Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credited Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Axanar raised a million dollars the last two JJ films made $385,680,446 and $467,381,584 respectively, Axanar is frankly chump change.
Not even vaguely comparable... You're trying to compare production funds (apparently ) to profits received after a cinema release... They may both involve 'numbers', but they're utterly unrelated... Now if Axanar was to be released in cinemas worldwide, then by all means, feel free to compare their take to the take of JJ's movies...
From people whining on the inter net, just form the Youtube posting of said trailer
Dislikes: 23,700 Likes: 56,361
Just becuase people whine loudly about something online does not make them the majority.
I don't believe I said it constituted a majority, but that's still a fairly significant figure... Point I was making, is that the recent official Trek Output, has hardly been universally embraced and accepted...
Or they crush this going on with their plans and ignore the vocal minority as they have been doing for years.
Absolutely, although as mentioned above, the thing that said minority has in their favor, is their viewing time, and their money: Things CBS/Paramount want... One can only abuse fans so much before they turn against the former-idol...
Axanar Productions (and Mr. Alec Peters in particular) seem to forget what they've done to date (IE - Mr. Peters now claims he doesn't know where people got the idea that 'Ares Studios' was going to be used for other 'for profit' productions; or that Axanar backer/donor funds was used with that aspect in mind...
Sorry, but anyone who believes the only reason CBS/Paramount filed a lawsuit was because they were afraid Axanar would be too good/somehow show up either Star Trek:Beyond or the new in pre-production Star Trek TV/Streaming series; please wake up and smell the coffee.
Go say that to Melinda Snodgrass -- the person who's opinions you brought into this discussion -- I double-dare you...
CBS/Paramount sued because this guy is trying to start a for profit business using 'Star Trek' as a means to get the start up funding - and has been blatantly hawking unlicensed merchandise (Coffee, Calendars, T-Shirts) all under the guise of making a single fan film
You're confusing all the issues... CBS/Paramount are suing (according to the suit) for infringement. That's it. I don't dispute that those things are what Alec Peters is doing, but that is not (on paper) what he is being sued for...
sorry, but if you WERE making a single fan film with photography slated to last 3 weeks, and you are doing it 'efficiently' - do you really need a two story office block?)
Depending on the set requirements, yes... Continues needed a building of that size to build an engineering set... The bridge set for Continues (which I believe is used by several productions) is also not just a single story building, because it's ceiling-less set to allow for lighting, sound-recording equipment requirements etc. So yeah, they do need a two story office block.
Turning it into a film studio to make ongoing projects, on the other hand, not necessary, and not what they were given the funds for...
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Axanar Productions (and Mr. Alec Peters in particular) seem to forget what they've done to date (IE - Mr. Peters now claims he doesn't know where people got the idea that 'Ares Studios' was going to be used for other 'for profit' productions; or that Axanar backer/donor funds was used with that aspect in mind...
Sorry, but anyone who believes the only reason CBS/Paramount filed a lawsuit was because they were afraid Axanar would be too good/somehow show up either Star Trek:Beyond or the new in pre-production Star Trek TV/Streaming series; please wake up and smell the coffee.
CBS/Paramount sued because this guy is trying to start a for profit business using 'Star Trek' as a means to get the start up funding - and has been blatantly hawking unlicensed merchandise (Coffee, Calendars, T-Shirts) all under the guise of making a single fan film (sorry, but if you WERE making a single fan film with photography slated to last 3 weeks, and you are doing it 'efficiently' - do you really need a two story office block?)
Yeah, the more I read about what Peters has done, the more he sounds like a conman.
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
It certainly gives her a better insight into how CBS/Paramount operate, because she had to follow their guidelines to make submissions (which wound up on our screens )
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
It certainly gives her a better insight into how CBS/Paramount operate, because she had to follow their guidelines to make submissions (which wound up on our screens )
That doesn't give her any special inside into this case than any other lawyer. She hasn't had any formal CBS contact since season three of TNG. I am sure how CBS/Paramount handles things is different in 2016 than in 1989.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
It certainly gives her a better insight into how CBS/Paramount operate, because she had to follow their guidelines to make submissions (which wound up on our screens )
That doesn't give her any special inside into this case than any other lawyer. She hasn't had any formal CBS contact since season three of TNG. I am sure how CBS/Paramount handles things is different in 2016 than in 1989.
If you're going to dismiss what could legitimately be termed 'expert opinion', there's not really anything else I can say... Like I said, she knows how they operate(d), her opinion certainly counts for more than yours, mine, or anyone else (apart from Tony Todd) who's commented thus far on the matter...
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
It certainly gives her a better insight into how CBS/Paramount operate, because she had to follow their guidelines to make submissions (which wound up on our screens )
That doesn't give her any special inside into this case than any other lawyer. She hasn't had any formal CBS contact since season three of TNG. I am sure how CBS/Paramount handles things is different in 2016 than in 1989.
If you're going to dismiss what could legitimately be termed 'expert opinion', there's not really anything else I can say... Like I said, she knows how they operate(d), her opinion certainly counts for more than yours, mine, or anyone else (apart from Tony Todd) who's commented thus far on the matter...
I don't discount her expert opinion...just that we've had other expert opinions say the opposite. So if one out of three experts are saying something...why is that the one that you believe?
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
It certainly gives her a better insight into how CBS/Paramount operate, because she had to follow their guidelines to make submissions (which wound up on our screens )
That doesn't give her any special inside into this case than any other lawyer. She hasn't had any formal CBS contact since season three of TNG. I am sure how CBS/Paramount handles things is different in 2016 than in 1989.
If you're going to dismiss what could legitimately be termed 'expert opinion', there's not really anything else I can say... Like I said, she knows how they operate(d), her opinion certainly counts for more than yours, mine, or anyone else (apart from Tony Todd) who's commented thus far on the matter...
I don't discount her expert opinion...just that we've had other expert opinions say the opposite. So if one out of three experts are saying something...why is that the one that you believe?
For the simple reason, that Ms Snodgrass, as far as I'm aware, is the only one who's written for Star Trek, thus having direct experience with CBS/Paramount which the other experts have not...
I don't discount her expert opinion...just that we've had other expert opinions say the opposite. So if one out of three experts are saying something...why is that the one that you believe?
It's also very important to pay very close attention to exactly what she said.
Which is why she doesn't want to be associated with one while this case is ongoing. It's also key to note the use of "prediction". She's just guessing and she says so.
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
It certainly gives her a better insight into how CBS/Paramount operate, because she had to follow their guidelines to make submissions (which wound up on our screens )
That doesn't give her any special inside into this case than any other lawyer. She hasn't had any formal CBS contact since season three of TNG. I am sure how CBS/Paramount handles things is different in 2016 than in 1989.
If you're going to dismiss what could legitimately be termed 'expert opinion', there's not really anything else I can say... Like I said, she knows how they operate(d), her opinion certainly counts for more than yours, mine, or anyone else (apart from Tony Todd) who's commented thus far on the matter...
I don't discount her expert opinion...just that we've had other expert opinions say the opposite. So if one out of three experts are saying something...why is that the one that you believe?
For the simple reason, that Ms Snodgrass, as far as I'm aware, is the only one who's written for Star Trek, thus having direct experience with CBS/Paramount which the other experts have not...
in 1989...CBS/Paramount is not the same entity in 1989 that it is in 2016
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Don't need to be a mind-reader to have an opinion... Given the link crypticarmsman provided to some of Melinda Snodgrass' pages, it looks like I'm not the only person thinking along that line (that the upcoming series and Beyond are motivating factors) Like I said, I don't think (key-words there, it's just my opinion) that CBS/Paramount care about the money. There's certainly no mention of it in the lawsuit beyond an "fyi, they've raised $$s" If they cared about the money, I would have thought it would have been either more prominently featured, or even named that as the basis for the suit, as in "We only let fan projects raise upto $10k, per project, but they've raised $1m...", not simply cited infringements... (which, as mentioned, if Alec Peters can provide proof of guidelines given, gets dismissed as authorized (unless they cite specific guideline infractons)...) Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, and putting 2 and 2 together than getting 22, but given Ms Snodgrass' thoughts, I'm clearly not the only one thinking along those lines...
I don't buy it. IMO the new movie and series coming out have nothing to do with it. If anything, fan productions are free advertising for official Star Trek stuff.
That's certainly your prerogative But when someone who is i) legally trained and ii) a credit Star Trek writer feels that a point worthy of mention, I feel more like I'm at a target range, rather than just getting spun round in a blindfold and being told to pin the tail on the donkey
My 600 quatloos is on Alec Peters et. al using funds to turn a profit in some manner and using the Trek IP improperly to gain those profits.
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
And one, who wrote for Star Trek, who certainly seemed to think there was a connection...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
It certainly gives her a better insight into how CBS/Paramount operate, because she had to follow their guidelines to make submissions (which wound up on our screens )
That doesn't give her any special inside into this case than any other lawyer. She hasn't had any formal CBS contact since season three of TNG. I am sure how CBS/Paramount handles things is different in 2016 than in 1989.
If you're going to dismiss what could legitimately be termed 'expert opinion', there's not really anything else I can say... Like I said, she knows how they operate(d), her opinion certainly counts for more than yours, mine, or anyone else (apart from Tony Todd) who's commented thus far on the matter...
I don't discount her expert opinion...just that we've had other expert opinions say the opposite. So if one out of three experts are saying something...why is that the one that you believe?
For the simple reason, that Ms Snodgrass, as far as I'm aware, is the only one who's written for Star Trek, thus having direct experience with CBS/Paramount which the other experts have not...
in 1989...CBS/Paramount is not the same entity in 1989 that it is in 2016
Still more relevant that anyone else's experience of the issue...
You're confusing all the issues... CBS/Paramount are suing (according to the suit) for infringement. That's it. I don't dispute that those things are what Alec Peters is doing, but that is not (on paper) what he is being sued for...
CBS is suing Peters for infringement because that's what he did.... infringe on their copyright. CBS/Paramount have the right to sue for that because they own the IP. It's their property. The can sue anyone at anytime who makes a fan production of Star Trek, for profit or not.
I'm not saying that they don't have the right to do that. I'm just saying -- and was saying long before crypticmarksman linked to Melinda Snodgrass' thoughts on the topic -- that the proximity to Beyond and the new series is likely also a (if not the) contributing factor to why they issued the suit. And that they're going down the infringement rout because it i) is accurate (if permissions were not given) and ii) won't get laughed out of court...
CBS hasn't sued other productions because they weren't trying to make a buck off the Star Trek name. Soon as Peters crossed that line, CBS invoked their rights. Had he not tried to make money off it, I would near guarantee they would have left him alone.
Beyond may be the worst Trek movie ever and Axanar may have looked like "Citizen Kane" compared to it. So long as there was no profit making by Peters and crew, CBS wouldn't have batted an eye.
This is where we disagree... The money Alec Peters has made, is not CBS/Paramount's money, it's crowd-funded pan-handling money. Unless you're suggesting that CBS/Paramount care about their fans getting fleeced by a conman and are 'acting as Big Brother looking out for Little Brother', I can't see why CBS/Paramount would care about money being made from the infringement. It's the same as the whole homage watches, fake bag argument... Companies like to claim that money spent on counterfeits, is money taken from their pockets through lost custom. That is an utterly false premise, because the people who buy a counterfeit bag or watch, are highly unlikely to have ever bought the original in the first place. Maybe they don't want to pay an artificially inflated price-point, maybe they just flat out can't afford it, maybe they like the selectable range that a collection of replicas can provide, as opposed to being stuck with one genuine all the time. Whatever the reason, their dollar was never going in Chanel/Luis Vuitton/Rolex's till. Never. It's not lost money, because it would never have gone to them. CBS/Paramount wouldn't be down money, so they have no reason to care, and I doubt they care about the feelings of their fans (beyond getting them to buy tickets, merchandise and subscription fees...)
I don't deny that what Alec Peters has done with the money is wrong, but that's for the supporting donors to act upon to redress, not CBS/Paramount. Which is why it makes the most sense to me, that the proximity of Beyond and the new series, is a motivating factor. As above, Ms Snodgrass also said that, and for someone who works in the industry to say that, as I said, it makes me feel like my suspicions are on the right line, rather than that I'm just making a complete assumption...
I don't believe I said it constituted a majority, but that's still a fairly significant figure... Point I was making, is that the recent official Trek Output, has hardly been universally embraced and accepted...
I'd like you to name ANY 'Star Trek' produced by Desilu/Paramount/CBS in the last 49+ years that has been "universally embraced and accepted.."
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
I'm not saying that they don't have the right to do that. I'm just saying -- and was saying long before crypticmarksman linked to Melinda Snodgrass' thoughts on the topic -- that the proximity to Beyond and the new series is likely also a (if not the) contributing factor to why they issued the suit. And that they're going down the infringement rout because it i) is accurate (if permissions were not given) and ii) won't get laughed out of court...
So where are the suits for "Renegades", "Continues" and every other fan production out there?
I don't work for CBS/Paramount's legal team. Any answer I give would be pure speculation... That Ms Snodgrass chose to distance herself from Renegades, I believe is telling (especially as in the lawsuit, 'other Does' are referenced, ie everyone in the production, including writers) As someone who has passed the bar, she is not going to place herself in a legally actionable position. Continues, as mentioned upthread, have received CBS backing. Their work could actually be considered more of a violation than Axanars, as it uses principle characters, races, ships and uniforms, rather than secondary characters etc. However, their output, is roughly an episode every six months. They are not a competitor in terms of viewing figures, for a show which could be putting out a new episode every week... They are also, admittedly, not making any profit, so I can only assume that they work within any guidelines CBS/Paramount have issued. And while I'm not denying that Alec Peters may have indeed breached the only (according to the peanut gallery) rule he was given: Don't make a profit, that is not what is listed in the suit, only infringement of Star Trek's IP... They might not have been able to sue for 'being scared of the competition' without being laughed out of court, but they could certainly have cited that profitable behaviour as the grounds of their suit. But they didn't...
According to the law, it is their money. Peters used the Star Trek IP as a vehicle to obtain money to build a production studio that will later be used for profit.
Had the crowdfunding been for building a studio and then using said studio to make a non-profit Trek fan film, CBS wouldn't have batted an eye.
Then the law needs to be changed, because it is not 'their money', it is the money of the person who is spending it, to spend on whatever they see fit. If they choose to boycott a product/movie and spend their cash on a competitor, that is their right.
I don't disagree that what Alec Peters has done is dishonest and TRIBBLE, and I don't deny that he deserves to be held to account for it. But. If the suit they want to bring is for him making a profit, then they should have said that in the suit. Not simply used the infringement as a way of claiming damages from him. That is just ripping off the fans by proxy. Alec Peters ripped off the fans with the Kickstarter. CBS/Paramount are claiming financial damages, which will have to be settled out of that $1m. If they cared about their fans getting ripped off, they would not be demanding financial restitution, but a shutdown of the project.
I don't believe I said it constituted a majority, but that's still a fairly significant figure... Point I was making, is that the recent official Trek Output, has hardly been universally embraced and accepted...
I'd like you to name ANY 'Star Trek' produced by Desilu/Paramount/CBS in the last 49+ years that has been "universally embraced and accepted.."
No. Highlighting flaws in Past Trek, does nothing to excuse the flaws in Nu Trek. Just because aspects of Past Trek were not universally popular, that doesn't mean that Nu Trek is universally accepted. I'd counter that point, by suggesting that Continues and Axanar have been widely embraced by fandom. Beyond hasn't even been released yet, but the trailer was soundly thrashed in terms of reviews, even Simon Pegg wasn't happy with it... I would say that Renegades also has a strong following, but it also has also received strong and valid criticism in everything from production values, to acting, to writing. Renegades is little more than recorded fan-fiction, Continues, is widely accepted as a continuation of the Five Year mission... There are players of this game who have created themselves a Doctor McKennah, Rod Roddenberry has reportedly said that he considers it canon, and that he believes that if his dad was still alive, he would also consider it canon. That's very different to the sentiments expressed by those who don't like JJ, or don't agree with the writing of the films and Kirk's ludicrous speed of promotion, or who don't think Justin Lin is the right guy to direct Beyond... I know that the fandom can be pretty divided on things, but I see way more love on forum for Axanar and Continues than I have for JJTrek and Beyond...
...And while I'm not denying that Alec Peters may have indeed breached the only (according to the peanut gallery) rule he was given: Don't make a profit, that is not what is listed in the suit, only infringement of Star Trek's IP...
You're still not getting it. He obtained money to make a profit using the Star Trek IP. That's copyright infringement. Quality of the work has nothing to do with it. Peters wouldn't have been allowed to do it if Axanar was filmed in someone's garage with cardboard sets. He used the property of someone else to make money for himself.
Copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright law without permission, infringing certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works. The copyright holder is typically the work's creator, or a publisher or other business to whom copyright has been assigned. Copyright holders routinely invoke legal and technological measures to prevent and penalize copyright infringement[/b]
There's nothing in that which says that a profit, or any kind of commercial venture need occur for infringement to have occured.
While the Axanar Works can be argued to be infringement (depending upon what(if any) permissions were granted) the fact that a profit was made, is not a required qualifying criteria.
I don't deny that he used someone else's IP to make money for himself. But that is not a requirement for it to be considered infringement. The infringement is the use of the Star Trek IP. Period. Your assertion that he would not have been allowed to do it in someone's garage with cardboard sets, is disproven by the fact that Continues not only infringes the Star Trek IP, but does so in an even greater manner, by using principle characters, but still has CBS support and moral backing. The cultural phenomenon and awareness of Star Trek is mentioned in the suit. Go up to any random, and chances are they would have heard of Captain Kirk. Ask the same random who Garth of Izar is, and they might even say "Game of Thrones?" Now arguably, Continues has not made a profit, where Axanar has. But, as the above definition shows, profit is not a necessity for infringement to be claimed. The mere unauthorized use of IP is enough for infringement, and CBS/Paramount need to prove, that they did not grant Alec Peters any kind of permissions to use the Star Trek IP. I don't believe they will be able to do that, but that is just my opinion...
The suit lists infringement as the grounds for the suit, the $1m is simply referenced as an fyi, and as above, not necessary for the infringement to be considered to have occurred nor to be proven... As I said above, Axanar has made $1m off its supporters. If CBS/Paramount actually cared about the fans, they would not be demanding financial remuneration, but would simply get the production shut down, which would then still enable the supporting donors themselves to take a class acton against Alec Peters for his undeniable obtaining of funds by deception and fraudulent use of funds acquired in good faith. By demanding remunerations, CBS/Paramount is denying the supporting donors the chance of getting their money back, by taking that money from Alec Peters as damages... That distinction, undercuts any notion that they are going to bat on the fans' behalf, they are doing it solely for themselves. If their own interests come into play, as mentioned, Beyond and the new series must also be considered. Continues isn't a threat to those, but Axanar made (or rather would have made) a significantly bigger splash than Continues in terms of scope of project, and financial support from donors... I can see why Axanar would make the CBS/Paramount execs nervous in a way which Continues does not...
Beyond may be the worst Trek movie ever and Axanar may have looked like "Citizen Kane" compared to it. So long as there was no profit making by Peters and crew, CBS wouldn't have batted an eye.
This could be interesting... I now eagerly await the 'Beyond is worse than Nemesis/ST:V' threads and the raging forum fires as everyone tries to prove their horse is the worst ever
Beyond may be the worst Trek movie ever and Axanar may have looked like "Citizen Kane" compared to it. So long as there was no profit making by Peters and crew, CBS wouldn't have batted an eye.
This could be interesting... I now eagerly await the 'Beyond is worse than Nemesis/ST:V' threads and the raging forum fires as everyone tries to prove their horse is the worst ever
I can't compare Beyond yet without having seen it, but I would say that Nemesis is a better film to ST:V (although I think V did have some good bits...) I would rate Nemesis as significantly better than the Undiscovered Country... (but purely my opinion)
Beyond may be the worst Trek movie ever and Axanar may have looked like "Citizen Kane" compared to it. So long as there was no profit making by Peters and crew, CBS wouldn't have batted an eye.
This could be interesting... I now eagerly await the 'Beyond is worse than Nemesis/ST:V' threads and the raging forum fires as everyone tries to prove their horse is the worst ever
As someone once said, every star trek movie ever made has been voted the worst ever by the fans.
I feel it's nothing but PBS's ego being bruised. I myself am a BIG hater of the.....thing.....called JJ Trek. To me, JJ Trek is Trek in NAME ONLY. It feels nothing like Trek, and pretty much urinates on Gene's vision. It's nothing but dark, gritty action flicks, and big character butchering, plus I am NOT a reboot girl.
Stuff like Cawley's Phase 2 and Axanar are superior stuff because, unlike JJ Trek, they are made by FANS....not overrated directors who had no interest in Trek like JJ, plus he stated Trek was too smart for him when he was watching it as a kid (warning sign right there, folks), or bean counters who THINK they got talent (aka PBS/Paramount executives)....but FANS. And seeing the awesome stuff they make on small budgets, and sticking to what was made prior.....I feel PBS/Paramount are just bruised little brats who can't handle the idea that mere fans can make better stuff than they can.
If PBS/Paramount had any brains, they'd call up the Axanar folks and HELP them make this, it would really give Trek a boost and give something fans would like....not just cater to the average joe sixpack movie goer slob.
I feel it's nothing but PBS's ego being bruised. I myself am a BIG hater of the.....thing.....called JJ Trek. To me, JJ Trek is Trek in NAME ONLY. It feels nothing like Trek, and pretty much urinates on Gene's vision. It's nothing but dark, gritty action flicks, and big character butchering, plus I am NOT a reboot girl.
Stuff like Cawley's Phase 2 and Axanar are superior stuff because, unlike JJ Trek, they are made by FANS....not overrated directors who had no interest in Trek like JJ, plus he stated Trek was too smart for him when he was watching it as a kid (warning sign right there, folks), or bean counters who THINK they got talent (aka PBS/Paramount executives)....but FANS. And seeing the awesome stuff they make on small budgets, and sticking to what was made prior.....I feel PBS/Paramount are just bruised little brats who can't handle the idea that mere fans can make better stuff than they can.
If PBS/Paramount had any brains, they'd call up the Axanar folks and HELP them make this, it would really give Trek a boost and give something fans would like....not just cater to the average joe sixpack movie goer slob.
This has been my suspicion all along... What the lawsuit says may be technically true, but I'd bet TRIBBLE to gold that this is the actual reason behind it...
I feel it's nothing but PBS's ego being bruised. I myself am a BIG hater of the.....thing.....called JJ Trek. To me, JJ Trek is Trek in NAME ONLY. It feels nothing like Trek, and pretty much urinates on Gene's vision. It's nothing but dark, gritty action flicks, and big character butchering, plus I am NOT a reboot girl.
Stuff like Cawley's Phase 2 and Axanar are superior stuff because, unlike JJ Trek, they are made by FANS....not overrated directors who had no interest in Trek like JJ, plus he stated Trek was too smart for him when he was watching it as a kid (warning sign right there, folks), or bean counters who THINK they got talent (aka PBS/Paramount executives)....but FANS. And seeing the awesome stuff they make on small budgets, and sticking to what was made prior.....I feel PBS/Paramount are just bruised little brats who can't handle the idea that mere fans can make better stuff than they can.
If PBS/Paramount had any brains, they'd call up the Axanar folks and HELP them make this, it would really give Trek a boost and give something fans would like....not just cater to the average joe sixpack movie goer slob.
CBS.
And this is the fanboy reaction. "OMG they saw how good Axanar was going to be so they shut it down."
No.
While the filmmakers of “Star Trek: Axanar” appear confident that they’re operating in safe copyright territory, attorney Lincoln Bandlow, a partner at Fox Rothschild, LLP, insists otherwise.
“If it’s based on characters or other protectable elements of the ‘Star Trek’ work, then what they are doing is a derivative work and that’s a copyright infringement that is highly unlikely to be a protected fair use,” he said.
He added: “Just because there are a lot of these fan versions being done doesn’t make it legal.”
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Comments
100% in agreement with you there, and I hope that if the CBS/Paramount suit doesn't put Alec Peters in the poor-house, that a class action by donating supporters objecting to their funds being misused and obtained by deception, will... I've no sympathy for the dude whatsoever, I just don't believe that CBS/Paramount are only concerned about infringements, as the suit itself claims... But as I've said all along, trying to sue for being scared of the competition will get someone laughed out of court... Suing for (potentially) provable infringements, at least has legs to stand on...
there have been two other lawyers quoted in the thread that say it had nothing to do with the new show and Beyond.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I don't understand the point you're trying to make there... :-\
I don't believe I said it constituted a majority, but that's still a fairly significant figure... Point I was making, is that the recent official Trek Output, has hardly been universally embraced and accepted...
Hey, I've got no time for crowdfunding or the folks who support it... Once bitten, twice shy...
Absolutely, although as mentioned above, the thing that said minority has in their favor, is their viewing time, and their money: Things CBS/Paramount want... One can only abuse fans so much before they turn against the former-idol...
You're confusing all the issues... CBS/Paramount are suing (according to the suit) for infringement. That's it. I don't dispute that those things are what Alec Peters is doing, but that is not (on paper) what he is being sued for...
Depending on the set requirements, yes... Continues needed a building of that size to build an engineering set... The bridge set for Continues (which I believe is used by several productions) is also not just a single story building, because it's ceiling-less set to allow for lighting, sound-recording equipment requirements etc. So yeah, they do need a two story office block.
Turning it into a film studio to make ongoing projects, on the other hand, not necessary, and not what they were given the funds for...
does her writing for Star Trek make her extra lawyer-y?
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
My character Tsin'xing
That doesn't give her any special inside into this case than any other lawyer. She hasn't had any formal CBS contact since season three of TNG. I am sure how CBS/Paramount handles things is different in 2016 than in 1989.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I don't discount her expert opinion...just that we've had other expert opinions say the opposite. So if one out of three experts are saying something...why is that the one that you believe?
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
My character Tsin'xing
in 1989...CBS/Paramount is not the same entity in 1989 that it is in 2016
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
This is where we disagree... The money Alec Peters has made, is not CBS/Paramount's money, it's crowd-funded pan-handling money. Unless you're suggesting that CBS/Paramount care about their fans getting fleeced by a conman and are 'acting as Big Brother looking out for Little Brother', I can't see why CBS/Paramount would care about money being made from the infringement. It's the same as the whole homage watches, fake bag argument... Companies like to claim that money spent on counterfeits, is money taken from their pockets through lost custom. That is an utterly false premise, because the people who buy a counterfeit bag or watch, are highly unlikely to have ever bought the original in the first place. Maybe they don't want to pay an artificially inflated price-point, maybe they just flat out can't afford it, maybe they like the selectable range that a collection of replicas can provide, as opposed to being stuck with one genuine all the time. Whatever the reason, their dollar was never going in Chanel/Luis Vuitton/Rolex's till. Never. It's not lost money, because it would never have gone to them. CBS/Paramount wouldn't be down money, so they have no reason to care, and I doubt they care about the feelings of their fans (beyond getting them to buy tickets, merchandise and subscription fees...)
I don't deny that what Alec Peters has done with the money is wrong, but that's for the supporting donors to act upon to redress, not CBS/Paramount. Which is why it makes the most sense to me, that the proximity of Beyond and the new series, is a motivating factor. As above, Ms Snodgrass also said that, and for someone who works in the industry to say that, as I said, it makes me feel like my suspicions are on the right line, rather than that I'm just making a complete assumption...
I'd like you to name ANY 'Star Trek' produced by Desilu/Paramount/CBS in the last 49+ years that has been "universally embraced and accepted.."
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Then the law needs to be changed, because it is not 'their money', it is the money of the person who is spending it, to spend on whatever they see fit. If they choose to boycott a product/movie and spend their cash on a competitor, that is their right.
I don't disagree that what Alec Peters has done is dishonest and TRIBBLE, and I don't deny that he deserves to be held to account for it. But. If the suit they want to bring is for him making a profit, then they should have said that in the suit. Not simply used the infringement as a way of claiming damages from him. That is just ripping off the fans by proxy. Alec Peters ripped off the fans with the Kickstarter. CBS/Paramount are claiming financial damages, which will have to be settled out of that $1m. If they cared about their fans getting ripped off, they would not be demanding financial restitution, but a shutdown of the project.
According to this definition, no it is not...
There's nothing in that which says that a profit, or any kind of commercial venture need occur for infringement to have occured.
While the Axanar Works can be argued to be infringement (depending upon what(if any) permissions were granted) the fact that a profit was made, is not a required qualifying criteria.
I don't deny that he used someone else's IP to make money for himself. But that is not a requirement for it to be considered infringement. The infringement is the use of the Star Trek IP. Period. Your assertion that he would not have been allowed to do it in someone's garage with cardboard sets, is disproven by the fact that Continues not only infringes the Star Trek IP, but does so in an even greater manner, by using principle characters, but still has CBS support and moral backing. The cultural phenomenon and awareness of Star Trek is mentioned in the suit. Go up to any random, and chances are they would have heard of Captain Kirk. Ask the same random who Garth of Izar is, and they might even say "Game of Thrones?" Now arguably, Continues has not made a profit, where Axanar has. But, as the above definition shows, profit is not a necessity for infringement to be claimed. The mere unauthorized use of IP is enough for infringement, and CBS/Paramount need to prove, that they did not grant Alec Peters any kind of permissions to use the Star Trek IP. I don't believe they will be able to do that, but that is just my opinion...
The suit lists infringement as the grounds for the suit, the $1m is simply referenced as an fyi, and as above, not necessary for the infringement to be considered to have occurred nor to be proven... As I said above, Axanar has made $1m off its supporters. If CBS/Paramount actually cared about the fans, they would not be demanding financial remuneration, but would simply get the production shut down, which would then still enable the supporting donors themselves to take a class acton against Alec Peters for his undeniable obtaining of funds by deception and fraudulent use of funds acquired in good faith. By demanding remunerations, CBS/Paramount is denying the supporting donors the chance of getting their money back, by taking that money from Alec Peters as damages... That distinction, undercuts any notion that they are going to bat on the fans' behalf, they are doing it solely for themselves. If their own interests come into play, as mentioned, Beyond and the new series must also be considered. Continues isn't a threat to those, but Axanar made (or rather would have made) a significantly bigger splash than Continues in terms of scope of project, and financial support from donors... I can see why Axanar would make the CBS/Paramount execs nervous in a way which Continues does not...
This could be interesting... I now eagerly await the 'Beyond is worse than Nemesis/ST:V' threads and the raging forum fires as everyone tries to prove their horse is the worst ever
My character Tsin'xing
Stuff like Cawley's Phase 2 and Axanar are superior stuff because, unlike JJ Trek, they are made by FANS....not overrated directors who had no interest in Trek like JJ, plus he stated Trek was too smart for him when he was watching it as a kid (warning sign right there, folks), or bean counters who THINK they got talent (aka PBS/Paramount executives)....but FANS. And seeing the awesome stuff they make on small budgets, and sticking to what was made prior.....I feel PBS/Paramount are just bruised little brats who can't handle the idea that mere fans can make better stuff than they can.
If PBS/Paramount had any brains, they'd call up the Axanar folks and HELP them make this, it would really give Trek a boost and give something fans would like....not just cater to the average joe sixpack movie goer slob.
CBS.
And this is the fanboy reaction. "OMG they saw how good Axanar was going to be so they shut it down."
No.
While the filmmakers of “Star Trek: Axanar” appear confident that they’re operating in safe copyright territory, attorney Lincoln Bandlow, a partner at Fox Rothschild, LLP, insists otherwise.
“If it’s based on characters or other protectable elements of the ‘Star Trek’ work, then what they are doing is a derivative work and that’s a copyright infringement that is highly unlikely to be a protected fair use,” he said.
He added: “Just because there are a lot of these fan versions being done doesn’t make it legal.”
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.