Differences

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

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
jonathan_zavin [2016/04/13 22:56]
Carlos Pedraza adds 'Joy of Trek' lawsuit
jonathan_zavin [2009/05/26 00:24] (current)
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 =====