Category: Editorials

In Part 2, we started looking more deeply into the fascinating points made in the Defense Opposition to the PLAINTIFFS Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.  In Part 1, we had looked into the Plaintiffs Opposition to the DEFENSE Motion for Summary Judgment.

Both documents are 20 pages long and intelligently written.  However, there’s a lot more to cover in the defense brief, so I had to split that portion into two parts in order to cover everything properly.  This isn’t to say one side or the other made better arguments–only that there’s more to go over with the defense.

So let’s jump right back in!  First up: profits…

Continue reading “A closer look at the OPPOSITION BRIEFS in the AXANAR LAWSUIT (Part 3)”

Last time, we took a look at what the plaintiffs had to say in their Plaintiffs Opposition to the DEFENSE Motion for Summary Judgment.  Now it’s time to flip over to the Defense Opposition to the PLAINTIFFS Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.  As I did yesterday, I’m going to conduct my review by gathering together some choice quotations from the filing and commenting on them individually, starting with this very important one…

Moreover, even if the Court were to construe Plaintiffs’ unsubstantiated and self-serving speculation that they could theoretically be harmed by Defendants’ Works as “evidence,” this would only create a factual dispute on fair use.

This shows that the defense isn’t just opting for a “We’re obviously right, and they’re obviously full of crap…” approach like the plaintiffs did.  (That’s not an actual quote from the plaintiffs’ filing, but it’s a pretty good summation.)

Instead, the defense is going to also cover their flank and protect themselves against the judge going with the plaintiffs.  In other words, yes, they’re saying “We’re right and they’re wrong,” but they are also saying, “But if you think they’re right, then we really need to let a jury decide.”  Summary judgments only happen if there is clearly NOT a factual dispute.  So pay attention to how many times the defense suggests that a the facts need to be brought in front of a jury.  The plaintiffs don’t do that at all.

Two legal teams…two different strategies.  Fascinating, ain’t it?  (Well, I think it’s fascinating, at least!)  So, let’s look at what the defense has to say…

Continue reading “A closer look at the OPPOSITION BRIEFS in the AXANAR LAWSUIT (Part 2)”

It was the best of crimes; it was the worst of crimes…or was it even a crime at all?  (Actually, this is a civil trial, not criminal…but I needed a word that rhymes with “times.”)

Looking at the two motions for summary judgment filed late Wednesday night by the two parties in the AXANAR copyright infringement lawsuit, one might wonder if he or she had just read a tale of two completely different fan films.  The defense, unsurprisingly, had that “What…little old us?” look as they discussed a mostly original piece of creative fiction that used just the smallest sliver of Star Trek–and only the “minimum” that was necessary to tell its story that was actually a “critical commentary and analysis” of “the present-day military industrial complex.”

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs painted a picture of a nefarious fan who maliciously tried to line his own pockets with ill-gotten gains taken from the good and just studios who have made Star Trek lo these 50 years.  His fan film contains nothing original and was simply a “…copy from the plots, themes, settings, mood, dialogue, characters, and pace of the Star Trek works.”  The very existence of Axanar in any way will “…cause irreparable harm to the market for the Star Trek Copyrighted Works…” and must be ended immediately “in the public interest.”

They can’t both be right, can they?

Continue reading “A Tale of Two(?) Fan Films – Analyzing the MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT in the AXANAR LAWSUIT! (Part 1)”