Return to Answer

1. All filings in the case are collected here (by the Language Creation Society [LCS]) if you want to read for yourself. This is updated regularly by me personally (I'm on the electronic filing notice list for the case). Some minor things like proofs of service are omitted.
2. Very thorough general coverage of the case is at AxaMonitor. It has a significant anti-Axanar bias, but is the most thorough all-in-one-place resource on the case that I am aware of, and is very frequently updated.

Paramount claimed to own a copyright to the Klingon language itself and anything anyone might ever say in it. (We say they don't because nobody can own a language.)

We filed a hilarious amicus that gained international attention.

Paramount backed down.

The court has ruled on motion to dismiss and summary judgment, both times avoiding having to reach the Klingon language issue, but expressing skepticism that it can be copyrighted.

Very recently, Paramount backed down further, and the court ruled that no evidence about Klingon can be introduced to the jury.

While we didn't get a definitive ruling on the copyrightability of Klingon, that was unlikely. What we did successfully do was defense: we prevented negative precedent that could have happened had we not participated.

As of their last filing, Paramount was down to only wanting to claim that using Klingon was a point of similarity in Axanar, and now they're not allowed to even do that because of the MIL being granted.

Paramount does still claim to own Klingon, but they're no longer actually asserting that claim, at least in this case, because it's not necessary to the case (which is mainly about "substantial similarity", i.e. the overall Trek look & feel).

We'll continue to monitor the case but don't expect any further activity of concern to us, at least at the trial level. Appeals (by the parties, not us) might bring it up again; TBD.

As far as we're concerned, for now at least, we won what we wanted.

Outside of the in-court defensive effect, it's had a pretty large impact on US IP lawyers. Apparently our brief is starting to be used in IP law classes; it's been read very widely; virtually all lawyers (other than Paramount's) who've read it and posted about it have agreed with our position.

That means it's probably even more unlikely anyone will bring this to court again. Hopefully they'll know about our brief, be convinced that it's a frivolous claim to make that will draw strong opposition and a lot of press, and therefore won't even try.

But… if there ever is another case that implicates conlang legal issues, please do let us know. ;-)

Meantime, please read the last statement, and if you haven't, do read the amicus brief.

It is seriously hilarious. The humor and use of Klingon are both intentional, for the reasons explained in the statement.

1. All filings in the case are collected here (by the Language Creation Society [LCS]) if you want to read for yourself. This is updated regularly by me personally (I'm on the electronic filing notice list for the case). Some minor things like proofs of service are omitted.
2. Very thorough general coverage of the case is at AxaMonitor. It has a significant anti-Axanar bias, but is the most thorough all-in-one-place resource on the case that I am aware of, and is very frequently updated.

Paramount claimed to own a copyright to the Klingon language itself and anything anyone might ever say in it. (We say they don't because nobody can own a language.)

We filed a hilarious amicus that gained international attention.

Paramount backed down.

The court has ruled on motion to dismiss and summary judgment, both times avoiding having to reach the Klingon language issue, but expressing skepticism that it can be copyrighted.

Very recently, Paramount backed down further, and the court ruled that no evidence about Klingon can be introduced to the jury.

While we didn't get a definitive ruling on the copyrightability of Klingon, that was unlikely. What we did successfully do was defense: we prevented negative precedent that could have happened had we not participated.

As of their last filing, Paramount was down to only wanting to claim that using Klingon was a point of similarity in Axanar, and now they're not allowed to even do that because of the MIL being granted.

Paramount does still claim to own Klingon, but they're no longer actually asserting that claim, at least in this case, because it's not necessary to the case (which is mainly about "substantial similarity", i.e. the overall Trek look & feel).

We'll continue to monitor the case but don't expect any further activity of concern to us, at least at the trial level. Appeals (by the parties, not us) might bring it up again; TBD.

As far as we're concerned, for now at least, we won what we wanted.

Outside of the in-court defensive effect, it's had a pretty large impact on US IP lawyers. Apparently our brief is starting to be used in IP law classes; it's been read very widely; virtually all lawyers (other than Paramount's) who've read it and posted about it have agreed with our position.

That means it's probably even more unlikely anyone will bring this to court again. Hopefully they'll know about our brief, be convinced that it's a frivolous claim to make that will draw strong opposition and a lot of press, and therefore won't even try.

But… if there ever is another case that implicates conlang legal issues, please do let us know. ;-)

Meantime, please read the last statement, and if you haven't, do read the amicus brief.

It is seriously hilarious. The humor and use of Klingon are both intentional, for the reasons explained in the statement.

1. All filings in the case are collected here (by LCS) if you want to read for yourself. This is updated regularly by me personally (I'm on the NEF list for the case). Some minor things like proofs of service are omitted.
2. Very thorough general coverage of the case is at AxaMonitor. It has a significant anti-Axanar bias, but is the most thorough all-in-one-place resource on the case that I am aware of, and is very frequently updated.

• ETA: in fairness to Carlos Pedraza (who runs AxaMonitor), I mean "bias" as in the implicit sort that unavoidably nudges coverage. He does not, TTBOMK, leave out anything, he presents all the facts, etc; it's just that the interpretation is consistently anti-Axanar, as his behavior in fora. Unlike some other anti-Axanar people, he has been IME scrupulously civil.

ETA LCS POV summary of case progress re #3:

1. All filings in the case are collected here (by the Language Creation Society [LCS]) if you want to read for yourself. This is updated regularly by me personally (I'm on the electronic filing notice list for the case). Some minor things like proofs of service are omitted.
2. Very thorough general coverage of the case is at AxaMonitor. It has a significant anti-Axanar bias, but is the most thorough all-in-one-place resource on the case that I am aware of, and is very frequently updated.

• In fairness to Carlos Pedraza (who runs AxaMonitor), I mean "bias" as in the implicit sort that unavoidably nudges coverage. He does not, TTBOMK, leave out anything, he presents all the facts, etc; it's just that the interpretation is consistently anti-Axanar, as his behavior in fora. Unlike some other anti-Axanar people, he has been IME scrupulously civil.

LCS point of view summary of case progress re #3:

1. All filings in the case are collected here (by LCS) if you want to read for yourself. This is updated regularly by me personally (I'm on the NEF list for the case). Some minor things like proofs of service are omitted.
2. Very thorough general coverage of the case is at AxaMonitor. It has a significant anti-Axanar bias, but is the most thorough all-in-one-place resource on the case that I am aware of, and is very frequently updated.
3. The Klingon language aspect of the case is covered by the LCS here. That part is probably over now.*

1. All filings in the case are collected here (by LCS) if you want to read for yourself. This is updated regularly by me personally (I'm on the NEF list for the case). Some minor things like proofs of service are omitted.
2. Very thorough general coverage of the case is at AxaMonitor. It has a significant anti-Axanar bias, but is the most thorough all-in-one-place resource on the case that I am aware of, and is very frequently updated.

• ETA: in fairness to Carlos Pedraza (who runs AxaMonitor), I mean "bias" as in the implicit sort that unavoidably nudges coverage. He does not, TTBOMK, leave out anything, he presents all the facts, etc; it's just that the interpretation is consistently anti-Axanar, as his behavior in fora. Unlike some other anti-Axanar people, he has been IME scrupulously civil.

3. The Klingon language aspect of the case is covered by the LCS here. That part is probably over now.*