying that happened here).

As suggested upthread, I certainly hope the group making Axanar had a lawyer onboard to shore up what they're doing, because while laudible in goal, at their scale rules and laws can change.

 

[Ryujin]

That's simplistic, if not an outright strawman.

A business entity is under no obligation to enter into contracts with everyone using the same terms, as long as none of those terms are discriminatory (among a few other restrictions).

Further, I wouldn't be surprised if lawyers thought there's a grey area in whether this was non-profit or not - even with open books. It sounds like a lot of professionals are being paid, even if at reduced rates, and I'm sure better legal minds than I could argue some sort of (un)intention shenanigans that those reduced rates hide what profit it could have warranted - ie: just because a business fails to make money, it doesn't mean it's a non-profit (without saying that happened here).

As suggested upthread, I certainly hope the group making Axanar had a lawyer onboard to shore up what they're doing, because while laudible in goal, at their scale rules and laws can change.

No, the business entity isn't obligated to deal with all comers in the same way. The specifics regarding whether the production is not for profit and if the studio created a situation in which the "Axanar" people believed that they were following the vague guidelines laid out are matters for the court to decide.

No, it isn't an over simplification. It's an analogy. It's representative of the situation and doesn't preclude your statement regarding inequality of treatment. I can easily point to three campaigns, ranging from $50K to $200K+, for other Star Trek fan productions. These productions are also not one-offs, but rather ongoing series.

 

[Janx]

No, the business entity isn't obligated to deal with all comers in the same way. The specifics regarding whether the production is not for profit and if the studio created a situation in which the "Axanar" people believed that they were following the vague guidelines laid out are matters for the court to decide.

No, it isn't an over simplification. It's an analogy. It's representative of the situation and doesn't preclude your statement regarding inequality of treatment. I can easily point to three campaigns, ranging from $50K to $200K+, for other Star Trek fan productions. These productions are also not one-offs, but rather ongoing series.

yep. A case can be made that CBS/Paramount has failed to defend its trademark/copyright/whatever in allowing any use of ST stuff.

It could also be that in seeing million dollar in donations, CBS lawyers got dollar signs in their eyes and decided to try to snag a share.

Sadly, Axanar could be a nice filler piece of content between Enterprise and TOS. I highly doubt CBS is ever going to backfill that content themselves.

So it could be that for a licensing fee and a consultancy, CBS could join the Axanar project and all this could be happy again.

If CBS tries to scuttle the Axanar project, I predict huge issues. In theory, the donations would have to be returned. Some of which was spent on costs/staff/etc. Try explaining that to your supporters...

 

[Ryujin]

yep. A case can be made that CBS/Paramount has failed to defend its trademark/copyright/whatever in allowing any use of ST stuff.

It could also be that in seeing million dollar in donations, CBS lawyers got dollar signs in their eyes and decided to try to snag a share.

Sadly, Axanar could be a nice filler piece of content between Enterprise and TOS. I highly doubt CBS is ever going to backfill that content themselves.

So it could be that for a licensing fee and a consultancy, CBS could join the Axanar project and all this could be happy again.

If CBS tries to scuttle the Axanar project, I predict huge issues. In theory, the donations would have to be returned. Some of which was spent on costs/staff/etc. Try explaining that to your supporters...

If "Axanar" is required to pay any fees, based on the point at which their budgeting currently sits, it would kill the project outright. Any donations would be lost. This statement appears on the Indigogo campaign and others, much like it, show up in their previous Kickstarter campaigns.

There are always risks and challenges when making a film - actors dropping out, locations and/or sets not being available, unforeseen costs, equipment trouble, inclement weather, etc. In addition, "Star Trek" is a licensed property of CBS and so they have the final say in any Star Trek venture. However, the Axanar team has dealt with CBS and knows the landscape which must be navigated. Every member of the Axanar team is also a professional, and has proven his or her skills on other projects and films.

As far as repercussions to CBS go, many are already screaming words like 'boycott.' Facebook and twitter are full of hashtags against CBS and supporting the "Axanar" group. This goes a bit far but, then again, when doesn't the internet dial outrage up to eleven?

 

[Umbran]

I can't say that you're wrong there. All that I can say is that previous efforts of the sort were passed and the only real difference here is scale.

Yes, but scale *matters*. Scale leads to qualitative, not merely quantitative, differences in the result. The larger scale leads Axanar to be a different beast. And, to be honest, *that is the point of Anxanar!*. Axanar was not supposed to be just another fan film, so I don't think they can't really hide behind that distinction.

To be honest, if they were big enough to have meetings with CBS about it, and they didn't come out with a written permission, then they've nobody to blame but themselves.

 

[Janx]

To be honest, if they were big enough to have meetings with CBS about it, and they didn't come out with a written permission, then they've nobody to blame but themselves.

that part is certainly true. According to the first article, the guy who's playing garth, who met with CBS, is also a lawyer.

Part of my work involves contracts, agreements and stuff that I am wise enough to recognize "this needs a lawyer"

Surely an actual lawyer, should have been wise enough to know "I think we should get a written agreement"

 

[tomBitonti]

Eh, why the focus on profit? That's just one leg of possible legal issues. And, a part of profit considerations is profit loss by the copyright holder.

There is a lot more to consider.

Thx!
TomB

 

[Ryujin]

Yes, but scale *matters*. Scale leads to qualitative, not merely quantitative, differences in the result. The larger scale leads Axanar to be a different beast. And, to be honest, *that is the point of Anxanar!*. Axanar was not supposed to be just another fan film, so I don't think they can't really hide behind that distinction.

To be honest, if they were big enough to have meetings with CBS about it, and they didn't come out with a written permission, then they've nobody to blame but themselves.

They aren't the only fan film folks to have a meeting with CBS execs though, by virtue of many of those involved having actually worked on Star Trek projects, they may have had an easier time arranging such a meeting. I don't believe that any of the fan films or series have received "written permission" from CBS. The vague outline given seems to be that such productions could not be made for profit and could not make use of previously unreleased content (in other words,for example, you couldn't make a production based on a script that was submitted for TOS).

I've looked for a quote I read from Alec Peters, but cannot find it, that stated CBS was unwilling to create actual guidelines for fan films, in the way that Disney has for the Star Wars franchise. Unfortunately it has been buried in the Facebook rage over this.