Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Next revision | Previous revision | ||
statement_fact_law [2016/12/20 12:19] – created Carlos Pedraza | statement_fact_law [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | {{: | + | {{: |
====== Filings Shine Light on Weaknesses of Axanar Defense ====== | ====== Filings Shine Light on Weaknesses of Axanar Defense ====== | ||
+ | |||
+ | **// | ||
{{TOC}} | {{TOC}} | ||
Line 11: | Line 13: | ||
A new round of pre-trial filings on December 19, 2016, shed light on several emerging weaknesses of the defense case in [[Axanar Productions|Axanar]]' | A new round of pre-trial filings on December 19, 2016, shed light on several emerging weaknesses of the defense case in [[Axanar Productions|Axanar]]' | ||
- | Both sides filed summaries of what they contend are the facts and the law supporting their cases, as well as a joint list of witnesses to be called and evidence to be admitted at trial, scheduled to begin January 31, 2017. | + | Both sides filed summaries of what they contend are the facts and the law supporting their cases, as well as a joint list of [[witness_list|witnesses]] to be called and [[exhibit list|evidence]] to be admitted at trial, scheduled to begin January 31, 2017. |
+ | |||
+ | <wrap lo>See also: // | ||
The new documents follow a number of pending motions filed in the previous couple of weeks asking federal [[judge_r._gary_klausner|Judge R. Gary Klausner]] to: | The new documents follow a number of pending motions filed in the previous couple of weeks asking federal [[judge_r._gary_klausner|Judge R. Gary Klausner]] to: | ||
Line 17: | Line 21: | ||
* Issue a [[summary judgment]] in the case based on either of separate motions by the two sides claiming the material facts in the case are not in dispute, giving the judge leave to rule just on the applicable law, making a jury trial unnecessary. | * Issue a [[summary judgment]] in the case based on either of separate motions by the two sides claiming the material facts in the case are not in dispute, giving the judge leave to rule just on the applicable law, making a jury trial unnecessary. | ||
* [[excluding_evidence|Exclude]] allegedly irrelevant or unfounded evidence from the trial, including Axanar' | * [[excluding_evidence|Exclude]] allegedly irrelevant or unfounded evidence from the trial, including Axanar' | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP right round box 50%> | ||
+ | //**__« Peters ‘reversed’ out certain [personal] expenses by attempting to offset them with the lease payments he was required to make on the studio he rented. »__**// — // | ||
+ | </ | ||
===== Axanar' | ===== Axanar' | ||
Line 25: | Line 34: | ||
Peters' | Peters' | ||
+ | |||
+ | [{{ : | ||
==== Altered Financials ==== | ==== Altered Financials ==== | ||
Line 38: | Line 49: | ||
===== Direct Financial Benefit ===== | ===== Direct Financial Benefit ===== | ||
- | However, the plaintiffs' | + | However, the plaintiffs' |
==== Vicarious Copyright Infringement ==== | ==== Vicarious Copyright Infringement ==== | ||
- | The charge | + | The allegations |
- Directly financially benefitted (note the law does not use the term ' | - Directly financially benefitted (note the law does not use the term ' | ||
- Supervised or controlled Axanar' | - Supervised or controlled Axanar' | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP right round box 50%> | ||
+ | //**__At the time of their public statement, Abrams had only seen a short clip of ‘Prelude’ and Lin hadn't seen ' | ||
+ | </ | ||
===== Abrams' | ===== Abrams' | ||
The December 19 filing also clarified why the defense wanted to have Star Trek producer J.J. Abrams and director Justin Lin testify on Axanar' | The December 19 filing also clarified why the defense wanted to have Star Trek producer J.J. Abrams and director Justin Lin testify on Axanar' | ||
- | |||
==== For the Defense ==== | ==== For the Defense ==== | ||
Line 55: | Line 70: | ||
The defense construed the two directors' | The defense construed the two directors' | ||
+ | |||
+ | [{{ : | ||
==== Irrelevant, After the Fact ==== | ==== Irrelevant, After the Fact ==== | ||
Line 66: | Line 83: | ||
The full set of documents filed December 19 are part of a package set for use at the final pre-trial conference in the case, scheduled for January 9. | The full set of documents filed December 19 are part of a package set for use at the final pre-trial conference in the case, scheduled for January 9. | ||
- | Judges at these final meetings | + | The Memorandum of Contention of Fact and Law, filed by each side, is required by court rules. It explains in brief form each side's theory of the case and a narrative of what they expect to prove. It also includes a discussion of the legal issues that should decide the case and any anticipated problems with evidence to be admitted.((General Order 96-15, California Central District Court, §9.5, pp. 5-7, retrieved 12/ |
+ | |||
+ | Judges at a final pre-trial meeting | ||
Other documents filed December 19 named the witnesses expected to be called and how long their testimony and cross-examination are expected to take. {{: | Other documents filed December 19 named the witnesses expected to be called and how long their testimony and cross-examination are expected to take. {{: |