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
settlement_analysis [2019/02/26 21:56] – Carlos Pedrazasettlement_analysis [2019/06/01 15:50] (current) – [The Legal Merits of Peters' Settlement Offer] Carlos Pedraza
Line 1: Line 1:
 +{{::settlement_analysis.jpg|}}
 <font 10px/inherit;;inherit;;inherit>Original image from Axanar Productions</font> <font 10px/inherit;;inherit;;inherit>Original image from Axanar Productions</font>
 +
 +<fs x-small>FEBRUARY 26, 2019<wrap indent> | </wrap><wrap indent> 4 MIN READ</wrap></fs>
  
 ====== The Legal Merits of Peters' Settlement Offer ====== ====== The Legal Merits of Peters' Settlement Offer ======
  
-//**Was Axanar’s former director right to refuse to settle Alec Peters lawsuit against him?** //+//**Was Axanar’s former director right to refuse to settle Alec Peters' lawsuit against him?** //
  
-**Former //Axanar// director Robert Meyer Burnett refused** producer Alec Peters’ settlement offer. Was that a good idea? We asked an attorney in Georgia, the state where Peters wants the suit tried. What he told us:+ {{TOC}}{{page>byline}} 
 + 
 +Former //Axanar// director Robert Meyer Burnett refused producer Alec Peters’ settlement offer. Was that a good idea? We asked an attorney in Georgia, the state where Peters wants the suit tried. What he told us: 
 + 
 +<WRAP center 90%> <fs smaller>**//Main story: [[:peters_sues_burnett|Peters Sues Former Axanar Director in Georgia Court]]\\ 
 +See also: [[:burnett_settlement|Peters Proposed Settling with Burnett]]//** </fs> </WRAP> 
 + 
 +{{page>subscribe}} 
 + 
 + 
 +===== 'One-Sided Settlement' =====
  
    * **The settlement’s incredibly one-sided.**  Burnett gives up everything, while Peters only promises to not badmouth Burnett.    * **The settlement’s incredibly one-sided.**  Burnett gives up everything, while Peters only promises to not badmouth Burnett.
   * **It doesn’t actually settle any claims**  against Burnett. Sure, it looks like he’d avoid any lawsuit by doing everything Peters wants but the agreement should expressly release all outstanding claims. Peters doesn’t do that.   * **It doesn’t actually settle any claims**  against Burnett. Sure, it looks like he’d avoid any lawsuit by doing everything Peters wants but the agreement should expressly release all outstanding claims. Peters doesn’t do that.
   * **Peters could still sue**  even if Burnett abides by everything in the agreement. To put a fine point on it, our consulting attorney says:   * **Peters could still sue**  even if Burnett abides by everything in the agreement. To put a fine point on it, our consulting attorney says:
-—- 
  
-“It’s bullshit from a settlement perspective, obviously meant to make a non-lawyer think it is a settlement, but it really is not.”+<WRAP>//**__« It’s bullshit from a settlement perspective, obviously meant to make a non-lawyer think it is a settlement, but it really is not. »__ **//  
 +</WRAP>
  
-----+==== A Setup? ====
  
   * **Setting Burnett up for another suit**: Peters asks Burnett to acknowledge the existence of what Peters says are loans — $31,550 worth. Under these terms, Peters could go on to sue Burnett later for non-payment and Burnett couldn’t deny the payments were a loan.   * **Setting Burnett up for another suit**: Peters asks Burnett to acknowledge the existence of what Peters says are loans — $31,550 worth. Under these terms, Peters could go on to sue Burnett later for non-payment and Burnett couldn’t deny the payments were a loan.
 +
 +==== Losing Copyright ====
 +
 **Giving up copyright**: Peters wants Burnett to give up any claim of ownership or copyright to any Axanar material, such as Burnett’s recently released documentary work. **Giving up copyright**: Peters wants Burnett to give up any claim of ownership or copyright to any Axanar material, such as Burnett’s recently released documentary work.
   * **That’s probably worthless**. Burnett’s ownership of work apart from Star Trek intellectual property wouldn’t be released even by this kind of agreement with Peters.   * **That’s probably worthless**. Burnett’s ownership of work apart from Star Trek intellectual property wouldn’t be released even by this kind of agreement with Peters.
Line 23: Line 39:
   * **Were CBS to sue a fan film**  it wouldn’t be because it violated the guidelines. It would be simple copyright infringement. The guidelines are legally irrelevant. "Alec doesn’t understand the difference," the attorney tells us.   * **Were CBS to sue a fan film**  it wouldn’t be because it violated the guidelines. It would be simple copyright infringement. The guidelines are legally irrelevant. "Alec doesn’t understand the difference," the attorney tells us.
   * **Freedom of speech**: Peters wants to keep Burnett from producing any kind of documentary about Axanar. Freedom of speech would likely protect Burnett, even if he signed the agreement.   * **Freedom of speech**: Peters wants to keep Burnett from producing any kind of documentary about Axanar. Freedom of speech would likely protect Burnett, even if he signed the agreement.
-**Which state’s law governs?**  The offer doesn’t say, though the case is being tried in Georgia, but Burnett is a California resident. + 
-  * **Why it matters**: Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) are a form of restrictive covenant treated differently by each state.+===== Which State’s Law Governs? ===== 
 + 
 +The offer doesn’t say, though the case is being tried in Georgia, but Burnett is a California resident. 
 + 
 +==== Why it Matters ==== 
 + 
 +Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) are a form of restrictive covenant treated differently by each state.
   * **California is very pro-freedom**  of employment, so some provisions may be unenforceable there.   * **California is very pro-freedom**  of employment, so some provisions may be unenforceable there.
 **No time limitation**: In most states, for any restriction to be enforceable it must be reasonable in duration and scope. **No time limitation**: In most states, for any restriction to be enforceable it must be reasonable in duration and scope.
 +
 +=== Stale Information ===
 +
   * **If what Burnett keeps confidential for Axanar isn’t a true trade secret **Peters may be out of luck. The theory here is that eventually information that isn’t truly a trade secret (like, say, the formula for Coke) — and what about //Axanar//  is like that given that it’s based on intellectual property it doesn’t own? — it eventually goes “stale.”   * **If what Burnett keeps confidential for Axanar isn’t a true trade secret **Peters may be out of luck. The theory here is that eventually information that isn’t truly a trade secret (like, say, the formula for Coke) — and what about //Axanar//  is like that given that it’s based on intellectual property it doesn’t own? — it eventually goes “stale.”
   * **This agreement literally goes on forever**: Most states’ law doesn’t look favorably on holding someone liable to protect information that isn’t valuable anymore.   * **This agreement literally goes on forever**: Most states’ law doesn’t look favorably on holding someone liable to protect information that isn’t valuable anymore.
-**Overly broad**: Peters is trying to keep Burnett from talking about more than most states’ laws will allow.+ 
 +===== Overly Broad ===== 
 + 
 +Peters is trying to keep Burnett from talking about more than most states’ laws will allow.
   * **Proprietary information that isn’t confidential. **Take Axanar’s logo, for example. It’s someone’s property but isn’t confidential. This agreement keeps Burnett from even speaking about the logo.   * **Proprietary information that isn’t confidential. **Take Axanar’s logo, for example. It’s someone’s property but isn’t confidential. This agreement keeps Burnett from even speaking about the logo.
   * **Courts don’t like that**. How come?   * **Courts don’t like that**. How come?
Line 35: Line 63:
 **Any ambiguity favors Burnett**. Almost every state construes agreements //against//  the interest of the party who drafted it — Alec Peters, in this case. **Any ambiguity favors Burnett**. Almost every state construes agreements //against//  the interest of the party who drafted it — Alec Peters, in this case.
   * **So if there’s any uncertainty**  about scope or duration of the agreement, Peters and Axanar likely end up the losers.   * **So if there’s any uncertainty**  about scope or duration of the agreement, Peters and Axanar likely end up the losers.
-**The bottom line**: No good reason appears to exist for Burnett to have agreed to Peters’ settlement offer. 
  
 +===== The Bottom Line =====
  
 +No good reason appears to exist for Burnett to have agreed to Peters’ settlement offer. {{:axamonitor-ico.gif?nolink|}}
 +
 +<WRAP tip 75%>
 +<wrap em>COMMENTS</wrap> \\
 +Discuss this article in [[face>groups/axamonitor/permalink/585912175256967/|AxaMonitor's Facebook group]].
 +</WRAP>
 +----
 +**Keywords** {{tag>Peters_v._Burnett lawsuit Axanar Alec_Peters, Robert_Meyer_Burnett settlement}}