there's something else going on, too -- the claim that this work is so much better than all fan films and all things the studio is doing. what's *really* amusing is nothing original is there so far, once you take out the Trek IP.
IIRC, one of the things that tripped up the 1997 book, Sam Ramer's "The Joy of Trek", which didn't seem all that different to many other unofficial, unlicensed, non-fiction Trek guidebooks of the day, was the subtitling on its cover suggesting the book was "all you need to know", or similar, about "Star Trek". It was argued that the book aimed at bringing casual fans and non-fans up to speed, by summarising each Trek series and movie, and supplying backgrounds of major characters, alien races and events in the shows, and essentially eliminating the need for people to watch the actual episodes. It wasn't a supplement, like Bjo Trimble's "Concordance", it was more of a "Star Trek Lite". A joking premise, but ultimately the element that brought it unwanted attention.
Last edited: