JAMES CAWLEY SPEAKS!
- Thread starter HerbFlynn
- Start date
Respectfully correcting to "smallest male member, artificially inflating it to accepted normal specifications."Well, suing someone who didn't violate the guidelines could be interpreted that way (although there's nothing stopping from doing that), but I absolutely agree which party has been the biggest male member here.
I wouldn't expect them to either. That particular storyline is derivative of French comedy, and certain elements could occasionally be seen in the TV Westerns. It's certainly meant to be a change of pace between productions.
I'm not a purveyor of French comedy, but it was a pretty funny episodeI wouldn't expect them to either. That particular storyline is derivative of French comedy, and certain elements could occasionally be seen in the TV Westerns. It's certainly meant to be a change of pace between productions.
Thanks. It was a hoot to make. Really loved how the cast and crew of the Star Trek: Reliant productions got into character as Klingons.
Which is why guidelines (even ones that don't creatively tie one arm behind people's backs the way the current ones do) are merely a band-aid on top of the dysfunctionality of IP law.
Now, those who seem to think IP law isn't dysfunctional, well, we'll have to agree to disagree here. But there's absolutely two sides on this argument. For instance, if IP were strictly controlled to the letter of the law, a hugely popular site like DeviantArt would be gone in an instant. That has to be middle-ground between going all caps and declaring IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ILLEGAL - AND STILL IS and looking the other way to 1.4 million in crowdfunding, but slapping fan-film producers with creative constraints like runtime and recurring characters is excessive, IMHO.
The IP owners are stuck with the law as it is. I don't think anyone will argue that the copyright law is not outdated, but being pissed at IP owners because of an outdated law is being mad at the wrong party. Why are you not outraged at Axanar for their blatant hypocrisy in grossly violating every tenent of copyright law, while weeping, wailing and wringing their hands over the lack of guidelines, when the only guidelines that count are contained in the law. If you think they need to be changed, well, an awful lot of people agree with that, but being mad at IP holders because they acted as they are obligated to act within the "guidelines" of the law is being mad at the wrong people. If you feel strongly enough about changing copyright laws, the answer is to tell your Congress Members to get off their collective duffs and do something.
Why? Because they're probably not going to deliver a good fan film that I never gave money to in the first place?
Alec Peters didn't put a gun to the collective heads of the CBS/Paramount lawyers and make them write the fan film guidelines. Even if we assume he crafted the guidelines personally, CBS/Paramount were free to write whatever guidelines they wanted. Alec's actions in no way make the copyright holders less culpable for their own actions. In the end, they alone are responsible for their own guidelines.
Did he influence how far they took this? Perhaps. However, I think some people give Axanar too much "credit". Crowdfunding was always going to become an issue, fan films had been allowed to get away with a lot for a very long time, and Star Trek on television has only been declining in popularity over the years as production costs for science fiction have only increased. Sooner or later something had to give. Axanar was just the straw that broke the camel's back.
Careful what you wish for.
There is no ban on recurring characters.
I agree. It's just that a lot of the anger directed at various parties could be more productively spent elsewhere!Careful what you wish for.
You're kidding, right? Axanar was far more than just the final bit of straw on the proverbial camel's back. I can't see CBS issuing these same guidelines without AP's greed pushing them into it. To imply otherwise is being intentionally obtuse.
Wasn't Alec working on his own guidelines to release to fan films before the official ones came out?
I was going to say something, but "I have said enough".
Not at all. You're presuming there isn't another Alec Peters out there, which is kinda naive. It's like you think he's some special snowflake made out of pure evil. There are about 7.5 billion people on this Earth, and even if Alec Peters were one in a million, that would leave about 7,500 people just like him to take his place. Welcome to the banality of evil.
But let's say, for the sake of argument, that AP is some kind of Asimovian "Mule" who is one of a kind and could never be predicted. You're argument on the behalf of CBS/Paramount essentially boils down to "The devil made them do it". It's a defense for children, not people running a major franchise.
But if you disagree, just remember that it's not my fault. Alec Peters made me do it.
Actually, IP owners are not required to enforce the law; they don't lose any legal rights by *not* enforcing (I believe that trademark does require enforcement so as not to lose rights. or something).
That's literally all that CBS is doing is choosing not to enforce their rights under the law as long as certain conditions are being met.
WTF? So far, only one person has tried to take advantage of the star trek fan-film culture for personal gain, and persisted despite repeated warnings from CBS and a lawsuit.
Certainly if anyone else pops up trying to pull the same crap CBS should slap them down, hard.
First of all, I'll thank you to not take that condescending tone with me. Secondly, you're making an overreaching example thinking that there would be as many con-men in the Star Trek fandom as AP. As @Jedman67 said, the guidelines and lawsuit, instigated by AP's actions will have stopped any future attempts to fleece Trek fans to such an egregious, multi-million dollar degree.
Not stopped. Hopefully discouraged but Peters doesn't seem very discouraged despite the lawsuit and all.
I should've said it's likely stopped future attempts by other opportunistic Trek fans.
Technically true, but Renegades was pushing the envelope quite a bit as well.
The free-for-all mentality facilitated by crowdfunding created an environment for an Alec Peters to exploit, but had he not done so, I'm positive others would have.
It's really a chicken and the egg debate but I rest firmly on the side of it being the environment coming first and Alec coming later rather than simply saying Alec is the one bad apple that has ever been or ever would be. Too much of a simplistic boogeyman narrative.
We've seen this play out in a lot of ways, like the Napster era leading to a crackdown on filesharing and the rise of legit streaming services like iTunes, Netflix, Hulu. Technology opens a gap that causes people to warp/break copyright/IP law and then the rights-holders have to scramble to catch up.
Last edited:
