Hello all. I noticed on the mailing list archives that there have been some mentions of legal threats or claims of ownership made by Paramount/CBS as to the "unlicensed" use of Klingon.* If you or someone you know has received a legal threat over using Klingon, or assertion of ownership of Klingon as a language, from Paramount/CBS/Viacom, I would appreciate if you could forward me a copy / links of the original, off-list. (Even if it's from the 1990s or earlier.) Please don't send stuff about enforcing other aspects of Star Trek (e.g. Klingons as a race, storylines, logos, costumes, Klingon-language excerpts from published works, etc) — I'm only asking about claims of sovereignty over the Klingon *language* (including pIqaD). And no need to send stuff re Axanar. I wrote https://conlang.org/axanar ;-) If you know any law reviews / legal memos about it, please send those also. I'm aware of 3 (in addition to the amicus brief): 1. LCS' Dentons memo <http://conlang.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/Dentons-Conlang-Memo-public-version.pdf> 2. Michael Adelman - Constructed Languages and Copyright - A Brief History and Proposal for Divorce, 27 Harv. J. Law & Tech 543 (2014) 3. Allen-Franks, Copyright protection for individual words of an invented language, 40(5) EIPR 311-318 (2018) My intention here is not to start another thread about the law here (though discussion of C&Ds, "license" agreements, formal legal writings about it, etc is on topic). FWIW: in the Axanar case, we deliberately did not contact KLI because (a) timing was too tight, (b) our position needed to be staunchly independent, (c) KLI has a "license" agreement that makes its position a bit precarious to push or be overtly adversarial to Paramount, and (d) it'd risk waiving our attorney-client privilege. I hope that y'all understood that, and didn't take offense at what must have seemed like an out-of-the-blue intercession. However, I would appreciate comments (on or off list) about what you thought of the LCS' position in Axanar, or what you think about the potential outcomes if it were to be actually litigated to the point of getting a direct court opinion about conlang copyrightability (or trademark on "Klingon" when used to refer to the language). Sincerely, Sai Founder, Language Creation Society (Speaking purely on my own behalf at the moment.) * Collection of substantive discussion thread roots - please link any others I've missed: https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1994/February/msg00251.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1994/December/msg00411.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1995/April/msg00141.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1995/June/msg00413.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1996/February/msg00241.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1996/May/msg00196.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1997/January/msg00412.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1997/May/msg00422.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1997/May/msg00446.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1997/May/msg00453.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1997/May/msg00505.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1999/April/msg00178.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2001/May/msg00247.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2002/June/msg00330.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2003/July/msg00279.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2003/July/msg00316.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2003/July/msg00392.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2003/July/msg00399.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2004/January/msg00788.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2004/January/msg00800.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2007/February/msg00038.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2009/June/msg00149.html https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2009/July/msg00007.html