But seriously, folks, these will likely be the last Axanar filings for the foreseeable future. In two weeks (December 19…a Monday, of course), attorneys for both sides will appear in court in front of Judge Klausner for oral arguments, each supporting their clients’ motion for summary judgement. After that, the next document we will see will be filed by the judge himself…and it’ll either be good news or bad news (or both!) for the two sides in this case as he makes his final rulings on these two motions.
In the meantime, here’s what came in last night: REPLIES. Three weeks ago, both sides filed motions for summary judgment (the plaintiffs filed a partial motion…more on that in another blog). These documents each asked the judge to rule on facts that were not in dispute (in other words, so obvious that any jury would reach the same conclusion, so why even waste the time to argue about it in court?). Of course, neither side agrees on what these “obvious” facts are, which kinda suggests they’re not quite undisputed. However, if the judge is convinced by the arguments of one side or the other, he could, conceivably, end this case before the trial even begins, effectively handing a victory to one side or the other.
After filing their motions, each side was allowed, two weeks later, to provide a second filing in OPPOSITION to what the other side had argued in its motion. And finally, a week after that (which was yesterday), each side could provide a brief REPLY to that opposition filing. Here are links to both of those replies from yesterday:
When I first started up FAN FILM FACTOR, I didn’t really feel the need to have a Facebook or Twitter or Instagram (or whatever else) presence online. Simply organizing a blog site, writing articles and interviews, and answering comments is more than enough work, thank you very much!
So why do I suddenly have a Facebook page? Funny you should ask…
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…
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…
Yes, it’s that magical time again! Jonathan is going to play tour guide to take anyone who is interested on a journey through the latest two major filings in the AXANAR lawsuit, each submitted to the Ninth Circuit Federal Court this past Monday.
For a better idea of what is going on at the moment, check out my (not so brief!) four-part blog on the motions for summary judgment (start here). In that analysis, I flipped a coin and began with the defense. This time, to be polite, I’m going to begin with the plaintiffs.
Yes, there are still other Star Trek fan films out there, and I promise to get back to covering them. But the Axanar news these past two weeks (and for the next three weeks) is truly significant and could, very likely, affect ALL Star Trek fan films and series…in a good way, a bad way, or possibly even both. So in my opinion, this is news deserving of extensive coverage.
That said, shortly before midnight on Monday, both parties in the Axanar copyright infringement lawsuit filed briefs opposing the others’ motions for (partial) summary judgment. Monday was the deadline, and these filings were widely expected by those following the case.
The goal of each legal team is not to win the case here and now, however. In a situation similar to the old joke, “I don’t have to outrun the bear, I only have to outrun you!” the idea is to simply torpedo the other side’s motion to get the judge to issue any ruling BEFORE the case goes before a jury. As such, if/when you read the filings, you’ll notice a tendency to argue that “the facts are still very much in question” rather than “they’re just plain wrong and we’re right.” As long as the facts are still in dispute, this case goes to court, and a jury gets to decide.
Here’s a link to the Plaintiffs Opposition filing and also a link to the Defense Opposition filing. And once again, they are both brought to you by the number 20…as there is a 20-page limit in how long these “briefs” can be. Some day, I am certain, all of this filings in this case will be required reading in law school courses on copyrights and intellectual property law. Yes, this case is THAT significant, and both sides are writing textbook motions that have a lot to teach future attorneys.
In a few days, I’ll try to provide my own “briefs” on these briefs…hopefully shorter than last week! Some things to notice if you do bother to read these:
- The plaintiffs are back to using pictures again!
- Now it’s the plaintiffs’ turn to bring up Star Wars…and Harry Potter!
- On the other side, the defense points out that Garth of Izar and Soval are not James Bond and Godzilla!
- Apparently, long-time Trekkie and director of Star Trek Beyond, Justin Lin, never heard of Garth of Izar!
- Apparently, no, the studio (Paramount) never bothered to register a copyright on Garth of Izar nor on Ambassador Soval. (This could be problematic for the plaintiffs.)
- If the judge grants the plaintiffs’ requested injunction against Alec Peters, it could violate the first amendment! (Hey, I’m just reporting the news, folks.)
- This time, the plaintiffs used a proper redaction technique. Whew!
And yes, I’m also going to include some blogs about OTHER Star Trek fan films really soon…I promise!
Last time, we began looking at the PLAINTIFFS Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in the AXANAR copyright infringement lawsuit. In Part 1 and Part 2, we looked at the DEFENSE Motion for Summary Judgment. There’s been a LOT to cover, but we’re finally seeing the light at the end of the tunnel (I’m just not sure whether or not it’s an oncoming train!).
Okay, so let’s say you to want to bake a winning copyright infringement lawsuit…what do you need to win?
Last time (and the time before that), we took a look at the defense’s DEFENSE Motion for Summary Judgment in the AXANAR copyright infringement lawsuit. Now it’s time to take a look at the PLAINTIFFS Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and see what they have to say. And they certainly have a lot to say (as did the defense).
The first question you might be asking is why the plaintiff’s motion is only for a partial summary judgment. The answer is actually rather simple. They aren’t asking for the judge to stop the entire case, only the parts where the plaintiffs could lose and the defense could win. In other words, they want Judge Klausner to say that the defendant Alec Peters infringed and shouldn’t be allowed to make any more Axanar anything. But, you ask, isn’t that all there is…is there nothing more? Oh, there’s one more thing still to determine…
The attorneys for CBS and Paramount also filed a PLAINTIFFS Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, and I look more thoroughly into that in my next blog. But the defense won the coin toss (yes, I actually flipped a coin to see which side would be analyzed first!).
When last we left off, we had just gotten to the “meat” of the defense’s motion:
“FAIR USE” – WHAT THE HECK IS IT?