Slashdot Mirror


CBS, Paramount Settle Lawsuit Over 'Star Trek' Fan Film (hollywoodreporter.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Hollywood Reporter: Stand down from battle stations. Star Trek rights holders CBS and Paramount have seen the logic of settling a copyright suit against Alec Peters, who solicited money on crowdfunding sites and hired professionals to make a YouTube short and a script of a planned feature film focused on a fictional event -- a Starfleet captain's victory in a war with the Klingon Empire -- referenced in the original 1960s Gene Roddenberry television series. Thanks to the settlement, CBS and Paramount won't be going to trial on Stardate 47634.44, known to most as Jan. 31, 2017. According to a joint statement, "Paramount Pictures Corporation, CBS Studios Inc., Axanar Productions, Inc. and Alec Peters are pleased to announce that the litigation regarding Axanar's film Prelude to Axanar and its proposed film Axanar has been resolved. Axanar and Mr. Peters acknowledge that both films were not approved by Paramount or CBS, and that both works crossed boundaries acceptable to CBS and Paramount relating to copyright law." Peters' Axanar video and script, which feature such arguably copyrighted elements as Vulcan ears, the Klingon language and an obscure character from a 1969 episode, sparked a lawsuit in December 2015. The litigation then proceeded at warp speed with the case almost making it to trial in just 13 months, an amazingly brisk pace by typical standards. When Axanar comes out, it will look different. "Axanar and Mr. Peters have agreed to make substantial changes to Axanar to resolve this litigation, and have also assured the copyright holders that any future Star Trek fan films produced by Axanar or Mr. Peters will be in accordance with the 'Guidelines for Fan Films' distributed by CBS and Paramount in June 2016," states the parties' joint announcement of a settlement.

22 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. Won't Be Star Trek by Psion · · Score: 2

    The only thing I can read from this is that in order to meet CBS/Viacom/Paramount requirements, it can't retain any of the Star Trek elements we'd like to see. In which case, it will be just another space combat short with no connection to any greater framework that makes it have relevance. Peters' bluster has not only ruined his Axanar project that would have brought an interesting bit of Trek 'history' to light, but it has ruined the chances of any other fan film becoming a serious production worthy of consideration, thanks to those stringent guidelines CBS understandably developed.

    1. Re:Won't Be Star Trek by irving47 · · Score: 2

      If it continues, it'll be rewritten and we'll end up with fewer of the cool actors that were in prelude.... We'll eventually see what was done to Andromeda to make it non-Star Trek

      --
      I had a sucky sig.
    2. Re:Won't Be Star Trek by dbIII · · Score: 2

      I for one am a bit sick of Star Trek fan films anyway. There was one where the Enterprise was parked underwater just to hide from a pre-industrial civilization - can you believe that? Another where a belt buckle made all of Star Fleet obsolete. There is some utter crap out there.

    3. Re:Won't Be Star Trek by camperdave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There was one where the Enterprise was parked underwater just to hide from a pre-industrial civilization - can you believe that? Another where a belt buckle made all of Star Fleet obsolete.

      I even saw one where the Enterprise was being built in the middle of a field on Earth's surface, and a single drop of red paint was enough to implode Vulcan.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  2. How is CBS and Paramount harmed by fan fiction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The law may be on the side of CBS and Paramount, but I'd like to know how they're harmed by the production of fan fiction. There's a case to be made that use of trademarks may be a problem, but the companies chose not to pursue that issue. They focused on copyright. How did this harm them?

    Fan fiction doesn't reduce fan interest in the franchise and the works created by CBS and Paramount. Instead, it increases interest, by keeping fans interested in between series and movies and perhaps winning over new fans who might encounter the videos on Youtube. Thefan works are non-canon, and there's no reason why it would reduce the desire of fans for films that are considered canon. For example, Star Trek Continues makes use of most of the TOS characters played by different actors. I don't see any logical reason that Star Trek Continues would reduce interest in TOS, though. If anything, encountering that on Youtube might make viewers want to watch TOS and increase revenue for CBS and Paramount.

    How could there be any damages to CBS and Paramount? Those donations are to cover the cost of production, not for the creators to pocket the money. That money was never going to CBS and Paramount anyway, who don't solicit donations to pay for the cost of their films. Instead, the studios set a budget, invest that money, and get paid though advertising and at the box office (for movies).

    How were CBS and Paramount possibly harmed? And if they're not harmed, how could they collect any damages at all?

    1. Re:How is CBS and Paramount harmed by fan fiction? by irving47 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, apparently, the damages *could* be something like, "Hey, we can crowd-fund this cool Axanar thing, or we could go buy the Star Trek Beyond DVD..."

      As for the donations to cover production... It seems the sticking point was they used the money to pay for tangible equipment and a studio that could be considered profit. I'm not sure if that's accurate 100% or if there was something else.

      --
      I had a sucky sig.
    2. Re:How is CBS and Paramount harmed by fan fiction? by Aighearach · · Score: 5, Informative

      They are very harmed if they wanted to make a mediocre movie about that part of the story, and there is already some higher-quality "fan" movie that uses their copyrighted material that they would have to compete with.

      It isn't hard to find a way that it harms them. I agree that fan fiction usually helps, but that isn't a guarantee, it isn't a law of the Universe that fan fiction can only help the company who owns the copyrights.

      It is a weak argument. There is no proof one way or the other what the effect will be, and will vary on a case-by-case basis. To even do the analysis you'd have to know what stories CBS/Paramount plan to tell in the future, and that will always be confidential, so you can't even do an analysis of it directly steps on their toes.

      Also, fans complain when new canon material contradicts popular fan material, and fans complain that if they didn't shut something down it is as if they had approved it for canon. It isn't obvious that encouraging or even passively allowing it doesn't change canon in the minds of viewers.

    3. Re:How is CBS and Paramount harmed by fan fiction? by mmell · · Score: 2
      Because now CBS/Paramount can't independently come up with that idea. Not that they would've, but if they had the could no longer do it without suffering comparisons to the fanfic.

      Had Alec Peters kept it non-profit, there's a really good chance CBS/Paramount would've ignored him. Hell, they may even quietly have been grateful to him for pumping more life into the Star Trek franchise. Star Trek Continues is a fine example of such a not-for-profit venture. For the record, JJ Abrams made some interesting space opera movies, but they were decidedly not Star Trek.

  3. Re:Let's face it by Psion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They had to kill it because Alec Peters was obviously trying to make money off their property. CBS/Viacom was playing hands off on fan films for decades before this selfish bastard came along!

  4. Some odd things in their guidelines by benlwilson · · Score: 2

    Some odd things in their guidelines

    "Videos must not include profanity, nudity, obscenity, pornography, depictions of drugs, alcohol, tobacco, or any harmful or illegal activity.

    Data has said "shit" in startrek before.
    There has been some nudity in a couple of episodes, bum shots.
    The entire crew of the enterprise got intoxicated on drugs in more than one occasion.
    Some startrek drinks contain alcohol.
    I'm sure there have been characters on the holodeck smoking tobacco before.
    And.. if you can't show any "harmful or illegal activity" then anyone being murdered is out. No spaceships blowing up and killing anyone, unless it was accidental.

    "uniforms, accessories, toys and props must be official merchandise and not bootleg items or imitations of such commercially available products"

    This also seems a bit problematic, official merch/toys is often inferior to fan made props

  5. Re:Goodbye, good movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Alec Peters has ruined Star Trek fan films for everyone due to his greed. And I was enjoying Star Trek Continues which can no longer continue thanks to him.

  6. Re:Let's face it by Psion · · Score: 2

    As I recall, the ledger that was leaked also included a salary for Peters, which is a big no-no in these cases, and probably the thing that pushed CBS over the line -- well, that and financing a studio to make more productions. He wasn't taking a huge a cut, I think it was in the $30k region, but it definitely made the Axanar project more than a not-for-profit fan film.

  7. Re:Let's face it by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

    Help me understand that one. What about Alec's efforts make it obvious he was trying to profit? Paying staff wages?

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  8. Re:In the interest of infringing further: by Aighearach · · Score: 2

    I totally agree. As a lifelong Star Trek fan I have to point out that William Shatner sincerely advised the obsessed people you talk about to "get a life" long ago. Perhaps anybody with an excessive attachment that they could "abandon" should finally now take his advice to heart?

    My advice, choose what is on the screens you look at, and never ever ever make what somebody else put on a screen into part of your personal identity.

    Star Trek's financial value of course won't change, but if twelve people stop buying Klingon prosthetics, all twelve of them will have more pennies. So their side of the financial effect is exactly the same. And by no longer obsessing about Star Trek, it will be almost as if it stopped existing for them. Create your reality by choosing what you spend your money on, and choosing what is on the screens you look at!

  9. You need to do a bit of research. by mmell · · Score: 4, Interesting
    My research indicates that Alec Peters was violating nearly every guideline set out by CBS/Paramount in a for-profit venture. His good work will therefore go to waste (as it should). This is why Axenar is now subject to injunctive limitations.

    Star Trek Continues also violates those same guidelines (high-quality props/sets/uniforms instead of toy-store quality items, professional acting/directing/scriptwriting, episode length and continuity, etc.) and so could well be sued. However, Trek Continues is creating this content in an explicitly not-for-profit context. Trek Continues therefore is holding high hopes that CBS will choose not to exercise their legal rights against them.

    Since CBS/Paramount and the Star Trek franchise are not demonstrably hurt by the Trek Continues production (and suing them might well result in such damage), the people associated with Trek Continues have said publicly that they intend to create the full eleven episode run which they originally set out to publish - intended to fill the gap between the episode Turnabout Intruder and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They've also pointed out that just because CBS/Paramount can sue them doesn't mean they will sue them. They've said that they have sufficient funding and resources to complete and publish the remaining four episodes. While there's a lot if if coming off this, I share their hopes. CBS/Paramount would do vastly more to harm their interests by suing than they might gain from injunctive relief in this case. But - yes, Alec Peters tried to stick his fingers in the cookie jar, so to speak, and risked ruining a lot of great fan fiction for all of us.

  10. Re:Goodbye, good movie by james_gnz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm reasonably convinced that Peters was trying to profit from Star Trek, which isn't OK.

    You could well be right that he was trying to profit from Star Trek, but I'm not convinced it's not okay.

    Apparently he was accused of copying the "concept and feel" from decades old episodes, including "Vulcan ears, the Klingon language and an obscure character from a 1969 episode". The world's richest man founded his empire on copying the contemporary "look and feel" of the Mac from Apple (who copied it from Xerox). That seems a lot like the "concept and feel" to me, so if it's not okay, then I think there's a far bigger issue here. Also, the "concept and feel" in dispute is over 40 years old.

    It's not clear to me from the article whether Alec Peters is or was intending to restrict distribution of the resulting work. If not, then I really don't think he was doing anything wrong. Copyright was intended to promote the production of works by restricting their distribution. I don't think it should hinder the production of works that can happen without restriction on distribution, over 40 years later. That seems counter productive to me.

    If he was intending to restrict distribution though, then his legal troubles don't bother me. Live by the sword, die by the sword, I guess.

  11. Re:Goodbye, good movie by ZenShadow · · Score: 2

    He didn't just copy the look and feel.

    He took entire designs wholesale; Klingon ships, at least one Federation ship, etc.; he took the exact names of the fictional nations involved; he even used actual Star Trek screen-used costumes. But most damningly, he took at least one whole character for use in Axanar.

    Interestingly, the character I'm referring to isn't from TOS, but rather from Enterprise, which is much more recent.

    --
    -- sigs cause cancer.
  12. Re:Let's face it by ZenShadow · · Score: 4, Informative

    How about paying himself a salary?

    The instant you do that, it's not a hobby anymore. It's a commercial enterprise.

    --
    -- sigs cause cancer.
  13. Re:Goodbye, good movie by jordanjay29 · · Score: 2

    He took two characters. Garth of Izar and Ambassador Soval, from TOS and Enterprise respectively.

  14. Typical studio assholes! by DatbeDank · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If anything, the film maker should have been granted a reasonable license fee from the studio for using the copyrighted works. We all know the reboot is trash and here we have someone going back to the series' roots to make something new.

  15. Commander's Diary, Startime 4637A.Q by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Funny

    My Valcun first officer tells me we're running the risk of Klangon attack, but I never listen to that pointy-nosed pink-blooded twerp.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  16. Re: You need to do a bit more research. by mmell · · Score: 3

    Sure those guidelines existed - it's called copyright law.