Source: https://fanfilmfactor.com/2017/01/12/judge-issues-tentative-rulings-on-exclusions-in-the-axanar-lawsuit-part-2/
Timestamp: 2017-11-20 17:15:32
Document Index: 279808766

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 2', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 1', 'art 1']

JUDGE issues TENTATIVE rulings on EXCLUSIONS in the AXANAR LAWSUIT! (Part 2) – Fan Film Factor
JUDGE issues TENTATIVE rulings on EXCLUSIONS in the AXANAR LAWSUIT! (Part 2)
Yesterday in Part 1, we began looking through Judge R. Gary Klausner’s TENTATIVE (important word!) rulings in the AXANAR lawsuit regarding the exclusion of evidence and witnesses from the jury trial. The rulings were issued to the attorneys early Monday morning (before oral arguments, which is standard practice) and released to the public the following day.
Please keep in mind that a total 143 pages of Oppositions to Motions In Limine were filed last Friday by both sides. Also, the attorneys for the plaintiffs and defendants still have to file replies to those oppositions on January 20. So this game is far from over, and you’re likely to see at least a few changes and/or clarifications when the judge issues his final rulings on exclusions sometime between January 20 and the start of trial on January 31. (More on that at the end of this blog entry.)
Okay, let’s take a look at what the defense TENTATIVELY did and did not get in the judge’s rulings:
D1 – Defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from saying anything about the fact that Alec Peters did not turn over all of his e-mails and social media posts, etc. during the discovery period. GRANTED
This could be highly prejudicial to the jury, painting Alec Peters as some nefarious shyster trying to keep important evidence hidden from the court. The judge likely reasoned that, since it wasn’t even Alec Peters who turned over his e-mails and other communications to the plaintiffs but rather his attorneys who did so, that holding the defendant responsible for sins he didn’t commit was indeed unfair and misleading. I wouldn’t expect this ruling to change.
D2 – Defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from using any evidence that was not delivered timely during the discovery period. DENIED
The discovery period closed on November 2, 2016. By the rules of the court, you can’t introduce any evidence after the discovery period ends. (Well, apparently, you can…although, if the judge doesn’t change this ruling, it could be additional grounds for appeal.)
Specifically, the defense doesn’t want the plaintiffs to be allowed to mention the novels Garth of Izar and Strangers from the Sky nor the FASA role-playing game supplement The Four Years War…all of which were never mentioned until after discovery was finished and they could no longer question witnesses about it. Obviously, taking those three items out of play (plus a few other things like DVDs of actual Star Trek episodes and movies) would go a long way toward making it more difficult for the plaintiffs to prove substantial similarity between Star Trek and Axanar…perhaps too difficult, thought the judge.
D3 – Defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from introducing evidence from any alleged works that were not mentioned in the original amended complaint. GRANTED
This was essentially the “back-up” plan if motion D2 was denied (which, so far, is the case). You see, you’re supposed to list everything you’re suing about in the actual complaint, and there are 57 alleged violations contained in that amended filing. But MUCH later on, the plaintiffs brought up additional alleged infringements based on the aforementioned novels Garth of Izar and Strangers from the Sky plus the FASA role-playing game supplement The Four Years War.
So while the defense didn’t get those particular items excluded as part of D2, they apparently did get them tossed as part of D3. Let’s hear it for back up plans…TENTATIVELY!
D4 – Defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from introducing at trial any evidence regarding items that should be filtered out because they are unoriginal, in the public domain, or from third parties. GRANTED
THIS IS HUUUUUUUGE!!!!
Granting this motion (if the judge doesn’t change or narrow his ruling) could quite literally make it nearly impossible for the plaintiffs to win this case. Many of the detractors, who were ready to jump for joy when they saw the TENTATIVE rulings on the plaintiffs’ motions (7 out of 10 of which were granted) suddenly felt a significant increase in the gravity under their feet when they saw the judges ruling on this motion.
If this ruling stands as is, based on the original motion in limine as written by the defense, here is a list of the things that the plaintiffs will NOT be allowed to present as evidence:
Q’onoS
Starfleet uniforms and medals
WOW! Imagine simply showing Prelude to Axanar to a jury and then having to shut up about it. Is it substantially similar to Star Trek? Better hope there’s at least a few classic Trekkies on the jury.
But before any Axanerds get their hopes up, I really can’t imagine that the judge won’t reverse or at least narrow the scope of this particular ruling. After all, he himself referenced many of these elements when he concluded in his summary judgment ruling that there was substantial similarity between Axanar and Star Trek. So don’t break open the champagne just yet.
D5 -Defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from introducing any evidence or testimony from either Christian Gossett or Terry McIntosh. GRANTED
Apparently, Judge Klausner doesn’t like witnesses in his courtroom! I kid, I kid… But he has now tossed out five different witnesses and only left one still allowed at trial. In the case of these latest two, Christian Gossett was the original director for Prelude to Axanar, and Terry McIntosh was the original marketing director and the programmer who first attempted to create Ares Digital. Both of these guys have what is euphemistically called by the defense “personal scores” to settle with Alec Peters. Their testimony would likely be prejudicial to the jury, and in the opinion of the defendants, would not be relevant to the determination of actual copyright infringement.
While there is no law against having witnesses on the stand who don’t like the defendant, there is at least a requirement for relevant and valuable testimony and not simply a “smear campaign” (the defense attorneys’ words). Now, I’m sure the plaintiffs will counter that both men do, in fact, have valuable and relevant testimony. We’ll see if it’s enough to change the judge’s mind.
D6- Defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from referencing any script for the Axanar feature film that has been superseded by a more recent version. GRANTED
Now, wait just a cotton-pickin’ minute!!!
Didn’t the judge say when he granted the plaintiffs’ second motion in limine that only the Axanar script which existed at the time the initial complaint was filed would be admitted into evidence? But that script has now been superseded by later scripts…and now the judge is saying that all scripts that have been superseded are excluded as evidence???
So the latest script is out AND the previous script from December of 2015 is out. Dos that mean that ALL the scripts now excluded from evidence??? If so, then this case is now only about Prelude to Axanar and the Vulcan Scene and nothing else. But I doubt that’ll be the case. Once the judge really gets his head wrapped around this contradiction, I suspect at least one of the GRANTED rulings is gonna turn into a DENIED…possibly both!
D7- Defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from using or referencing Alec Peters initial financial records that were submitted to the plaintiffs during discovery (the ones not prepared by a CPA). DENIED
The judge also denied the plaintiffs‘ first motion to exclude Alec Peters’ audited financial statement (the second one he submitted that was prepared by the CPA). So now the jury will get to look at “dueling” financial records!
That said, it’s probably mostly irrelevant at this point. Without fair use, the question of whether Alec Peters personally profited is essentially moot. All the jury will decide is whether Axanar is substantially similar to Star Trek and whether infringement, if there was any, was willful or non-willful. As for the dueling statements, they are both essentially saying the same thing. The first shows all of the expenses. The second shows all of the expenses but includes the money Alec put in personally, which covers personal expenses like auto repair and meals and health insurance. In other words, the amount spent is the same, but the second document simply specified which of those expenses Alec Peters paid for himself.
(NOTE: Axanar will be releasing its full financial summary next week–or so I’ve been told by Alec–so you’ll all be seeing what I’ve been so gosh-darn eager to show/tell you these past two months.)
D8 – The defense did not want the words “Star Trek” used during trial. No, really! DENIED
C’mon, we all knew this one was going down in flames. But in the words of Admiral Kirk in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock when he asks to take the Enterprise to Genesis to retrieve Spock’s body: “I had to try.” And the defense gave this motion their best shot, arguing that “Star Trek” is a trademarked name, not a copyrighted one (you can’t copyright a word or phrase). So by using the words “Star Trek,” you risk confusing the jury into thinking that this is a trademark case, which is a very different animal than a copyright case. Good try, though. But I don’t expect this one is getting changed.
D9 – The defense wants the plaintiffs precluded from mentioning the quality of the Axanar works. GRANTED
Well, this could be problematic for the plaintiffs. They’ve been harping for such a long time that Axanar isn’t a fan film but a quality professional independent Star Trek production. It stands above the rest of its ilk by virtue of it looking so good. And if it looks as good as Star Trek, then it’s substantially similar, right?
On the other hand, the defense can now say without contradiction something like, “Look, Alec Peters and his friends filmed the whole thing in one weekend against a green screen. The had no sets. Alec had never even acted as the lead in a film before. Most of the professionals involved were charging the bare minimum just so Alec could afford them. And of course, the whole 20 minute Prelude to Axanar only cost about $100,000. The last Star Trek movie cost $2oo,000,000! How could they possibly be substantially similar?”
Now, some of the detractors might not agree with that reasoning at all. But imagine trying to rebut it in the courtroom without being allowed to reference the QUALITY of Prelude. Not so easy!
Of course, not only can any of these DENIED rulings be switched to GRANTED rulings (and vice-versa), but the judge can also partially deny or partially grant any motion. So he could rule that Jonathan Lane is excluded as a witness but still allow my History of Star Trek Fan Films document (which I suspect will happen…despite my lifelong dream of being witness in a Star Trek fan film trial). Or maybe the judge partially grants defense motion #4 but only as it applies to Andorians and Romulans and triangular medals…allowing everything else to be used at trial. Big difference, huh?
So as you can see, this is still anybody’s game!
Author Jonathan LanePosted on January 12, 2017 Categories Axanar Lawsuit, Editorials, NewsTags Alec Peters, Axanar, CBS, Lawsuit, Paramount
50 thoughts on “JUDGE issues TENTATIVE rulings on EXCLUSIONS in the AXANAR LAWSUIT! (Part 2)”
Since the rulings on plaintiff’s and defense’s ‘in limine’ submissions were tentative in nature (and I assume subject to oral arguments) as you have already stated, I realize that any or all of these rulings could change entirely or in part.
Except for generating false concern or false relief (depending on your point of view), the rulings mean almost nothing at this point. Or so it seems.
Except that both sides may now focus their arguments to those points they believe are most valuable to their case. This, of course, assumes they will have limited time to argue.
No, the rulings are not tentative, IDIC, they are TENTATIVE. 🙂
Oral arguments already happened. Only brief replies (no more than 5 pages per motion) are still allowed.
The more I read on this (from both sides) I am firmly convinced LFL has handled fanfilms or fan-created content far better than CBS/P.
As long as the various IPs are not misrepresented or grossly altered from established characterization, and proper ownership acknowledged and delineated, then it is not only allowed but even ENCOURAGED.
The better the quality of the work, the more LFL likes it, to the point of hosting a fan film competition and giving awards to what the studios consider the best.
It would be a shame NOT to see Axanar or any other high quality artistic expression of Star Trek made because a small group of executives who seem to have no appreciation for their own IP won’t allow others to play in their sandbox.
Of course, one day (2066), Star Trek will fall into the public domain. I will be 99 years old and Alec well over a hundred, but we’ll finally be able to see some quality Star Trek fan films! 😉
Not if they are claim you violated a copyright on some later Star Trek work.
Also let us remember Trademark lawsuits are still possible, if the Trademarks are Still in effect.
I’ve already seen several quality fan films.
I’ll be 75 years old by then .
A wee lad!
francis rudy says:
Yeah Star Wars has a fan film contest. But do you know what the rules are?
They have huge limitations like a 5 minute running time, and it’s forbidden for anyone that’s ever worked for lucas or any company related to Disney.
A few years ago, all fiction stories were forbitten, you could only do parodies. Using any existing character is till forbidden, if I recall.
There is no way something like Star Trek Continues could ever exist in the Star War universe.
Why don’t you read this new york time article
“‘Star Wars’ Fan Films Come Tumbling Back to Earth”
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/28/movies/film-star-wars-fan-films-come-tumbling-back-to-earth.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
That article is from 2002, Francis. A lot has changed since then. As Lucasfilm has explained, the 5-minute limit for competition entries is there to save the judges from having to watch hundreds of hour-long fan films. Even with the 5-minute limit, the judges still watch countless hours of fan productions. But Lucasfilm has never come out negatively toward any Star Wars fan film, regardless of length. Neither has CBS and Paramount…with one notable exception. And that is what forms the basis for a determination of non-willful infringement. Well, see, though.
as you can see the link to that article is 15 years old, obviously things have changed during that time. The thing that hasn’t changed is that they aren’t suing their fans like C BS is.
Haha, wow. Another bunch of crazy developments. From what I read, the defense should be rather happy with these rulings so far. Let’s hope they don’t change that much more. Though it is indeed a shame that they didn’t allow you to argue your case Jonathan! Would have been cool and would have given us an even greater insight. That is, you would have been allowed to talk about it, right?
Trials are public events. Anyone can talk about anything said in an open courtroom.
“Now, wait just a cotton-pickin’ minute!!!”
I don’t think you should be throwing around that racist expression around like it’s something funny or casual. It denigrates black people who suffered slavery.
Actually, the term “a cotton-pickin’ minute” is not a racist expression:
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/cotton-picking.html
It can come as as little surprise that the term ‘cotton-picking’ originated in the southern states of the USA, where it is usually pronounced cotton-pickin’. It began life in the late 1700s and differs from the 19th century Dixie term, ‘cottonpicker’, in that the latter was derogatory and racist, whereas ‘cotton-picking’ referred directly to the difficulty and harshness of gathering the crop. This didn’t extend to the specific expression ‘keep your cotton-picking hands off of me’. This no doubt alludes to the horny, calloused (and usually black) hands that picked cotton.
Of course, ‘cotton-picking’ must have been in use as an English adjectival phrase for as long as English-speaking people have picked cotton. There are numerous citations of ‘cotton-picking’ seasons/jobs/machines etc. since the late 1700s. J & E Pettigrew’s Letters has an early example, from 1795:
Manual cotton picking was tough work. The southern expression ‘cutting in high cotton’, which means ‘have it easy’, refers to the relatively easy task of cutting cotton without having to bend down.
Nevertheless, Frederic, I do apologize if I’ve offended anyone of African-American heritage or otherwise.
Use to work with an older couple who use to pick cotton (they were white) and the way they describe it, it isn’t just your back, feet, and knees that hurt, but your hands, as well. Apparently, the plants can cut your hands up a bit, and the repetition of removing the cotton (making sure the burr of the boll is left behind) wears down your hands quite a bit (like the pain of carpal tunnel syndrome). It was from the lady of the couple having carpal tunnel syndrome that brought the conversation up—her explaining the story behind her troubles with her hands. Also learned the balls of cotton are much larger than I thought (as described, they are about a full handful in size), and divided into four quarters (kind of like a 7cm-wide mandarin orange that has been longitudinally divided in four).
I live near the Bootheel of SE Missouri, which is a major cotton growing area. When I moved here 40 some years ago, I quickly discovered that it was common for almost anyone…housewives, students, retired folks, etc. to earn extra money picking cotton. While that part of the state does have a higher population of black residents, left over from the slave, cotton picking carried no particular negative connotations cause everybody did it. Main comments would be that it was darn hard work.
Let’s hear it for Eli Whitney, who also had patent infringement issues
Even if one roots for Axanar to win, I think it’s not good if the FASA game or the book “Garth of Izar” is excluded, because it looks like something is getting dropped on a technicality. It’s just a “gotcha” courtroom sleaze. Especially if we know that Peters or others were aware of these works.
I think CBS rushed to court unprepared and didn’t do the proper process like sending C&D. There were probably pushed by some internal politics, a top exec waking up angry one morning. But I think Axanar needs to win “for realsie” for this thing to be put to rest. If there is missing evidence and it looks like the decisions were taken on incomplete information, it’s bad and this issue just going to keep coming back.
It already looks like this trial is going to be a huge waste of time while everyone expects an appeal or retrial. It’s not saving the justice system any time to try to cut things out early if we have to spin this thing again later.
The plaintiffs claimed that Axanar was not only Star Trek but “canon” Star Trek because it was based on the Garth of Izar book and the FASA game materials. That is complete horse-hockey given that the Garth of Izar book and the FASA game materials were specifically excluded by Paramount from being canon (see link below). FASA, in fact, lost their license due to being considered to warlike and going farther away from established Trek to the point of being declared “false-canon” for contradicting on screen “canon” Trek.
If anything, the fact that Alec used the FASA 4 Years War supplement as his Axanar “Bible” just goes to show how substantially NON-Trek Axanar is. Clearly Paramount is singing a different song now as opposed to their last word on the subject in 2010, but isn’t that terribly convenient timing of them with no prior notice?
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/canon.htm
Whether something is “canon” or not is a debate for the court.
That book and game are copyrighted work. Paramount Pictures Corporation owns the copyright on that and they can defend it ( http://tinyurl.com/j3ram5h )
It doesn’t matter if later work contradicts the story or eliminate it with up new timelines, that NEVER invalidates a copyright of previous work and NEVER cause anything to be kicked into the public domain. It doesn’t make anything “fair use”.
The question is whether Axanar is copying things that are copyrighted.
As I said above, if that work is not allowed in, either that’s caused for appeal or another lawsuit. It’s best if we have all the facts in just one trial and don’t get a decision on something that’s ruled things out on technicalities, such as not listing the work by a certain deadline.
“Whether something is “canon” or not is a debate for the court.”
Not really since it is entirely CBS/P’s right to declare what is and is not “canon” whenever they want. It just boils my bottom a bit that they are throwing out the window everything they have ever established about “canon” just to try to score a legal point against Axanar. Either they made a factually incorrect statement in their legal filing or declared a large swath of previously dismissed “false and non-canon” work as “canon”.
“That book and game are copyrighted work.”
No kidding and I’m not claiming otherwise. I’m objecting to how, just for the purposes of this lawsuit, Paramount has discarded everything they ever established about what is and is not canon (let alone why such a distinction is even important). This may surprise you, but this action is actually quite a big deal to some Trekkers. Maybe not as big a deal within the fandom as the Klingon language thing, but those folks can be a bit… intense.
“It’s best if we have all the facts in just one trial and don’t get a decision on something that’s ruled things out on technicalities, such as not listing the work by a certain deadline.”
So not following the court rules is just a technicality? Got it. Not sure how you think you can really defend that, but whatever.
Paramount did not name FASA or its extensions in the complaint, but thinks it’s reasonable that it still be able to be discussed in court, which is rather interesting. (I can see it not needing to be excluded because the defense can simply object that discussion of FASA is irrelevant) FASA bears no relevance to any of the other copyrights, so whether Alec actually did copy it or not is irrelevant to this case.
I don’t buy that Francis. They set the pacing by starting this. If they weren’t prepared that’s their own fault. Sliding stuff in at the last minute is slimy.
I have a “go to” phrase which applies to much of the spoken and written world today. After reading this post and the prior one, here again it is summarizing the net result of the TENTATIVE rulings:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”
“It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” – President William Jefferson Clinton
Question? Is the jury allowed to do their own research? Like say,…
Google “fan films” and discover how vast it is on their own? Even find your site, and the document you produced? Or are they forbidden from watching the news, reading the news, etc?
There are high-profile cases where juries are either sequestered or asked to avoid watching/reading the news, but I doubt that’ll happen here. Most likely, the jurors will go home each night, and there’s nothing to stop them from doing a little Internet research of their own. That said, the judge and attorneys hope they DON’T do that, and might perhaps instruct them accordingly. After all, reading this blog could prejudice the jury. So could reading Axamonitor or listening to certain podcasts. And even them watching Star Trek Continues or New Voyages could influence them if they see things that aren’t shown in the courtroom. And the idea of a trial is to control and limit the information the jury is presented in order for them to adjudicate the verdict based solely on the arguments of plaintiffs’ and defense counsel.
Although I’ve said it before, I feel that it’s worth repeating: as much as I enjoyed Axanar (and the Vulcan scene, of course), so too am I enjoying the heck out of following along with this case. Grand entertainment, indeed!
Thanks, Jonathan, for keeping us all in the know.
It’s like I’m a writer for “Boston Legal.” Where’s Denny Crane when we need him????
Now, that would be a great parody of this lawsuit. Man, the possibilities are endless. But, Maybe I should hit up Shatner on twitter, but on second thoughts, he’s a little daft there, because, I could never figure out any conversation. Go look up his stream, it’s…..?
It’s just a pile of Shat! 🙂
He’s on a cruise at the moment! “Denny Crane!”
This case has been all over the place. I find law to be interesting. In the case of something that I have more of an emotional investment, I find it to be highly fascinating. One that could be akin to watching your favorite sport team playing their rival. Though, I don’t necessarily regard CBS/Paramount as a rival.
D4: is that your list or are those items actually listed in your complaint.
They’re in the motion, dude…every last one!
narius says:
Wait .. how is D4 even be possible if Prelude is part of the evidence? And isn’t it reasonable to have CBS show some selected star trek videos right before or after Prelude, and let the jury draws their own conclusions.
Anything else smells like excessive technical legal maneuvering and is not conducive to the spirit of what “subjectively substantial similarity” should mean to a jury.
As I said, expect some clarifications and narrowing of the scope of some of the judge’s rulings.
Regarding D7…I think it would actually be more interesting to see both versions of the financials for the jury. Raising questions as to when (ie at the time of alleged expense…or in say 2016…and retroactively applied to 2015) the $150k was paid back to Axanar might impact the willfullness determination of the infringement…and possibly final damages.
Heck, even accruing interest on $150k would be financial gain for Alec.
I think both versions of the financials are relevant.
Alec didn’t write a check for $150,000. When he paid for his tires, that was part of the $150,000. When he paid for his business-related meals, that was part of the $150,000. You’ll see that next week (hopefully) when Alec publishes his financial summary.
Thanks for clarifying the 150k jonathan…that wasnt clear (to me anyways). So it is at most a case of poor expense management in not separating personal from axanar expenses properly.
Pretty much. When Alec first delivered his receipts to the plaintiffs’ lawyers, it was just that, a collection of receipts. Everything Alec had paid for over the prior two years was collected into a pile and recorded in QuickBooks. And it included both personal and business-related expenses because expenses like car repair (when you’re driving to conventions and transporting materials–like perks–and driving to business meetings with donors and potential production crew members, etc.) are considered reasonable costs of business and are tax deductible. (I used to deduct car maintenance when I owned my second small business in 2003-2006 and had to drive extensively for work.) Things like business meals meeting with key people and health insurance would also be counted as business expenses.
But all of that was clustered together with other Axanar-related expenses like rent and utilities, inspections, set materials and construction, costumes, props, studio build-out, etc. At the time the financials were due during discovery last September, the CPA was still working on sorting everything out. He finished in November, and that was the second financial statement Alec submitted, this time with his personal expenses listed as such.
So it’s basically two identical lists of financials, but the second one shows what Alec Peters paid for himself rather than using donor funds. So no, donors were not ripped off in any way…except by CBS and Paramount! 🙂
Sometimes it seems to me the judge secretly wants this case to have every opportunity for appeal. That said (and as someone hinted in an above comment) if I were a juror and the plaintiffs lawyers tried to paint Axanar as something more than a fan film I’d seriously want to know more about other fan films to make that assessment.
It seems to me that the judge is trying to make it more “appealing” for both sides to settle. *rimshot*
The judge, to me at least, has made it clear that he thinks CBS/P will win but are only going to get at a pyrrhic victory if it goes forward.
I just completed a FASCINATING interview with a legal expert (and this one is NOT anonymous–HOORAY!!!) that I will be publishing next week…assuming I can transcribe it quickly. And he touches on the question of whether or not he thinks Alec should settle quickly or keep fighting. The answer will surprise at least some of you! 🙂
NICE– can’t wait to read it! 😎
Lucas actually took a money making work and made it official.
It is Clone Wars. Clone Wars and it Spinoff Rebels, are arguably Star Wars biggest TV hits.
what ever happened to the whole truth?
Truth is a complicated thing…and it can be quite time-consuming. I think the judge wants this case in-and-out of his courtroom asap.
I recall an old Jedi saying something about truth depending on a certain point of view…
Previous Previous post: JUDGE issues TENTATIVE rulings on EXCLUSIONS in the AXANAR LAWSUIT! (Part 1)
Next Next post: STAR TREK: DARK ARMADA, Part 1 (2005 to 2009)