Star Trek Fan Film Producers Lose Effort to Dismiss Copyright Infringement Action

During its half-century voyage, the Star Trek franchise developed a planetary defense system. The defense system was designed to employ various strategies and procedures in an effort to protect fictional planets from attack.  The makers of a crowdfunded Star Trek-themed short film recently failed to effectively employ similar defenses to fend off an attack by the owners of the Star Trek franchise. Earlier this week, on May 9, U.S. District Court Judge R. Gary Klausner denied the filmmakers' motion to dismiss, under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in which they argued the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted by the Federal Court.

The lawsuit was brought by Paramount Pictures and CBS Studios as the owners of the copyrights in the Star Trek franchise. They alleged in their Complaint that they owned the copyrights in the science fiction franchise, which chronicles the adventures of the U.S.S. Enterprise and its crew as they travel through space during the twenty-third century. The original television series was first broadcast nationwide in the United States in 1966 and since that time has been in syndication throughout the U.S. almost continuously.  Subsequently five additional Star Trek television series have been broadcast, totaling more than 700 episodes. There also have been a dozen Star Trek motion pictures, and the studios are continuing to develop additional works, including the planned release of an new feature film in 2016 and new television series in 2017. CBS is the owner of the copyrights in the television series and Paramount owns the copyrights in the films. They also jointly own certain copyright rights in multiple novels and other works.

In the original series, captain of the Enterprise James T. Kirk met former Starship captain Garth of Izar and the two of them discussed captain Garth’s victory in "the Battle of Axanar."  When Paramount and CBS recently learned of the development of an unauthorized production of a short film entitled Prelude to Azanar, they filed suit against its producers for copyright infringement, alleging the film incorporates numerous elements of their copyrighted works.

In an effort to fend off the lawsuit, the producers of Prelude to Azanar filed a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Rule 12(b)(6) is a procedural mechanism that allows a defendant being sued in Federal Court to seek an an order dismissing the case on the grounds that the complaint is legally insufficient and that, as a matter of law, it fails to state legal grounds justifying relief the court can grant.  Under the U.S. Constitution, Federal Courts have limited jurisdiction, and their authority does not extend to every dispute. Where a case fails to state a legal claim it will be dismissed. It is a potentially cost- and time-saving tool that allows for the early resolution of a case. If successful, the defendant can avoid incurring significant legal fees that otherwise would be necessitated by taking and responding to discovery and preparing for trial. 

In ruling on the motion, courts generally will not consider anything but the applicable law and the allegations in the complaint. Indeed, that is the point. Before the parties have to go through the expensive exercise of attempting to discover potentially relevant evidence, argue about and ask a fact finder to evaluate and determine disputed facts, the Court may first evaluate whether a complaint states a legal claim, assuming the alleged facts to be true.  If it does not, the case will be concluded at an early stage.

In the Prelude to Azanar action, the producers of the short film filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the complaint failed to sufficiently plead a cause of action for copyright infringement. They asserted that the complaint failed to give them sufficient notice of the copyrighted works they were accused of infringing and that certain elements were not protectable under the copyright laws in any event, such as characters, species, costumes, makeup, weapons, and starships. They also raised issues concerning whether Paramount had standing to sue, and various other arguments, including that the lawsuit constituted an unlawful prior restraint under the First Amendment. However, the Court rejected every argument and found the complaint sufficiently alleged viable claims for copyright infringement. 

The defense system did not succeed and the producers of Prelude to Azanar were unable to ward off the studios' attack, at least not yet.  But this was not a ruling on the merits and the case is far from over.  Instead, the battle will continue.  Discovery will proceed and the facts and evidence will be developed as the case progresses.  Who will prevail on the ultimate issues remains to be seen.  As Judge Klausner put it, "whether Plaintiff's Claims will proper" is an issue for another day. But at least for the moment, "Plaintiff's claims will live long enough to survive Defendants' Motion to Dismiss."

Watch this space for further developments.  The case is Paramount Pictures Corp. & CBS Studios Inc. v. Axanar Productions, Inc. & Alec Peters, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Case No. CV 15-09938 RGK.