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
jonathan_zavin [2016/04/13 22:56] – adds 'Joy of Trek' lawsuit Carlos Pedrazajonathan_zavin [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1
Line 16: Line 16:
 Like the [[lawsuit|Axanar suit]], this 1998 case involved a fan accusing Paramount of trying to prohibit him from using the Star Trek copyright after turning a blind eye to its use for years by many others. Representing Paramount, Zavin asked a judge to stop sales of the book by fan Samuel Ramer, and asked for $22 million in damages for all 220 television episodes mentioned in the book.(([[http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/nyregion/studio-sues-over-a-star-trek-book.html|"Studio Sues Over a 'Star Trek' Book," New York Times]], by Lynette Holloway, 5/2/98.)) Like the [[lawsuit|Axanar suit]], this 1998 case involved a fan accusing Paramount of trying to prohibit him from using the Star Trek copyright after turning a blind eye to its use for years by many others. Representing Paramount, Zavin asked a judge to stop sales of the book by fan Samuel Ramer, and asked for $22 million in damages for all 220 television episodes mentioned in the book.(([[http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/nyregion/studio-sues-over-a-star-trek-book.html|"Studio Sues Over a 'Star Trek' Book," New York Times]], by Lynette Holloway, 5/2/98.))
  
-[{{ ::joy-of-trek.jpg?nolink&200|**NO JOY** for this book whose publication was halted by Jonathan Zavin in a 1998 copyright case with similarities to Axanar.}}]+[{{ ::joy-of-trek.jpg?nolink&200|**NO JOY** for this book whose publication was halted by Jonathan Zavin in a [[https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16356117916964453773&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|1998 copyright case]] with similarities to Axanar.}}]
  
 The judge in that case issued Zavin's requested injunction, finding the publisher failed on all four factors weighed to determine [[copyright_infringement#defense|fair use]], and rejected its claim that Paramount had relinquished its copyright by not prosecuting other unauthorized books. The judge in that case issued Zavin's requested injunction, finding the publisher failed on all four factors weighed to determine [[copyright_infringement#defense|fair use]], and rejected its claim that Paramount had relinquished its copyright by not prosecuting other unauthorized books.
  
 > While the book cannot serve as a market substitute for the richly entertaining television shows and movies, <wrap hi>it can interfere with Paramount's market for derivative works.</wrap> … Defendants claim that their book differs from any work presently licensed by Paramount. This makes no difference. … Defendants also argue that Plaintiff's lack of legal action against other allegedly infringing indicates that "The Joy of Trek" will not damage a potential market. This argument is without merit. … <wrap hi>The lack of earlier litigation against other similar works is simply irrelevant.</wrap> A self-avowed substitute for other Paramount licensed products adversely impacts the market for derivative works.(([[https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16356117916964453773&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|Paramount Pictures Corp. v. Carol Publishing Group, et al., Order re: Plaintiffs's Motion for Preliminary Injunction]], 6/1/98.)) <wrap lo>[emphasis added]</wrap> > While the book cannot serve as a market substitute for the richly entertaining television shows and movies, <wrap hi>it can interfere with Paramount's market for derivative works.</wrap> … Defendants claim that their book differs from any work presently licensed by Paramount. This makes no difference. … Defendants also argue that Plaintiff's lack of legal action against other allegedly infringing indicates that "The Joy of Trek" will not damage a potential market. This argument is without merit. … <wrap hi>The lack of earlier litigation against other similar works is simply irrelevant.</wrap> A self-avowed substitute for other Paramount licensed products adversely impacts the market for derivative works.(([[https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16356117916964453773&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|Paramount Pictures Corp. v. Carol Publishing Group, et al., Order re: Plaintiffs's Motion for Preliminary Injunction]], 6/1/98.)) <wrap lo>[emphasis added]</wrap>
- 
 ===== Biography ===== ===== Biography =====