Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
axamonitor_redaction [2016/11/18 17:22] – Carlos Pedrazaaxamonitor_redaction [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1
Line 3: Line 3:
 <wrap lo><wrap lo>//Photo/wnjr/Flickr//</wrap></wrap> <wrap lo><wrap lo>//Photo/wnjr/Flickr//</wrap></wrap>
 </WRAP> </WRAP>
- 
  
 ====== Why We Refused to Remove Redacted Axanar Financial Info ====== ====== Why We Refused to Remove Redacted Axanar Financial Info ======
 +
 {{TOC}} {{TOC}}
 +
 <WRAP> <WRAP>
 //**__ __**// <wrap lo>**By [[user>cpedraza|Carlos Pedraza]]** \\ //**__ __**// <wrap lo>**By [[user>cpedraza|Carlos Pedraza]]** \\
 **AxaMonitor editor**</wrap> **AxaMonitor editor**</wrap>
 </WRAP> </WRAP>
 +
 +<wrap lo>//See also: [[summary_motions_filed|Plaintiffs Cite Peters' Shocking Personal Spending in Asking Judge for Summary Judgment]]//</wrap>
  
 Amid calls by an Axanar surrogate for sanctions against [[Loeb & Loeb]] attorneys for inadvertently disclosing confidential financial information, **AxaMonitor** was asked to retract what it published. Amid calls by an Axanar surrogate for sanctions against [[Loeb & Loeb]] attorneys for inadvertently disclosing confidential financial information, **AxaMonitor** was asked to retract what it published.
  
 "It has been brought to our attention that your website and/or blog has, as of this morning, published material that was filed under seal pursuant to court order in this case," [[Jonathan Zavin]], lead attorney for plaintiffs [[CBS]] and [[paramount_pictures|Paramount Pictures]], wrote me.((Jonathan Zavin email to AxaMonitor editor Carlos Pedraza, 11/17/16.)) "It has been brought to our attention that your website and/or blog has, as of this morning, published material that was filed under seal pursuant to court order in this case," [[Jonathan Zavin]], lead attorney for plaintiffs [[CBS]] and [[paramount_pictures|Paramount Pictures]], wrote me.((Jonathan Zavin email to AxaMonitor editor Carlos Pedraza, 11/17/16.))
 +
 +{{page>summary judgment box}}
  
 The studios are suing producer [[Alec Peters]] and his company, Axanar Productions Inc., for infringing their copyrights by producing a feature film, //Axanar//, with $1.5 million Peters raised from thousands of Star Trek fans. The studios are suing producer [[Alec Peters]] and his company, Axanar Productions Inc., for infringing their copyrights by producing a feature film, //Axanar//, with $1.5 million Peters raised from thousands of Star Trek fans.
Line 21: Line 26:
 In its story November 17, 2016, about the studios' [[summary_motions_filed|motion for summary judgment]], **AxaMonitor** posted plaintiffs' quotes critical of Peters' lavish spending habits with donor funds. In its story November 17, 2016, about the studios' [[summary_motions_filed|motion for summary judgment]], **AxaMonitor** posted plaintiffs' quotes critical of Peters' lavish spending habits with donor funds.
  
-==== Peters Reputation Damaged ====+==== Peters' Reputation 'Damaged' ====
  
 On his Fan Film Factor blog, Axanar surrogate Jonathan Lane criticized Loeb for the apparently inadvertent disclosure of Axanar's confidential financial information: On his Fan Film Factor blog, Axanar surrogate Jonathan Lane criticized Loeb for the apparently inadvertent disclosure of Axanar's confidential financial information:
Line 38: Line 43:
  
 <WRAP right round info 50%> <WRAP right round info 50%>
-<wrap lo>**Defeating Redaction** How were we able to read the documents' redacted text? CBS/Paramount attorney Jonathan Zavin described it like this: "Someone has manipulated the documents to make the redacted portion visible." No hacking was required; all we had to do was copy and paste from the PDF document, a normal operation for a reporter quoting from court filings.</wrap>+<wrap lo>**DEFEATING REDACTION** How were we able to read the documents' redacted text? CBS/Paramount attorney Jonathan Zavin described it like this: "Someone has manipulated the documents to make the redacted portion visible." No hacking was required; all we had to do was copy and paste from the PDF document, a normal operation for a reporter quoting from court filings.</wrap>
 </WRAP> </WRAP>
  
Line 63: Line 68:
 Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, **AxaMonitor** is not liable for "truthfully publishing information released to the public in official court records," even if the information should not have been released, according to Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 496 (1975). Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, **AxaMonitor** is not liable for "truthfully publishing information released to the public in official court records," even if the information should not have been released, according to Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 496 (1975).
  
-=== Defense Released Same Information ===+<WRAP right round important 50%> 
 +<wrap lo><wrap em>UPDATE</wrap> On December 29, 2016, defense attorneys admitted — six weeks after that fact — they made an error in disclosing the same Axanar "confidential and sensitive financial information" the defense had criticized the plaintiffs' attorneys for inadvertently releasing.((Notice of Errata re: The Declaration of Kelly N. Oki in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, Document 157, p. 2, 12/29/16.)) 
 +\\ \\ 
 +The amended exhibits accompanying the December 29 filing were meant to replace the original documents, with the financial information simply removed. The inadvertently filed pages, the defense claimed, "are not relevant to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment." Axanar attorney Erin Ranahan had [[excluding_evidence#axanar_s_financials|already indicated]] her intent to bar the jury from seeing any of Axanar's financial data. 
 +\\ \\ 
 +The plaintiffs, naturally, want the jury to see how Peters raised and spent $1.4 million, collected from Star Trek fans, on a film he never produced.</wrap> 
 +</WRAP> 
 + 
 +=== Defense Released Same Information in Error ===
  
 Most importantly, while certain text in the plaintiffs' partial summary judgment motion was indeed redacted, the information **AxaMonitor** reported appears unredacted by the defense in documents they themselves released into the public domain. Most importantly, while certain text in the plaintiffs' partial summary judgment motion was indeed redacted, the information **AxaMonitor** reported appears unredacted by the defense in documents they themselves released into the public domain.
Line 77: Line 90:
 The defense submitted that document the same day as the plaintiffs in support of defendants' own motion for summary judgment. The defense submitted that document the same day as the plaintiffs in support of defendants' own motion for summary judgment.
  
-I believe the public is entitled to know how Alec Peters spent money he raised in public using Star Trek's intellectual property.+I believe the public is entitled to know how Alec Peters spent money he raised in public using Star Trek's intellectual property. {{:axamonitor-ico.gif?nolink|}}
  
 ---- ----
-**Keywords** {{tag>lawsuit about plaintiffs defendants parties}}+**Keywords** {{tag>lawsuit about plaintiffs defendants parties summary_judgment}}