Axaanr splash imageYep, we can now safely assume that the two sides in the AXANAR copyright infringement lawsuit have NOT reached a settlement yet.

It came quite literally down to the wire!  I checked with the court at 11:30 pm Pacific Time and neither side had filed any motion yet.  I was wondering if they’d somehow managed to settle the case after all.  But when I returned shortly after midnight, I found multiple filings from both the plaintiffs and the defense.

There’s a LOT to read through and analyze, but for right now, I just want to get the two main filings up for you all to look through.  Please note, before anyone starts doing victory laps or predicting this or that outcome, remember that each side gets to respond to the opposition’s motion and then each side gets to then respond to that response.  And finally, the two legal teams present oral arguments before Judge Klausner before he finally rules shortly thereafter.  It is FAR from over, folks!

Okay, here’s what was filed last night:

DEFENSE Motion for Summary Judgment

PLAINTIFFS Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Each of these filings goes on for 20 pages, and they both reference other documents (including my own “History of Star Trek Fan Films”).  However, there is a downloading/viewing charge for accessing each document (up to $3 per document), and I want to see if I can perhaps get the supporting evidence documents directly from the defense team (for free) before I spend all my Google Ad revenue for the year just getting PDFs for all of you (and me, of course).

And finally, yes, I intend to provide an analysis of both of these motions–their strengths, weaknesses, and any surprises I found (and there’s quite a few).  But I’m traveling next week, so I don’t know if I’ll have enough down time to write up something thorough enough until after I get back.  We’ll just have to see, but thanks for your patience and understanding.

121 thoughts on “Both parties file MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT in the AXANAR LAWSUIT!”

  1. Wait. You’re a writer for Axanar? I thought you said that you were impartial. My friend, that connection compromises any impartiality you may have had.

    1. I never said I was impartial, James. Alec said I was impartial. I’ve always said I’m an Axanar donor and supporter, and I’ve never hidden the fact that I write a regular blog on the Axanar website called “Fan Film Friday.” In fact, many of the interviews and features I post on FAN FILM FACTOR you will also find on Fan Film Friday. So no, I’m not impartial at all and never said I was.

      That said, I still try to present my analyses as objectively as I can. It is possible to be both inclined toward a particular outcome and still present facts objectively. I can’t change the way I feel about the project and about Alec Peters himself, and I won’t lie and say that I never donated to the project or that I don’t want Axanar Productions to prevail in this lawsuit. However, I still feel it’s important to have a strong and confident voice out there that isn’t simply trying to tear down Alec Peters and Axanar. Like me, those other bloggers are partial to a particular outcome while trying to appear objective. We all succeed and fail somewhat in our stated goals. That’s the nature of blogging.

      To quote one of my favorite spinach-eating deep philosophers: “I yam what I yam.” 🙂

      1. Fair enough. I was just surprised to read of your connection. Have you read the plaintiff’s full motion? Pretty damning. Not sure if it’s enough to sway the judge for summary but it comes awfully close. Not securely redacted, was it?!?

        BTW– was pleased to see that many of my points were reiterated by the CBS lawyers. Spot-on analysis on my part. When commenting on a blog, a lawyer would be careful not to identify him or herself as such lest anything be misinterpreted as legal advice.

        1. “When commenting on a blog, a lawyer would be careful not to identify him or herself as such lest anything be misinterpreted as legal advice.”

          A real lawyer knows how to include a disclaimer, James. My wife has one in the sig line of her work e-mail.

          I’m preparing an analysis of both motions. It seems I predicted a lot of what’s in them, as well. To be honest, it wasn’t rocket science. 🙂

      2. I might be wrong but I suspect James thinks, based on your declaration, you’re a script writer or other creative mind behind the movie and not simply a blog writer for their Homepage.
        The first time I read your declaration I thought the same until looked again a saw that you’re a writer for AP INC. and not Axanar or the Axanar Movie and remembered you talking about the origin of this blog.
        So I hope I’m right and you Jonathan can confirm it, to set the record straight for James and maybe others coming to the wrong? conclusion.

      3. Amazing … for being the official mouthpiece of Axanar, and such a legal expert, you’d think you can write a story and get it up far faster than those you look down upon.

        1. Sorry to disappoint you, my brother, but this morning I needed to get Jayden ready for school, make his breakfast and lunch, drive him to kindergarten, drop off some donated food items for the poor, film children’s gymnastics classes for a few hours for my one client at the moment (doing training videos for his staff), fill up my gas tank, and read/respond/approve all these comments. I’ll be working in earnest more tonight and tomorrow. It’s okay if others finish first–I’d rather do it right. (Hey, call me Right Lane!) 🙂

    2. Yet James, yet it seems perfectly ok for you to call Carlos, and Michael impartial? When both are deeply involved with Vic on Star Trek Continues one of Alec Peter’s biggest detractors? With Carlos even producing and writing show scripts for Vic? With Carlos conveniently creating a blog to ONLY attack Axanar, when his own friends has done most of the same things with Star Trek? You’re joking, right James?

      1. Not being part of the Star Trek fan film community, I only know what I read. I don’t know any of the players personally and have no grudge against anyone in this dispute. It’s fair to say that no one in your community can be completely unbiased since the issues raised by the lawsuit appear to affect everyone in it. That said, bias in the discussion of it should be limited to those persons directly involved in or with the parties connected to the lawsuit. Jonathan, the kind host of this blog, appears to have a small connection to one of those parties. To my knowledge, the author of the Axamonitor site does not. If this is incorrect, please let me know, but simply disagreeing with or disliking one side or the other is different than having a vested stake in the outcome.

        1. I think Carlos’ vested interest in the outcome is if Alec wins, he (Carlos) is gonna have some serious ‘splainin’ to do. 😉

          But seriously, I’m all for the First Amendment. Free speech is one of the reasons I approve nearly every post. Whether or not someone is directly involved with this case, peripherally involved, or simply curious, let them have a chance for their voice to be heard.

          1. “Free speech is one of the reasons I approve nearly every post.”

            And for that I commend you. As an old friend of mine was fond of saying, we can disagree without being disagreeable.

  2. Just wondering if you are aware that on the PDF documents that the redacted material is visible by copying and pasting the blacked out sections into a word document.

    1. That trick didn’t work for me, Hayden, but it seems that it did for others. Apparently, that was a screw up by Loeb & Loeb. What leaves me wondering, though, is how such a screw up happened. It’s not like these guys are My Cousin Vinnie. Loeb & Loeb is one of the top law firms in the country. They charge rates of $500-$1,000 per hour (or more!). They handle hundreds of cases each year for huge, really important corporate clients where confidentiality is critical and failure to properly redact something in a filing could potentially lead to losses in the millions of dollars (or more!) for their clients. In other words, I can’t believe they didn’t know how to properly redact.

      Am I implying that Loeb & Loeb made this “innocent mistake” on purpose to leak confidential and potentially damaging information about Alec Peters to hurt his professional reputation? I don’t have enough information to support that claim, so no, I am not officially implying that. I’m just saying that one would reasonable expect that a law firm of the caliber of Loeb & Loeb knows how to file a document in Federal Court without leaving confidential information so easily open to copy/pasting into Microsoft Word.

      1. Yep. Ridiculously easy to get past the redaction. Just open it in Adobe Acrobat or Reader and use the text selection tool to highlight the text starting before and after the redact blocks and then copy and paste into Notepad, Word, or whatever. Total amateur hour if not intentional.

  3. Would that everyone be as honest about their biases as you are. If someone asserts that she or he is unbiased, I’d say the odds are 99.9999% that they have a bias, hidden or open.

    1. Honest? I he were honest – he would have mentioned he worked for Axanar in his very first blog – not wait until his sworn court declaration went public.

      1. My semi-weekly Fan Film Friday blogs on the Axanar website have had my by-line since July of 2015. Here’s a link to them:

        It was never a secret, dude. I’ve also written two books, been to Antarctica, sat in Captain Janeway’s chair on the Voyager sets (well, actually, it was Chakotay’s chair…I couldn’t bring myself to sit in the actual captain’s chair!), been featured on “The Daily Show” (for 15 seconds of fame), sold half of my company in 1997 to the son of the former prime minister of Malaysia, taught computer skills to 1st through 5th graders for four months, directed Majel Barrett Roddenberry, graduated Cornell with a 3.3 GPA in psychology, appeared on national TV in Canada, worked at the Sundance Film Festival, got a standing ovation playing Nicely Nicely Johnson in my high school’s production of “Guys and Dolls,” survived driving for a week in Italy, and answered Willy Wonka’s fan mail for over a year.

        Exactly how much of my bio would you like?

  4. I find your seeming “inside information” fun to follow (yes, I know is public domain, don’t ruin the illusion) and I really appreciate the time you take to explain what you have read. Not being a lawyer myself, I enjoy the explanations of the more legal aspects I might not recognize. I’m not a regular blog reader of yours, but merely a Facebook link follower who finds your write-ups fun to read, even if you like to take the seemingly unlimited space of the internet as a challenge to fill up. Hopefully this chapter will be ending soon and I wanted to thank you personally before it does. Safe travels over the holiday.

    1. I’ve always been a very precise communicator. I don’t like being misunderstood, so I try to get it right the first time…which usually means OVER-explaining everything. But at least I’m whimsical as I do it. I appreciate you sticking around for my prolific prose, Tony! 🙂

  5. Looking very forward to your analysis. There is a lot riding on this case as far as precedence goes.

  6. If you’re willing join the dark side, you can get all the files from the CBS/Paramount v Axanar facebook group for free.

  7. I realize that with the enormous amount of documentation out there, ven a measly $3 fee per document adds up, so I can understand your hesitancy to pay that much for all of it, but there’s a group on facebook (which is filled primarily with supporters of the Plaintiff’s side of the case rather than axanar) wher ethey are already paying the fee and downloading all of them. I reckon you could head over there and snag a copy for yourself, to really look over in detail all the nitty gritty of this phase of things.

    (and I haven’t specifically linked to the group, given your pro-axanar proclivities, you might frown upon advertising for ‘the opposition’… the name of the group is ‘CBS/Paramount v. Axanar’. I will leave that linkless reference there, rather than risk upsetting things too much by promoting folks you don’t agree with…..but a court document is a court document, and the source is still the same even if the provenance runs down a road you don’t like.)

    1. Yeah, I’m familiar with the CBS/PvA group. I visit there every so often to keep up with the latest insults hurled at me. It’s nice to be noticed. 🙂

      At the time I posted this update, it was shortly after midnight Pacific, the two filings (and ALL their supporting documentation) had just popped up on Pacer a few minutes earlier, and I didn’t think to check CBS/PvA to see if they had it, too. Apparently, they even had it a couple of hours BEFORE the documents were even uploaded to the Federal Court, as I was checking that website every 15-20 minutes from 10pm onward. Not sure how a Facebook group got a hold of those documents before they were filed, but I have a few guesses. 😉

      That said, Erin was supposed to send me the files after they were filed, and apparently she did around midnight or 1. But the e-mail didn’t come through (need more space in my account!), so I didn’t get them. So yeah, I downloaded them for the CBS/PvA Facebook group this afternoon. I’ll look them over during the weekend. I’ve got a 5-hour flight!!!

  8. No actually they didn’t have them two hours early. And the person who posted them paid over $80 for them. Nice try at trying to make it seem as some one other than you has a direct line to attorneys and one of the litigants .

    1. The time-stamp on the FB uploads from Jody Wheeler (as of right now) is 20 hours ago. Right now, it’s a little after 5:30 pm on the West Coast. Subtract 20 hours from that, and the documents were uploaded about 9:30 pm yesterday. I was checking the court’s website every 15-20 minutes from 10:00 pm onward looking for something to post to FFF. There was nothing available at 10:00 pm. In fact, there was nothing available until about 10 minutes before midnight, and that was the Axanar stuff! The CBS/P stuff didn’t show up until after that (you can even see the order that documents were received on the Pacer website).

      Nice try, indeed! 🙂

      1. Let’s suppose for just a second that you’re correct and the documents were received early. (I don’t believe they were received early and you’ll read why later.) First, you’ve just admitted contact with defense counsel. How are we to know you’re not fibbing and didn’t get more than a sneak peak into the documents that you admitted to seeing yesterday? (I don’t believe you did get a sneak peak, by the way. Just playing devil’s advocate.)

        Second, does it matter? Jody Wheeler got his hands on court-filed documents (as noted by the blue text which is generated by the Federal Court system… actual paralegal here who has dealt with PACER and the Federal Court system before) was at most, only a few hours earlier than you did. So, what, in the grand scheme of things, does that matter? The documents had been filed, which then put them into the public record. Which means they’re perfectly legal for people in the public to get their hands on.

        So why even bring it up in the first place?

        1. Actually, I now need to publicly apologize to Jody Wheeler. I just got confirmation from Erin that the Plaintiffs filed first, likely around 9:30 or 9:45. Then it was discovered that the improper redaction happened, and the files were quickly pulled down by Loeb & Loeb. I checked after that pull-down and saw nothing. When the corrected files were finally uploaded, Axanar had already filed theirs…hence the “Axanar filed first” assumption…which was wrong on my part.

          And so my apologies for the accusation against Jody. As for Loeb & Loeb, well, I’m still dubious that they simply made a mistake in something as critical as following a court order for confidentiality. At their level, Loeb & Loeb should know better.

          1. The horses are already out of the barn. The versions with improper redaction are already everywhere now.

          2. “I’m still dubious that they simply made a mistake in something as critical as following a court order for confidentiality”–and yet, mistakes DO happen. there’s half a dozen ways of blanking text these days, and if one just looks at documents, the text is properly redacted. but if one wants to fiddle with it, it’s apparently easy to find a way to work around that.

            (there was also a post or two in the CBS/PvA group that actually mocked the flub by whoever handled the redacting of documents, which would undermine implications about some kind of close relationship.)

            I recall that AP had a great deal of difficulty getting his perk mailing list completed, which is another incredibly simple task (just about every crowdfunding platform has some kind of ‘click here’ guide to set it up and run with it for perk fulfillment.), considering how much his prior businesses relied on e-commerce and web pages, one would expect that Alec Peters ought to be experienced and competent enough to handle something like a mailing list. if a mistake over something simple is sufficient to imply nefarious intent, are you saying Alec Peters intentionally stalled on mailing out kickstarter perks? Or is it possible that mistakes are actually just mistakes?

            (and given how intensely some folks have scrutinized every single aspect of this case, then the ‘standard’ redaction that works most of the time would clearly be insufficient….I suppose one could say CBS ought to have known how many people in the fan base really despise Alec Peters and want to work extra hard to see Axanar shut down….but since Axanar has been presenting itself as the standard bearer for fans all over the place, one can understand why CBS would not expect fans to pursue the information so aggressively.)

          3. “if a mistake over something simple is sufficient to imply nefarious intent, are you saying Alec Peters intentionally stalled on mailing out kickstarter perks?”

            Logical fallacy of false equivalence. Alec wasn’t under court order to get his kickstarter perks mailed out in a timely manner. Alec is not under threat of having his malpractice insurance take a big hit for how the mailing list was handled.

          4. “Alec wasn’t under court order to get his kickstarter perks mailed out in a timely manner.”–the point, James, is that it is a relatively simple procedure, and yet for Axanar it was plagued by constant problems and mistakes that caused all sorts of delays. something relatively straightforward, and it got screwed up. it does not matter WHY the job needed to be done; the job failed to get done because of a few unfortunate glitches or mistakes. the lawyers likewise had a job that had to be done, and they did it…and the way they did it turned out to have an exploitable flaw. it is disingenuous to argue that Alec’s mistakes are just mistakes because his obligations stemmed only from professional ethics, while the lawyers’ obligations stemmed from a court order, so if they were messed up , then that means there are some underhanded, nefarious goings on. the source of a given obligation is irrelevant; the result–and how it is interpreted–is.

            “Alec is not under threat of having his malpractice insurance take a big hit for how the mailing list was handled.”–given that the error was caught and corrected within one or two hours, I wonder if it really would be a ‘big hit’ to their insurance….and given the current economic status Alec peters finds himself in, filing a claim against that malpractice is likely beyond his means at the moment (if you think studio lawyers are tough, try getting an insurance company to pay out….he’ll wish he was still being sued by CBS after dealing with an insurance company for a couple of years…)

          5. “the point, James…”

            Your point is irrelevant. What is disingenuous is using a false equivalency to try to side-step the conversation from Loeb & Loeb’s screw up to make it about something else.

            “given that the error was caught and corrected within one or two hours…”

            Even more irrelevant. The horses are out of the barn. The damage is done. Alec has already proven himself quite resourceful when it comes to legal matters so I’m sure he won’t be taking your counsel on this.

    2. It is seriously surreal to witness the amount of drive-by B-roll animosity going on. Give it a rest. If you have such hatred and contempt for a stranger just writing about things not personally oppressing you or your own, it’s time to take a step back from the keyboard and reevaluate how you got here.

      1. Some people just don’t like it when intelligent and informed people disagree with them and make valid points while doing it. And I know the detractors will say, “Slow Lane is anything but intelligent and informed.” But in their hearts, they know that’s exactly what I am. I speak about this case in plain language that makes sense. I don’t call people names while doing it. I welcome nearly all disagreeing viewpoints (as long as they aren’t overly disrespectful) and reply to most of them in a civil way (not all, but certainly a good majority). I don’t lose my cool like some people. I remain confident and undeterred by criticism. And I just keep doing what I’ve been doing while thousands of people read what I write blog after blog.

        That’s gotta be really annoying to some people. 🙂

  9. I sincerely believe it was an accident. People make mistakes even at big firms. I would imagine that the document was being finalized by a paralegal, legal assistant or clerk and perhaps they inadvertently skipped a step or two. Does that make it right? No. Should someone have checked their work? Yes, absolutely. Should there be some sort of punishment? Maybe but that’s up for the judge to decide.

    Accidents happen. Clerical errors, ya know? I cannot for one moment believe that there was malicious intent behind this.

    1. I’m not as convinced. But we’ll see what happens. Either way, the damage to Alec Peters’ professional reputation is now irreparable…hence the defense team’s initial request to the judge to make the financial records confidential. I would not be surprised if something about this goes into Alec’s counterclaim…negligence or malpractice or something. I haven’t talked to my legal eagles on this point, so I’m kinda flying blind and indulging in a bit of wishful thinking (which is why I made sure to state that what I just said has no legal input behind it…when I’m flying blind, I admit it). 🙂

      1. “the damage to Alec Peters’ professional reputation is now irreparable”–but that’s a problem, don’t you see? if the facts of the matter (not the conclusions CBS reaches, but the actual facts and records they use to support those conclusions) damage Alec Peters’ professional reputation, then isn’t that pretty clear that he has done something wrong?

        if alec is truly innocent of wrongdoing, then facts, documents, and e-mail records cannot damage his reputation, but will support his innocence.

        1. What was reported by the plaintiffs in a summarizing way in tiny snippets (that should have been redacted) was obviously skewed to paint as negative a picture of Alec Peters as possible. After all, what motivation would the plaintiffs have to make Alec seem sympathetic or competent or honest or in any way positive? It doesn’t serve the purposes of the plaintiffs’ case. So of course, they’re going to pull things out of context and spin them as best they can to support their case and taint Alec Peters as much as possible.

          Remember that the financials being reported on were not even reviewed by an accountant. How do we even know they are accurate?

          I’m not saying Alec didn’t do any of those things, but we don’t know for sure that he did, either. We have only the Loeb & Loeb lawyers to trust on this, and they’ve already lied previously in filings when they said the defense team didn’t meet with them to discuss resolving discovery issues. How do we know Loeb & Loeb is telling the truth this time?

          Maybe…and just hear me out on this because I know it sounds crazy…before you crucify Alec Peters based on hearsay allegations from an obviously biased source dedicated to discrediting him, what if you gave Alec a chance to be heard, as well? I know–totally crazy. Why assume innocent until proven guilty when it’s so much easier to just jump to the fun “guilty” part?

          1. “was obviously skewed to paint as negative a picture of Alec Peters as possible. “–yes, obviously….and the defense then presents their OWN skewed version of things to paint Alec in the best light possible. given that, how can you say the damage to his ‘professional reputation’ (without even getting into why someone making a fan film needs a ‘professional’ reputation) is ‘irreparable’?

            in this case, it was not me jumping on the ‘guilty’ part; it was you. ‘his reputation is irreparably damaged’ was YOUR conclusion, not mine. I was asking you how you can say his rep is permanently ruined given the facts of the case…..if the CBS version of events is skewed so far past the facts that it is a lie, then the supporting documentation would show that, and AP’s rep is not ‘irreparably damaged’. the only way his reputation could be damaged was if the CBS version of events is closer to the truth than you want to believe.

          2. The thing about damaging someone’s reputation, Bill, is that they do not actually need to be guilty of what they are being accused of for the damage to be real. For example, remember that article in “Rolling Stone” about the gang rape of that student…and the story turned out to be false? The fraternity identified in that article was suspended by the University of Virginia…even though the allegations has been fabricated by the student. UVA suffered a drop in enrollment applications that year, as well. Ultimately, “Rolling Stone” was forced to print a retraction and admit that they didn’t thoroughly research the story.

            So Alec could be completely innocent of the allegations made by the Loeb & Loeb attorneys. But since the supporting documents are marked as confidential, none of us can look at them and judge for ourselves. We’re simply taking the word of the lawyers, just as the U. of Virginia and millions of readers took the word of “Rolling Stone.”

          3. will those documents remain permanently confidential, or can one or both parties request a lift of confidentiality at some point?

            if those records would exonerate AP’s reputation, he would want them made public, would he not?

            in that extra thick sheaf of court papers, is there something that says which side requested a specific document be marked confidential? the only one I recall was the one about the rough financials and how CBS waned them declassified but AP’s lawyers wanted them to remain classified….what of the rest? will those ever be made public?

          4. Due to L&L’s error (whether on purpose or by accident), Erin Ranahan has essentially been proven right in her prediction of what would happen if the initial, inaccurate financials were ever released publicly. So if the plaintiffs were actually hoping to use these early financials at trial, I think they just fracked the dagget on that plan. In my opinion, there is now VERY little chance the judge will take away the confidentiality order on those records. Alec could, of course, release them himself any time he wanted to, but I doubt he’d release the inaccurate ones that he plaintiffs used to discredit him.

        2. Bill:
          When documents are not the truth, but only part of the truth that are framed to make me look bad, and don’t include the actual truth, then yes, there are a lot of people who aren’t smart enough to realize they are reading one side of the story and damage to a reputation can occur.

          Loeb & Loeb was fully in possession of the donor financials that show no expenses being charged to donors that in any way benefited me. No auto expenses, meals, insurance, salary, NOTHING. I have paid for all of that myself with the almost $ 150,000 I have put into Axanar.

          So when Loeb & Loeb does something that is not the truth to make their argument, then yes, that can hurt my reputation.

          Alec Peters

          1. What reputation to harm.

            My friend you have done more damage to your own reputation than any one person could have ever done.

            You’ve lied.

            You’ve cheated.

            You’ve blocked hundreds of people from you social media because they have either asked questions you didn’t want to answer or had a difference of opinion.

            You’ve alienated almost the entire fan film community.

            You’ve driven a wedge between the fans.

            You’ve stolen money from the fans in the name of producing a film that you had no intention to make.

            You’ve spent donors money on things millions have trouble affording like HEALTH INSURANCE.

            Need I go on.

            You are your OWN worst enemy blaming others for your own short commings is not only irresponsible but childish.

            Act your age and own up to your mistakes and come clean before you do so much harm not only to your own reputation but to the entire Star Trek fandom.

            This will not get past moderation but hey ho Mr Lane will see it.

          2. I only moderate the potty mouths and the disrespectful insulters, James. You simply have unresolved anger issues. You’re welcome to accuse Alec all you want…doesn’t make it true, though. But if it makes you feel better saying it as if it’s some kind of proven set of objective facts, then by all means, shout from the rafters on my blog. Your words are but electrons traveling through routers and photons coming out of computer screens. Neither has much weight or substance. 🙂

          3. “when Loeb & Loeb does something that is not the truth”–the first financial summary you posted a year ago, right before the whole trial kicked off, you listed a salary for yourself of $38,000. pretty soon, some people said ‘wait a sec, this is a fan film, why are you paying yourself? that’s a bit hinky, dontcha think?’

            you replied with ‘I am working full time on this, so it’s only fair I get a measley little salary that’s just barely over minimum wage. even charitable foundations pay salaries to their CEOs.’ you did not say anything then about ‘it is not a salary’ or ‘I put in a lot of money myself’ or things like that; in fact, it was only a month or two ago–well after you found yourself in hot water–that you denied it was a salary, that you said you put in 150k of your own money.

            now, it is certainly possible that you were lying a year ago, just blurting out something random without thinking, but it is also possible that denying now that you ever got a salary is some kind of attempt to packpedal, to retcon history in order to save face or avoid serious trouble.

            when the Plaintiffs make a statement, based on your own words from a year ago, then to say they are lying is to admit you lied, either now or a year ago.

            wouldn’t it be easier to say ‘it was a small salary, I had no idea it’d be considered ‘financial gain’ in a lawsuit, I kept the salary small because I was only looking to break even, never to make a profit, I didn’t really have a clear understanding of copyright law’? when other folks (the ‘haters’ like Christian gossett and terry macintosh) say something that contradicts your version of events, it is more difficult to think your story is the true one because it has changed very drastically from a year ago.

          4. Heh…It’s Because You Don’t Like What I’m Saying, But I’m Not Wrong….At Least, Not In An Obvious Way. I Can Adjust My Style If You Like.

            (…And i’m done capitalizing every word; just had to mess with you a bit; and, just this once, I will properly capitalize. Don’t get used to it.)

            What REALLY bugs you about me is not the capitalization issue; it’s that I’m not carrying a grudge or personal vendetta against AP, but still view the events as having a strong negative connotation.

            Take this most recent comment: AP claims to have never taken a salary or had any kind of personal financial benefit from the Axanar funds, but this is a marked contrast to his old justification that said he DID take a salary, but it was modest, barely enough to cover expenses, and justifiable for a variety of reasons. You remember, I remember, Even Alec remembers (I think; based on some of his public comments, he sometimes looks like he responds form his gut and not his head, so it is possible he does not think about what he writes, and by not thinking about it he does not remember it.)

            That is what I think is REALLY bugging you; you believe in Alec Peters (an earlier post had you describing what a nice guy he was on a personal level, so you can’t believe he would be, to borrow from Hater parlance, a ‘degenerate scumbag’ at the professional level. If I felt like being snarky, I would point out the cliché about how neighbors always describe the killer next door as ‘such a nice, quiet man…’)

            More importantly, though, you believe in Axanar more than you believe in Alec Peters. You want to see the finished product, you want it to be great, etc. So when I show up and make comments, in your mind those comments represent a danger to Axanar, because I have no personal beef with Alec Peters, but still see him as wrong. When I say things along the lines of ‘maybe it isn’t intentional fraud, maybe it is just incompetence’, you have a hard time disagreeing with me.

            You know mistakes were made; but like the famous dead guy said, ‘to err is human.’ Everyone makes mistakes, so by itself it’s no big deal….people may stumble, they may fall, but they get back up and finish the race. But when some guy like me shows up and tells you that there are too many mistakes, that the screw-ups are stacked so deep there is no coming back, it bugs you because it means there is a chance you won’t get to see Axanar.

            I think, at some point, you will get to see Axanar. In fact, I think you will get to see it TWICE. often enough via the many social media outlets, AP has dismissed many of the most vocal of his detractors by pointing out that they have never made a film, so they know nothing. If he keeps doing that, eventually, some of them (many who have been involved in various minor capacities in filmmaking over the years) are going to put their money where their mouth is, and make their own version of Axanar, to demonstrate that it CAN be done without provoking CBS. Of course, many of the folks who worked on THIS version of Axanar will, in a year or two, come back and finish it. They were not the ones sued, after all, and if they want to make a fan film, sans Alec Peters’ involvement, as long as they follow the rules it is unlikely CBS will stop them. After all, CBS has been doing some things to benefit fan films here and there…a couple of Fan Film actors were given walk-on cameos in the newest films, that New York soundstage was issued an officially sanctioned license to operate as a Tourist trap…. it may take a few years longer, but I think you will still see Axanar in some form.

            Now, I have in the past made a living off my ability to ‘read’ people, to know what makes them tick in order to sell them something or convince them to support various policies, so I have a fairly solid understanding of how people think, and why they do some of the things they do, so while this is a speculative analysis of your inner workings, I am fairly confident it is an accurate read of the situation….but I am not 100% confident, because my talents are built more on face-to-face encounters, where body language plays a BIG role in the analysis. So, this being a text-only format, I could be missing subtle nuances. But you do inject a lot of your own personality into your writing (and that is a good thing), so I feel my reading of you is accurate. You are a good person, one who is optimistic and upbeat, and you want to believe the best in people, even if they sometimes mess up. But when a bitter old cynic from Washington D.C. shows up and starts pointing out the bad side of the world, it gets you down just a bit. You think things will work out in the end, and when someone comes along and tells you your glass is half-empty, you hate that their outlook is factually accurate but not optimistic.

            Don’t worry about it. Even if Alec Peters is blacklisted from anything remotely connected to Star trek, even if CBS takes Industry Studios and razes it to the ground, fan films will endure. Alec Peters will endure, not as a professional filmmaker nor as a fan film maker, but as a person. There’s no death sentence in civil suits. Alec will still be around, still be your friend, and fan films will still be made….there will just no longer be an overlap between those two things.

            (Also, on an unrelated note, can you at some point soon make one of your blog posts that list you compiled of fan films for this case? Not the entire word-for-word 100+ page summary, just the list of titles, along with links to the websites where they can be viewed? I need another list, in case my current source list is missing something.)

          5. Very insightful, Dr. Allen! (And here I thought I was the psychology major.) But I’d like to share two additional pieces of my personality profile with you to help you better understand why I not only stand BY Alec Peters but I also stand UP for him. And I don’t mind opening up the inner workings of my soul with the masses reading this. As my brother David said during his best man speech at my wedding: “Jon wears his heart on his sleeve. He wears his mind on his sleeve. He wears his lunch on his sleeve.” (All true!)

            So here’s two other very important pieces of the Jonathan Lane mental puzzle:

            1) I value honesty above nearly all else in the world (except for maybe love). That’s why I’m so upset over the L&L accusations in their complaint. It’s not because Alec might be lying but rather because I know that L&L is distorting the truth into something unrecognizable…pretty much a lie based on the improper presentation of facts. Remember in the episode “A Private Little War” when Spock tells Nurse Chapel to strike him repeatedly and hard? Scotty comes in and sees the Nurse putting the smackdown on Spock and pulls her away. In that moment, Scotty’s “facts” were correct: Chapel’s going medieval on Spock’s ass (probably because of that whole T’Pring thing). But while those facts (Chapel is beating up Spock) were correct, Scotty’s interpretation of them was incorrect. M’Benga would explain later that Vulcan’s need to fight their way back to consciousness, and that Chapel was only doing Spockasked her to do.

            You see, I know how the Axanar funds were spent. I know how much Alec put in. And I know how proper accounting works. Call it a salary or call it a reimbursement, it doesn’t matter until a proper accountant files it. What Loeb & Loeb worked from was a list of receipts–everything in one basket. They pulled out the “facts” that they wanted to twist into their own interpretation of reality. But it’s not a correct one. And my belief in the value of truth is why I have come to Alec’s defense in this particular instance when few others have. They seem much more willing to believe those who would distort facts, leaving out certain important ones and improperly describing others in order to serve their own purposes. Now, perhaps Alec will ultimately do that himself when he finally defends his financial management of the Axanar project (assuming he does). But until he does, there is only one version of the “truth” out there, and it’s not necessarily the correct or accurate one.

            2) I believe in fairness. In my mind, the world should be fair–and when it isn’t, you should try to make it that way. Axanar was treated very unfairly by the studios. After 50 years of doing nothing about fan films, they decided they’d finally had enough and wanted to make an example of this twerp Alec Peters. So they brought down the full fires of hell in the form of a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Why was this unfair? Because Alec asked them four separate times for guidance, and they gave him none. They never told him to stop or limit his crowd-funding or to stop using Gary Graham or anything–and he ASKED!!! They never sent him a cease and desist letter. They never called or even sent an e-mail. They just waited and waited and waited and then–less than a month before filming was to begin, they lowered the legal boom. In my mind, it was almost entrapment. The studios had two full years to stop Alec or slow him down or guide him into a more acceptable direction. The studios chose none of the above.

            In my mind, that was not fair, and so I want to see the legal system restore fairness. And for me, that means Alec wins this case–not just for Axanar or for all fan films but simply because the studios were being assholes and deserve to lose for that.

            And now my song is done.

          6. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I think what Peters is saying is that he contributed approximately $150k of his own money to the Axanar works before any of the crowdfunding campaigns began, but after the campaigns ended he used some of the donations to effectively reimburse himself approximately $65k. Is this correct?

          7. If I remember correctly, about $50K went into it all up front and then more along the way as cash-flow slowed. The most recent donations of Alec to his own project came within the past few months. But don’t take my word for it. I’m really hoping Alec will chime in or–better yet–give me that interview I’ve been nagging him about! 🙂

  10. I find it funny that they take umbridge with your supposed “impartiality”, but not the biased nature of others who are blogging on this case. I go to both pro and con Axanar sites because to only visit one site, does not give a “full picture” of the case at hand. some people are going nuts over the fact you are an “axanar writer”… it is actually rather funny to see.

    to those who complain you did not get your blog up quick enough…real life still exists, give Johnathan a break. he has RESPONSIBILITIES beside writing a blog for the web. sorry he is not the first guy out of the gate so to speak

    1. Before Fan Film Factor, there were mainly blogs out there regularly bashing Alec and Axanar (and a couple of podcasts, too). It seemed there was room for one that didn’t bash. In business parlance, that’s known as filling a void in the marketplace. And for my troubles, I’ve now make nearly four dollars! I am so tipping that Uber driver on Saturday. 🙂

      And hey, thanks for the words of support and encouragement. And now I gotta get back to writing that next blog or I’m gonna miss my deadline! 😉

  11. So, again playing devils advocate here… Alec himself or Rob or others have all confirmed that Alec has done these things. I don’t deny the fact that these things that have leaked are likely irreparable in his professional career and that is unfortunate. But wouldn’t the way about avoiding these issues be just not doing them in the first place? Just my $0.02.

    And the legal remedy I believe you would be looking for is sanctions.

    1. Sanctions can’t restore what Alec has lost, Ryan. Whether or not he did the things people are claiming is actually irrelevant. He’s not on trial for financial mismanagement. And a trial for copyright infringement should not ruin one’s business reputation and damage their ability (possibly permanently) to make a living…especially when there’s a chance this person could win the infringement lawsuit.

      But even if Alec were to lose, the label of “infringer” is one thing. The labels being placed on him by some of the detractors out there are significantly worse. That is why the judge ordered the financial records (which, when entered into discovery, were still incomplete and not reviewed yet by an accountant) be kept confidential. Whether by accident or on purpose, Loeb & Loeb violated that court order. Sanctions are certainly called for, but that doesn’t restore what was just taken from Alec.

      While one of my legal eagles was really busy tonight and had time for only a quick texting session, s/he said that Alec might indeed have a reasonable cause of action against Loeb & Loeb that they would most likely be inclined to settle, admitting no wrongdoing and allowing their malpractice insurance to just pay Alec a lump sum to go away (after the current trial is over, of course). Things like this do, in fact, happen (s/he said), and that’s why law firms have malpractice insurance in the first place.

      1. “they would most likely be inclined to settle, admitting no wrongdoing and allowing their malpractice insurance to just pay Alec a lump sum to go away”

        Interesting that there is now a scenario (regardless of likelihood), thanks to this, where Alec loses and yet walks away with more money than he lost by the end of it all.

        Even better if he wins and then gets paid as well, of course, because then we get Axanar made with one heck of a launch party. 😉

          1. If you are worried about the redactions harming Peter’s reputation, you should just look at the defense’s filing, because they include an unreacted interrogatory from L&L that basically outlines Peter’s salary, sushi, and tires… It also includes the testimony from Burnett and Hunt that Ares Studios was intended to be a for profit venture, and it also includes Gossett’s e-mails on the Netflix deal..

            One day, soon, lane someone is going to cut your strings.. then you can be a real boy once and for all…

          2. Pinocchio jab aside he does have a point that the same paragraphs of text discussing money spending etc are in the defenses submitted filing with zero redactions.

            L&L massively screwed up not making sure that text was properly redacted when they were published to PDF, by W&S didn’t even consider it worth redacting in the first place.

            Are questions regarding reputation damage being asked of the defence council due this information hitting the public domain? Especially if as being suggested it isn’t true?

          3. We’ll have to see what happens. But as I just said in another response, Alec is allowed to share his confidential information. L&L is not. That alone is very significant and will, at the vey least, affect THIS case. Whether there is another lawsuit, well, it certainly couldn’t hurt to throw some mud at the wall and see what sticks.

          4. That he is, though I do find it odd that he has said its twisting the truth but then the defense has submitted it to the court as well? Seems like if L&L had created their documents properly this would still have had the same result in harming his reputation wouldn’t it? So despite the mahoosive SNAFU but their part (which does need to be remarked on) the end result is still the same isn’t it?

            Like I said before L&L massively screwed up, from reading up on how these PDF editors redact text its something along the lines of you block out what you want blacked out but at that point you can export to PDF without it being redacted, you must actually confirm the redactions as a part of the export process. I imagine someone in their offices will be having a harsh dressing down (if not fired) for that little mistake (if they haven’t already).

  12. “He’s not on trial for financial mismanagement.”

    No, but may I remind you of the amended complaint where it makes reference to Alec enjoying direct financial benefit? What do you think that means? It isn’t just a salary. And I certainly don’t want to get into the details here but I would say that he, and other senior members of the team received a lot of financial benefit out of the donors’ money. While there are certainly things I can accept as legitimate business expenses, there are more things that I cannot forgive. So these particular financial mismanagements actually do play a part in the bigger picture of copyright infringement.

    As for Alec’s certain to be coming down the pipeline case against Loeb & Loeb, I’m on the side of justice. And justice will prevail for Alec there. Regardless of why it happened whether it was malicious or not (I don’t believe it is but your mileage obviously varies), he deserves some restitution there. And yes, malpractice insurance is a wonderful thing.

    But I also would not be surprised to see that money to go away for the certain to follow class action suit. There are some very unhappy donors out there and many (not just those you call detractors) who will be out for blood. I’m not even going to speculate on the IRS or the Feds getting their hands on his books. It really could happen.

    And I know you’re Alec’s friend, Jon, but the evidence is certainly not looking good for him in any light. And the defense has done very little to bolster their case, using basically the same arguments since their Motion to Dismiss. Those arguments failed then. We’ll see if they hold any weight now.

    1. I chuckle when I hear folks talking about a class action. My wife has handled a few of those in her time, and they are NOT easy to set up and administer. Axanar has 10,000+ donors, which sounds like a lot, but most of them are in the $25-$50 range. The cost of contacting each of those people, confirming they donated what they said they did, and soliciting their participation costs nearly as much to organize and execute as the law firm would get if they took even as much as 50% of the judgment as a contingency fee. The only donors who would make the case “worth it” would be the $1000 to $10,000 donors, and there are very few of those. And what makes it worse for the law firm wanting to take this on is that most of those big-ticket donors are VERY loyal to Axanar (or else they wouldn’t have donated so much). They WANT Axanar to happen…right down to their DNA. I had dinner with one of those donors last week in Century City. I can’t imagine him ever choosing to participate in a class action, as he’s incredibly loyal to the cause.

      And of course, then there’s the problem of actually proving some kind of fraud. Alec did, in fact, produce PRELUDE TO AXANAR, just as his first Kickstarter promised. He built a studio and sets–just as his second Kickstarter promised. There’s photos of the construction and witnesses (like me) who actually helped do things like carry carpet upstairs and get the floor prepared. And of course, he produced the Vulcan scene as part of the final film. Then he was sued and had to half production, watching $15,000/month disappear into rent and utilities. But all three crowd-funding campaigns can demonstrate the proper application of funds raised (as opposed to outright theft of the entire $1.2 million).

      All of this is to say that a class action would NOT result in a $1.2 million verdict. The vast majority of that money went into precisely what was promised in the campaign. Now, if you wanted to go after $10,000 spent on food (and I have to assume at least half of that was craft service for the filming days, so it’s probably more like $5,000) plus whatever he spent on gas and tires (which is actually a justifiable business expense since Alec was traveling to many conventions to generate more donor revenue), then at best, a firm is looking at a judgment in the low five-figure range (like $10,000 or $20,000)…meaning each donor would likely get a dollar or two. (Note: Alec’s “salary” still counts legally as a reimbursement if he put in $100,000 of his own money. So don’t count on a judge including that $38 or $65K or whatever in a hypothetical judgment ward.) With a dollar or two needing to be sent out to 10,000 people, postage alone (since some donors were international) would actually make such a class action COST the law firm more than it would ever take in!

      And of course, the biggest reason no law firm would take on such a class action is because the money was donated…not invested. There was no contract, real or implied. No one was buying a product that they failed to get. (Perks may have been fulfilled late, but they were fulfilled…and remember that perks for donations still do not count as “items purchased.” They are “thank you” gifts for donating.) And finally, each Kickstarter had a disclaimer clearly stating there were no guarantees that the project would be completed.

      So while the idea of a class action is a fun imaginary scenario for a few of the haters to fantasize about, in the real world, such thing don’t happen without a really good business rationale for the law firm that takes the case. Good luck 1) finding a law firm, and 2) finding a way to win the case.

      1. I’m happy to finally be able to fully agree with one of your legal analysis posts. Donors have very little legal recourse should their donations be used in ways other than advertised. With crowdsourced donations, you pays your money and takes your chances. This is why I think such donations are generally foolish. Not all, but most. Here’s a great article from ArsTechnia a few years ago that describes the pitfalls inherent in crowdsourcing:

        If you donated to Axanar or any crowdsourced project, you may not get what you want but you get what you deserve.

  13. Johnathan, I learned something long ago in the military that is very relevant to what you just talked about. It is “there are two things that define a person, character and reputation. Character is how you see yourself, reputation is how others see you”. Only Alec gets to decide which is important.

    Also reputation in Hollywood is a fickle thing. Should Alec win(which I hope he does), in the end there will be enough support to overcome the damage from a bunch of Facebook/web blog Trolls

    1. I hope so. But I would imagine that Alec’s effectiveness as a crowd-funder would be lessened once the trolls started posting accusations about his on his Kickstarter and Indiegogo pages and on social media. Should Alec decide to take legal action against L&L, it would certainly be reasonable to assume his former successes as an executive producer would now be much more challenging to replicate…and that would be damaging to his professional opportunities.

      1. “Alec’s effectiveness as a crowd-funder would be lessened “–CBS guidelines already put some pretty big restrictions on crowdfunding, so this is a moot point.

        If Alec Peters decides to work on some independent project not related to Star Trek, one would hope he had sense enough to hire someone more experienced in handling money to avoid the mistakes that led to this fiasco in the first place….in which case, it would be the reputation of the money man that matters, and not AP’s rep.

  14. Are people really so offended that Alec paid himself a salary (or whatever you want to call it)? I’ve skimmed through the leaked sections (er, failed redactions) of the plaintiff’s document, and honestly am having a hard time getting worked up about them. The amount that Alec paid himself was less than my salary… and I’m a grad student. I literally get paid barely enough to live on (given my location).

    And then, *gasp* he actually spent it! Oh, wow! Guess what I do with my salary?! I bet you do too!!!

    Ok, turning down the tone a bit: the only thing modestly concerning to me is the claim that he approached Netflix to propose a deal. And that wasn’t even one of the redactions. Everything else was either already more-or-less public (like the studio or any specific items of infringement), or not at all surprising (like the use of money).

    At any rate, this all seems like a sideshow anyway. I can see why the plaintiffs would want to make Alec look unsympathetic, because if it works it only helps their case. I also have no difficulty imaging there might be people on the internet who would like that. But in terms of what is likely to have an actual, material impact on this case, I suspect the only points that really move the needle are the points on whether infringement actually occurred (or not). Judges are, after all, essentially paid to see through BS, and there’s a lot of that flying around here….

  15. Most of the information that Loeb & Loeb unsuccessfully redacted (including Alec taking a salary and personal expenses out of Axanar funds) is also in Winston & Strawn’s motion for summary judgment — but with no redaction at all! Check out the “Plaintiff’s Response to Interrogatories” document in W&S’ defense exhibits.

    So even if Loeb & Loeb did the redaction correctly, the reputation-damaging info would still be out in public because Alec’s own lawyers released it! Therefore if Alec is going to sue anyone, it would have to be his own lawyers…

  16. As I was reading the documents, I first believe the black boxes were stickouts. But as I read the second document, it clearly there are words that are being block from us. I say this because it read like they implying that Alec was taking monies for himself. I know that not the case. Alec has repeatedly stated the funds are 100% safe until the mess is over with. So I want to know what was blacked out?

      1. Theres a copy of the unredacted text available to read courtesy of the Defence Council if you really want to track it down it shouldn’t be too hard to find either on CBS/Paramount v Axanar like Jon said and Axamonitor have a copy of the original PDF downloaded from the court.

        1. Sorry to be a spelling Nazi, but it’s “counsel” if you’re talking about an attorney and “council” if you’re talking about a governing body. (My mom has taught reading skills and phonics for over 50 years.) 🙂

          1. Ok Mr Smarty Pants :p Point still stands that they posted the same information to the public domain, I was just trying to help the poster out if she wanted to read the full text 😉

    1. Pat White, Is that what you really believe?

      First let me make clear the money was never ever safe. To be safe it would have been put into an escrow account, which it never was, to assure it would only be used to make the film. Alec personally told me himself the donor money was not in any escrow account. Mike Bawden told Alec to put the money in to escrow and Alec flat out refused and left it in Axanar’s personal accounts as well as those from Paypal which Alec and other had access to. Escrow would have assured Alec would not be able to use ANY donor funds for his personal use.

      Those of you commenting praising Alec and thinking YOUR donor money is safe when there is NONE left because Alec spent ever last penny of his car, countless restaurants, rent, comic cons, insurance, SAG fees and dues as well as many other things he spent the money for his own personal gain and enrichment of himself and his inner circle of fellow scammers. It’s all in the court filings in plain black and white.

      Remember, I used to be one of Alec’s biggest defenders. Alec lied to me and to all of you. Difference between you and me now is that I no longer believe his lies, his excuses, or his explanations. Alec ripped you all off and is laughing at the fact you are still gullible enough to believe him.

      1. Well, then I guess Alec is laughing at me, too. Then again, I’m pretty comedically brilliant! (I tell myself that quite often.) 🙂

        (Oh watch the haters jump on that one.) 😉

      2. “Escrow would have assured Alec would not be able to use ANY donor funds for his personal use.”

        It would have also insured he couldn’t use the funds to pay rental fees for the studio. Or even postage to honor perk shipments. How convenient.

        “It’s all in the court filings in plain black and white.”

        The plaintiff’s allegations are there, certainly, but they are not proven as of yet and should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

          1. Remember in the original Ghostbusters when they were discussing the size of the Twinkie? Yeah. That Twinkie size. 😛

  17. Jonathan, you keep saying Alec lost this and lost that yet you refuse to accept, believe or take any responsibility that everything Alec did that to bring on the lawsuit is indeed his own fault. You refuse to acknowledge he knowingly enriched himself on Copyright Infringment of CBS IP and donor money.

    Makes me wonder just how much was your cut? How much did Alec pay you to be his TOOL?


    1. He bought lunch for me and my son Jayden and let Jayden take home an extra set of patches and a small toy that Jayden found on Alec’s desk. Oh, and he treated me and one other volunteer to dinner at PF Chang’s with Richard Hatch after we manned the Axanar table for most of the day during Long Beach Comic Con back in 2014. I think that about covers my “cut.”

      And I personally believe that one should never be proud of having hate…for whatever reason. Anger, frustration, resentment, suspicion, disapproval…all perfectly acceptable. Hate, well, that’s just not something I’d ever be bragging about personally.

      1. Lawsuit ramblings aside thats such a nice story about Alec and your son, I said from the beginning and would still say it today that no matter what happens in the courts, whats is proved in law has happened (and I suppose also the fallout in the court of public opinion) that Alec seems like a guy that I could have a good Star Trek discussion and debate with over a pint and a burger (sorry but I don’t like the idea of sushi).

        I don’t believe in hate either, especially over a fanfilm (theres enough hate every day in this world already), I don’t really think its a very “Star Trek” way to be.

        1. I agree. I think Gene Roddenberry wanted more love in the world (and beyond), not more hate. I think back to “Day of the Dove” and how easy it was to slide into hatred and open aggression bathos difficult it was to set that hate aside and reach out to the opposition with kindness and forgiveness.

          I don’t think Gene would be very happy to see a small percentage of fans so dedicated to hatred and ridicule and derision in the name of Star Trek.

          1. Great episode choice there, another is much earlier in with Balance of Terror… When dealing with an enemy who last time they were seen it was the end to open warfare where you can imagine millions lost their lives, an enemy who destroyed several outposts (who I imagine were crewed by more than the single extra we saw) and tried to do the same to the Enterprise Kirk instead of relishing in his victory extends an offer to save the remaining Romulan crew.

            The reboots have their faults but I smiled during the 2009 film where Kirk offers the same to Nero in a hope that it could earn peace with an enemy who in that timeline sounds like is much more a here and now threat.

            “It’s logic Spock”

          2. Yeah, I was trying to draw an analogy to the current schism in fandom and the vitriol from both sides. Not sure if “Balance of Terror” is quite as analogous. Possibly.

  18. Dude you seriously need to take a chill pill. Jonathan made a mistake and was man enough to admit it and let Jody know he was wrong. Simply because I no carry the Axanar Banner does not make me s hater I have a sizable vested interest in this case as a donor.

  19. I don’t know about the folks who donated to Kickstarter bit those of us who donated to IGG paid shipping. And as s donor I didn’t donate for rent I donated for the film to be made. It was my understanding from Podcasts and Cspptain’s Logs that they had paid rent in advance and Alec had personally guaranteed the rent. Now if I say I will pay for something I’m not going to take money meant for the movie to pay rent.

    And they shut everything down so there was no reason for he IGG money couldn’t be put in an escrow account.

    1. They shut down filming, but the studio was leased for three years. You can’t simply put the studio in “suspended animation” and start paying rent again when the case settles.

      And Brenda, you DONATED. You didn’t invest. When I give to the Red Cross, I can’t tell them to use all of my money for help in Ethiopia or Haiti or only inside the U.S. I can’t tell them to spend my donation only on food or medicine or blankets sand not to pay salaries or rent or fuel costs. The Red Cross might say, “Give to help the victims of this or that horrible tragedy,” but once you send in that check, the money is theirs. It goes into a central account and pays for whatever expenses the Red Cross has.

      You donated to Axanar for them to make a movie. I get that. I did, too. Stuff happened. I donated to the Red Cross to help victims of Hurricane Katrina. But if there were shortly afterward an earthquake in Italy or a flood in China and my money had to go into helping those victims instead (or as well)–or into advertising and marketing to raise more money for those other natural disasters, then so be it. My money now belongs to them.

    1. Give me a week or two, David. I’m having computer issues (using the wife’s Surface right now on vacation). I’ll get it up soon enough–don’t you worry! (And then I won’t have to write any more Fan Film Factor!) 🙂

  20. I’ve heard the Red Cross analogy, and it doesn’t apply the in this since Axanar is not a charitable origination or even a nonprofit. And too be honest it’s a very tired old argument that holds no weight.

    1. Actually, I don’t see how non-profit or not plays into the analogy. You still donated. You didn’t invest. Let’s take this out of the realm of even donating to a charity or a fan filmmaker. Let’s say I pass a guy on the street asking for money and give him a $5 bill to buy a sandwich. If he uses it to get drugs instead (or sushi), I can’t get angry at anyone other than myself for giving it to him in the first place. Once I gave him my money, it became his money.

      That said, as I’ve now shared with you all, I happen to know how the money was spent. Was Alec the perfect organizer and manager of all the moving parts of Axanar? Probably not. Did he spend every penny 100% wisely? Nope. But he did a hell of a lot better than I ever could have…or most all of us for that matter. And yes, he got hit with a huge lawsuit that stopped production. Had that not happened, Axanar would have launched on time…or at least the first half-hour of it.

Comments are closed.