Oh, so when fans fund and create large, ambitious fan productions, they're a threat to the integrity of the franchise, but for everything else they're inconsequential peons of little importance or value, right? There's a reason this argument seems circular: You're arguments are based on two different models of fandom: one where fans are weak when it comes to benefiting the franchise, and one where it's powerful regarding how they can hurt the franchise. You have to do this, because if the fans were weak in both cases, it wouldn't matter what they do and the Guidelines would be petty waste of time, and if they were strong in both cases, they'd be important enough to listen too.
So make up your minds. Are they a powerful threat (in which case they'd make a powerful asset), or are they inconsequential (in which case it doesn't matter what they do and they can be safely ignored by CBS)? You can't have it both ways.
When fans create Non-Licensed content (and raise outside funds in the thousands to million+ dollar range, yes, it hurts BOTH the integrity of CBS licensing, and overall long term profitability. Peters COULD have approached CBS/Paramount with his idea and asked for a license to do the project.
^^^
That's how it done. Is it easy to 'break in' and get a meeting? No, it's not, but that's how the process works - you pitch an idea tom the IP rights holder, and they ultimately say "Yes" and you then hammer out a contract, specifying what each side is responsible for, any monies to be paid, length of time to complete/deliver, etc. and move forward - OR - the IP rights holder says, "No, not interested."
Alec Peters tried to START A FOR PROFIT BUSINESS using the Star Trek IP to obtain crowdfunding. He also sold UNLICENSED Star Trek IP related products and had a revenue stream coming in from that.
If CBS/Paramount lets that slide; the ACTUAL Star Trek license holders (IE those companies that HAVE gone through the legitimate licensing process, and are paying money to CBS/Paramount for being able to market their Star Trek related items) would start questioning boy WHY they are doing so, since CBS/Paramount doesn't seem to care that others are doing unlicensed projects and getting money for doing so; or ask for a reduction, etc.
^^^
This is why said Guidelines are broad and cover all fan film situations (not just Peters and Axanar). I can guarantee they would rather ST:PII and STC had not gotten thousands of dollars for their fan projects; and employing SAG members who had worked on Star Trek projects before; but at least they WEREN'T claiming that the Star Trek IP was public domain because GR had never properly conferred Star Trek rights to Paramount/CBS - or further that they "Could do it 'better' than the professionals, and for less money too.." <-- Something Peters WAS claiming.
Peters situation got to the point where CBS/Paramount (after telling him at a Convention meeting that they were not okay with Axanar raising the funds it did; strongly suggested he stop <-- Yes, Peters claims they didn't tell him anything of the sort, but seriously in a credibility contest, I will take the word of the rights holder over a person who has already shown he is dishonest in raising and using funds as he outlines in various crowdfunding campaigns.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TLDR:
- CBS put out the Guidelines BECAUSE of the situation created with the Crowdfunding campaigns and other illegal revenue streams created by Alec Peters.
- They were broad because CBS was not happy about the fact that many Star Trek fan film groups were raising large sums and hiring current and former professionals to work on fan projects.
- Yes, the situation was affecting CBS long term ability to properly license and profit from the Star Trek IP which they own; hence the reason for the actions they took to correct that
