CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
I think the worst, most abusive thing we've done here has been the whole "Fat Terry" nickname. Beyond that, it's been a discussion about the legitimate disappointment/outrage at what Peters has been doing along with following the evolution of the case and the inevitable coming out and voicing of all our concerns through the years as a group that has been villified by Peters for not drinking his Kharn Coffee-flavored Kool-Aid.
Thankfully for their closest supporters there is a safe and comforting place they can go and pay homage the Great Creator and offer up sacrifices in His Name - the "closed" Axanar Fan FB Group.
Nothing done or said there can be seen by anyone else.
Thankfully for their closest supporters there is a safe and comforting place they can go and pay homage the Great Creator and offer up sacrifices in His Name - the "closed" Axanar Fan FB Group.
Nothing done or said there can be seen by anyone else.
Someone must've said something about the theragen......
And they still kind of do 'participate.' Some of them read the thread, find a post that particularly gets their goat, and then post ridiculously obvious responses to it on the Facebook page.
Hardly 'rising above' our little rabble.
The only other things are probably Hinman's goof with the address, the 'Nazi' dumbassery, and the few deviations into Peters personal life. None of them passed without criticism.
Hardly 'rising above' our little rabble.
The only other things are probably Hinman's goof with the address, the 'Nazi' dumbassery, and the few deviations into Peters personal life. None of them passed without criticism.
Last edited:
Yes, and this is just imagining what it would be like for corporate IP holders. The same standard could very well apply to the starving author who has a potentially valuable property, but no massive legal team or army of assistants to defend it. Talk about killing creativity.
The one big difference (at least in my mind) is that Peters & Co. are completely amoral with respect to everything that's gone on (whereas I fell on my sword for a brief moment - anyone ever see Alec do that after one of his posts?)
At this point, with the self-delusion so ingrained, I don't think all the mea culpas in the world could affect public opinion....
Last edited:
A Youtube scrubbed of Star Trek. I'm sure the fans will appreciate that.
I'm sorry, excuse me? There was no goof. And this is the last time I am going to repeat myself on this issue. And I will provide emphasis to keywords and phrases here, so that you don't overlook them.
I had questioned Alec Peters about a company he created in Florida called Woodland Terrace Investments. In the discussion of that company, which was created in February 2015 — the same time period he was raising all this money for Axanar — I linked to a PUBLIC DOCUMENT that PETERS HIMSELF filled out. A document that WHEN you fill out, it WARNS YOU IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT.
On this PUBLIC DOCUMENT, Peters listed his corporate address for Woodland Terrace Investments using a property he owns in Florida. In cross-checking the physical address, once again USING PUBLIC RECORDS THAT ANYONE CAN ACCESS, I determined that this was an address Alec Peters purchased in March 2013, that it was paid for in cash (by the apparent absence of a mortgage, which also is public record in Florida), and was not his residence, because of the apparent absence of a homestead tax exemption.
Peters purchased the property soon after he defaulted on a timeshare in Florida. So it appeared to simply be a property that he either uses when he visits Florida, or rents out to others. The previous timeshare suggests the former, but the latter also was possible.
I did not choose to use that address as a corporate address in a public document. And no one knew who lived there until Alec Peters proclaimed it to the online world. I certainly didn't know anything about that, and once again, I am not the one who listed it on a public document.
Corporate records are public records in Florida because it provides transparency, the same with property records. You have a right to know what companies are forming or are exist, who the principals of that company are, how to contact that company if you wish to seek legal redress. And Peters could choose whatever address he wished as a "corporate address."
Before you throw stones, you need to make sure you understand the facts of something. Stop responding to emotion, and stop being manipulated by this sideshow that Alec Peters created.
The real question is, what is this company? Peters claimed to me that it was created to protect such property through a corporate ownership (which would make it more difficult for, say, CBS and Paramount later to claim that as a personal asset of Peters for a judgment). However, one thing I have pointed out repeatedly is that Peters never transferred the title of this residential property to the corporation, which would be required to at least try and have the protection of a corporation owner of a property, rather than a personal owner.
The last time I checked, which was a year after the corporation was created (and thus, plenty of time to make the transfer), the property has not transferred. So while it is very plausible that Woodland Terrace Investments was set up as a protection mechanism for real property Peters owns in Florida, he had not taken any steps that would be recognizable in a simple public records search to do what he claimed the company was for.
Thus, it leaves the question open ... what is Woodland Terrace Investments?
If you wish to be distracted by the other nonsense, that's up to you. But everything there was standard reporting. I've been doing it for many years as a business journalist, in Florida. And if material is public record, it's public record. Peters provided that information, not me. Anyone can find that information, with really minimal and basic search skills.
It's amazing how people will consume news and such, but get upset in the process that exists to collect that news. It's just like enjoying an amazing hamburger, and then complaining about the fact you had to kill a cow to have it.
Sigh... here we go again. The "corporate address" in question also happens to be where Alec's godkids live. That's right - now we know where his godchildren live. That's not creepy at all.
I think we all agree that personal stuff is not kosher, so when that particular fact was revealed more than a few folks felt it was better to move on and not continue that line of inquiry. Could Alec be involved in more shenanigans? Sure. But once kids are involved, any continued investigation could appear rather stalkerish. So most of us moved on. We aren't getting paid for this, and there isn't some overwhelming benefit to the public, so who cares?
I think we all agree that personal stuff is not kosher, so when that particular fact was revealed more than a few folks felt it was better to move on and not continue that line of inquiry. Could Alec be involved in more shenanigans? Sure. But once kids are involved, any continued investigation could appear rather stalkerish. So most of us moved on. We aren't getting paid for this, and there isn't some overwhelming benefit to the public, so who cares?
Correct me if I'm remembering wrong, but isn't Alec saying that publicly the only way anyone knows that? (Who knows if it's even true, given his problems with honesty.)
It's a bit like saying to him, "So, I see you have a car."
And he says, "How DARE you bring up the car I use to drive my sick child with CANCER to the doctor?!? HAVE YOU NO SHAME?!?!"
Wut?
There's a rather large group that are too stupid to realize that Lord Garth is leading the way to this brave new world.
^^Ugh. So it's some conspiracy on his part to conceal his dastardly deeds? He's not that bright.
To clarify - the "goof" wasn't the posting of the address. @Michael Hinman was doing his due diligence.
It was the continued discussion AFTER it became apparent that there may be privacy issues that was the "goof."
To clarify - the "goof" wasn't the posting of the address. @Michael Hinman was doing his due diligence.
It was the continued discussion AFTER it became apparent that there may be privacy issues that was the "goof."
It's not stalker-ish. Seriously, get over it. That is an insult to anyone who really has been stalked or is being stalked.
Peters could've used ANY address he wanted for that corporate address. He could've even filed as a foreign corporation, and used his California address. He chose the address he chose, and he's the one that revealed that "children live there."
Children live a lot of places. That doesn't automatically mean that the address is a state secret. Nor is knowing an address considered "stalking."
People throw the word "stalking" and "harassment" around so much, that when people really ARE suffering from stalking and harassment, it gets dismissed, because the claims are so overused. And that's terrible.
It's like when people would come to me from time to time claiming that they had a news story based on the fact they were removed from something. And they'll claim that it's because of their race, or their sexual orientation. That is a SERIOUS charge to make, and should only be used if that is INDEED the case. But if it's not ... and they are just trying to latch onto something, that only HURTS other people who are indeed being discriminated against because of their race, sexual orientation, or other issues.
It's highly inappropriate to deflect from an issue simply because someone makes some dubious claim. And it also opens the door for anyone who might indeed want to be doing something potentially wrong to then make sure they use an address for that thing where there are kids living, so that if someone exposes that potentially wrong activity, they can then deflect and say, "No! Kids here! Stalker!"
Tell me how dangerous that is.
Thanks for the clarification on this. I won't argue with that.
Well that was resolved quickly. How disappointing. This is the INTERNET PEOPLE! WE NEED MORE DRAMA!
- Status