I think CBS/Paramount has a magic-hypospray for that
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Just had a thought - the Judge's ruling, as I understand it, means that Axanar can continue to be made. If that is the case, can CBS/Paramount then outright win because Ares Productions has made a motion picture which fully violates the IP?
Why would they make it now? One of the cornerstones of their motion was that it was unripe, i.e., there was no move to sue about. Why make it so they COULD be sued?
At least, as it stands now, Peters can settle without possibly losing everything.
Well Alec said that he was going to move forward with making the rest of the film after the Judge ruled they could. Half thought His Honour was giving Axanar the rope to hang themselves
#
@GSchnitzer - did you post a minute ago? I see a space where you have posted, but there is no text at all
Alec seems to think they can go ahead and make it...
Oh he can if he wants to im just saying he'd have to be mental to think he'd be able to pay for it down the line if found guilty...
8mil is going to do him over if its that much let alone a guess of like 30mil if film is made lol.
What he says and what he does are different things. He might be saying things to keep the donor class happy. It's PR. I don't think he's so foolish as to make it in the MIDDLE of the lawsuit.
Wanna bet?
In addition to that possibility this statement by the defendant suggests to me, at least at this time, that this could indicate a possible alternative being currently entertained for proceeding with the film:
"move forward with telling the story of AXANAR in a way that satisfies both the studios and the over ten thousand fans who financially supported our project."
Having the movie lose every aspect of Star Trek, even to changing the name, could still be a movie well received by the followers because I do think the defendant has the ability spin and more importantly 'sell' any rewrite move made by the production, including removing every single IP that could be an issue for the Plaintiff, into being a Win for the production and the followers.
Sure, if Alec is enough of a draw to get Mel Brooks involved, they could even make me want to watch it. Anything is conceivable. But I believe Alec's ability to spin is still dependent on his audience's attachment to Trek. I don't think he has much draw otherwise, because he hasn't managed to make Axanar and thus bootstrap himself into an industry track record as producer. That plan has arrived at a different track record.
So maybe he'd have to write it. What could he offer of a Petersverse that could raise interest among "we paid for truer than true Trek like it was meant to be" fans?
Last edited:
I don't understand the faith that people have in Peters? Seriously, the guy has accomplished nothing other than bilking fans of a property out of cash.
He's a 56-year old man living off of fan film donations.
Does he still live in his mum's basement?
Well, if the film is made, than the donors get, more or less, what they paid for, and can't "lose money" due to the lawsuit and other risks. The film might not be as good or whatever, but it would exist. At the point the donor's funding has been used for its purpose, nor can they warrant a refund (well they can, but the film is made rather than pending to be made). Then all CBS can go after is Peters without the donor's needing to be involved, as the project would be finished.
This continues to baffle me. I guess he's just managed to say exactly what a certain segment of the fandom has wanted to hear.
I know, right? And here's a thing I'm noticing:
I've been watching the followers' posts on the production website. Watching their incremental rallying around every change and contradiction to something previously said. I admit it has begun to intrigue me enough into searching around to see where this kind of thing has happened before. I don't think the followers are fools or idiots or stupid or etc. And I am seeing a commonality showing up in lots of places - even outside of politics & religion.
Intelligent, non-stupid, non-fool people digging in to stand firm on something they have come to believe in for one reason or another.
You may not be old enough to remember the Pepsi vs Coke wars. Then came the studies, and actual filmed public blindfolded taste tests, with neither Pepsi drinkers nor Coke drinkers being able, in overwhelming numbers, to pick out that product they were rallying around with undying devotion. 'Even after' it had been proven to them by even using them in the tests that they could not tell the difference, they undauntedly continued to proclaim that their Pepsi and their Coke remained clearly superior.
This kind of devotion is exhibited everywhere, and as far as I'm finding, throughout all of history. From aquifer debates, to ST series and movie debates, to what's happening to the bees debates, to books vs film debates, to Grateful Dead followers, to whether real chili is sweet or tomato-y, to the Kes & Wesley Crusher debates, abstract art vs classical art vs manga art (etc), to the auto-emission debates, to Star War vs Star Trek debates, to fluoridated water vs non-fluoridated water, to starships&sci-fi vs history, to Apple vs all other computers debates, to classical music vs rock vs country vs jazz music (etc), to deforesting rain forests debates. This devotion to something or idea or person is a human proclivity, propensity for,... a 'thing' we humans do. It's exhibited everywhere and in most everything.. And from what I'm finding is having no correlation to intelligence in any way.
And this is the thing I'm noticing in the followers, whom I don't see can really be referred to as donors anymore because so many many donors I've seen or know have changed their views on this production and on this defendant. So I'm not seeing how the term donor is even applicable anymore. The people I'm seeing continuing forward are more like devoted followers. Just as much as the devoted Pepsi or Coke lovers remained, and remain for that matter. Or the Grateful Dead followers. Or the devoted tomato-y chili eaters. The football vs American football followers. Or classic art lovers. Or wine lovers. Or cat vs dog lovers. Or jazz lovers. It just is a thing we humans do. And I bet it's quantifiable when we learn enough to do so. I'll bet it can be mapped in the brain with FMRI right now if it were useful or interesting enough to fund it.
So that's how I've begun thinking the followers are going to go with and support this defendant and this film any direction the defendant moves with this production. And I reiterate I'm simply not finding any correlation to intelligence or lack thereof either. In this example or all the others that are so prevalent across humanity at large.
And it is an intriguing puzzlement to me.
Last edited:
I have a few friends that post or bring to my attention pro Axanar news and I explain it like this.
Axanar has collected $1.3 million and delivered a $10,000, 20 min flick and then run the ad to buy Axanar coffee.
- Status