The alleged legal battle with News of the World was a scoop reserved for Charlie Brooker's BBC Four show Newswipe, Atkins said. But the short Newswipe film detailing the struggle has not yet been aired.
Starsuckers was released in the UK last October and designed as an exposé of bad tabloid media practice. The film grabbed headlines for the way in which it used tabloids to spread fake stories with ease throughout the world, for example a story that Amy Winehouse's hair had set on fire.
Atkins has said the alleged NOTW threats over the original film's screening - which are as yet unconfirmed by News International - contradict the tabloid's own position on freedom of speech. Atkins cited, for example, that in May 2009 NOTW legal manager Tom Crone told the Culture Media and Sport (CMS) select committee, that the so-called Reynolds Defence for responsible journalism, should be made statutory law.
The purpose of the new film for Charlie Brooker's popular show Newswipe, was "to expose the gaping hypocrisy and contradiction of the NOTW's stance," says Atkins in a blog post.
"The piece gained even more potency after the NOTW broke the John Terry story, and Tom Crone had been publicly claiming that News International were ruthless defenders of free speech. Brooker's team had specifically asked us to hold back the story of our legal battle, to give Newswipe the exclusive."
In a further post Atkins writes: "Last week we were told categorically that the Starsuckers piece would be in Tuesday's [16 February] Newswipe. On the day of transmission we were told by the production team that the segment had been cut for pressures of time, just hours before broadcast.
"Further calls elsewhere in the BBC told us that the segment was cut as it was fraught with legal problems and that the Beeb did not want a lengthy battle with News International, a view further supported by messages we have received once it kicked off on Twitter."
BBC Legal cleared it, says Brooker
But Charlie Brooker and a spokesperson from production company Endemol UK deny the suggestion of legal fears over the new clip and say that the programme might still be aired:
"The BBC legal department cleared the Chris Atkins film," Charlie Brooker told Journalism.co.uk.
"It was, however, dropped from the episode when it became clear we didn't have time in the running order - or indeed, time left in the edit suite - to accommodate it in the episode.
"We may use it in future. The BBC legal department has been far from 'spineless' throughout the series. In fact they've been exemplary, and it would be unfair for anyone to suggest otherwise."
Following Brooker's statement, Atkins was "prepared to accept it was cock up over conspiracy," he later told Journalism.co.uk.
"[Brooker] suggests that they may use the piece in the future, which will now have to be in the next series," he wrote on his blog.
"This seems unlikely given that it's a topical news programme and that the next series will be going out nearly a year after the original story."
Legal arguments
The people behind Starsuckers were also approached by lawyers Carter-Ruck, acting on behalf of PR consultant Max Clifford, who was recorded secretly for the film, a story reported by Private Eye last year.
The Starsuckers producers told Journalism.co.uk they received a letter from Clifford's lawyers the day the film first screened in London, which requested changes to Clifford's scene in the film and stated: "Please may we hear from you by 11am confirmation sought failing which we shall advise our client to apply to the court for relief including but not limited to an injunction". The film was then screened uncut.
But Max Clifford claimed that his intention was not to injunct the film. He told Journalism.co.uk last year: "They [Starsuckers] have said to several people I've tried to injunct them. I haven't. [I] never tried to; it's not my nature. I just wanted to make sure that I knew exactly what they were claiming, that's all.
"Was I happy? Of course I wasn't. I'm not happy about having an off-the-record conversation with [Starsuckers] journalists and then find out that they're secretly recording it.
"I wasn't happy about it but I'm old enough and ugly enough to say well, there are some people like that.
"All I asked Carter-Ruck to do was to clarify exactly [because of] the letter they [the film producers] sent over."
Clifford told Journalism.co.uk at the time that he had no plans to see the film: "I won't be seeing it. I don't go to the cinema anyway. I've probably been once this year [2009]."
Following the film's screening, no further legal action was taken by Clifford or his lawyers. Starsuckers' own lawyer, Simon Goldberg, of Simons Muirhead and Burton, was delighted that the film was eventually released uncut, he told Journalism.co.uk.
"We knew that working with Chris Atkins on Starsuckers was going to be a legal headache, but we didn't quite expect all out war," he said.
"In the space of one week we fought off a threatened injunction from Carter Ruck who were acting for Max Clifford, and a slew of threats from three separate legal teams instructed by a News of the World journalist who, irony of ironies, my clients had secretly filmed.
"We were particularly surprised at [NOTW] demands to see the film before release, as well as full copies of the unedited undercover transcripts."
Free daily newsletter
If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).
