• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

Status
Not open for further replies.
I take your point that you don't like, don't want, what you've been given regarding Star Trek for maybe since 2009? Maybe even before? For years I felt that way about DS9.

I respect you in that without qualification.

What would you like to see in Star Trek that to you wouldn't be crap?
 
Last edited:
Or CBS needs to be the only one who makes crap and calls it Star Trek. You either like it or they'll take that away from you.

Has CBS decided to not allow for the release of home video or streaming versions of TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT and the original 10 movies and ONLY allowed for the release of the Kelvin and Disco-verses? Have they taken your copies away? Those rat bastards!
 
Has CBS decided to not allow for the release of home video or streaming versions of TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT and the original 10 movies and ONLY allowed for the release of the Kelvin and Disco-verses? Have they taken your copies away? Those rat bastards!
Just this morning, Les Moonves showed up at my place, knocked me out, and stole all of my Trek DVDs, scripts, and books. I've been bamboozled!
 
And it was already going into diminishing returns. Add in Disco and 2 new Trek films coming up, plus Guidelines, plus the fallout from the Axanar lawsuit, and now you've got a recipe for people being a lot more reticent about donating.
I forget the name of it, but there's a psychological effect where if you don't have a high enough price for your product, people will think your product is of lower quality and your sales will suffer. It wouldn't surprise me if, by instituting a caps on funding and runtime, CBS has put fan film producers in a situation where no one will fund them because their funding goals and projected run length suggest to prospective patrons a lack of ambition on the part of film makers.
This is how i solved my dislike of “star trek the motion picture” … I never watched it again. It was really simple."
Mark my words, though, you will be watching this movie on your death bed, because you'll want every remaining second you have to feel like an eternity! ;)
Yeah - it's kind of a difficult point to prove. I imagine - hope! - YT can tell if someone has bought views or at least if they would have a good idea of such. They are undoubtedly tracking IPs and so if a suspiciously large number of views are coming from IPs either directly linked to view sales or similar (as an unethical company such as that might be using a block of IPs), then YT should have a strong case for saying a particular channel was buying views. A meteoric rise in views, particularly from a channel that doesn't normally have that, would be a part of such evidence as well.
Actually, I was wondering if people couldn't use Amazon Mechanical Turk to pay random people to view a fan film. That way, all the IPs would be from distinct machines on different networks.
Yes, just like Ford needs to be the only one making Mustangs.
Give the way the car market is going for Ford, they may not be making Mustangs for much longer...
 
I forget the name of it, but there's a psychological effect where if you don't have a high enough price for your product, people will think your product is of lower quality and your sales will suffer. It wouldn't surprise me if, by instituting a caps on funding and runtime, CBS has put fan film producers in a situation where no one will fund them because their funding goals and projected run length suggest to prospective patrons a lack of ambition on the part of film makers.
The guidelines explicitly prohibit crowdfunding of $50k per "film".
JVC has stated that CBS doesn't care or track private donations or contributions that exceed the public limits.
Guidelines said:
CBS and Paramount Pictures do not object to limited fundraising for the creation of a fan production, whether 1 or 2 segments and consistent with these guidelines, so long as the total amount does not exceed $50,000, including all platform fees, and when the $50,000 goal is reached, all fundraising must cease.
 
The guidelines explicitly prohibit crowdfunding of $50k per "film".
Was that not what I was referring?
JVC has stated that CBS doesn't care or track private donations or contributions that exceed the public limits.
Yes, you can theoretically have rich friends fund a fan film, but in reality, most people will have to crowdfund to get any serious funding, so I don't see how it matters. You can't plan on Elon Musk to fund your fan film.
 
Theoretically, if your rich uncle donates a million dollars to your fan film, CBS has no objections.
I think they should not care if someone's uncle donated to a fan film. The masses are not being duped, and the other restrictions would prevent the film from being anything more than a fan film. That is, no threat to their IP and no threat that crowd funded money would be used to create a studio to compete with them.

If an uncle want's to put 1 million into someone's ambition to build a studio, why should CBS have any say in that. No one would be using the "Star Trek" name to fund the studio. It's motivated by an Uncle's love only.
 
The masses are not being duped, and the other restrictions would prevent the film from being anything more than a fan short film.
Fixed that for ya. The 15 minute time limit and the use of exclusively amateur cast and crew actually make the amount you can raise academic, because you have virtually nothing to spend it on. In fact, you might as well spend it on a studio, because otherwise all you can spend it on is frivolous things like solid gold phasers. Not that you need to worry about that, because you'll never raise a million dollars for a 15 minute film made by people with no professional experience.
That is, no threat to their IP and no threat that crowd funded money would be used to create a studio to compete with them.
Right, 'cause there's no way to economically build a studio to film a day's worth of footage on one set. You need to have a post fan film business or funding model.
If an uncle want's to put 1 million into someone's ambition to build a studio, why should CBS have any say in that. No one would be using the "Star Trek" name to fund the studio. It's motivated by an Uncle's love only.
I'm going to disagree with you here. Private entities with money to burn could build a studio, use it to film a Star Trek fan film, then use that film to attract business and investment. In fact, they could easily redress the fan film sets to look like generic sci-fi sets and rent them out to low budget sci-fi productions. The studio would still potentially be sapping viewers from CBS via productions they make after the fan film. By contrast, things like Renegades, STC and Axanar, while being generally successful in their fundraising, had to raise funds multiple times to get all their funding. They also had to deal with promises to contributors and shipping perks and the like, whereas a rich backer can self-fund with no restrictions.
 
But again, CBS has limited the guidelines to crowdfunding platforms. If someone wants to build a studio or soundstage with his own money, which is what Continues and New Voyages were doing initially, or builds a studio to rent out to different fan film productions, CBS doesn't care, as long as the actual fan films generally toe the line Re:Fair Use or the Guidelines.
 
I'm going to disagree with you here. Private entities with money to burn could build a studio, use it to film a Star Trek fan film, then use that film to attract business and investment. In fact, they could easily redress the fan film sets to look like generic sci-fi sets and rent them out to low budget sci-fi productions. The studio would still potentially be sapping viewers from CBS via productions they make after the fan film. By contrast, things like Renegades, STC and Axanar, while being generally successful in their fundraising, had to raise funds multiple times to get all their funding. They also had to deal with promises to contributors and shipping perks and the like, whereas a rich backer can self-fund with no restrictions.
On this point, I think I will say that CBS was merciful in their decision to settle and establish some guidelines. You know the saying, "no good deed goes unpunished". Hence, there is potential for harm, but still I think they did a reasonable job of balancing being merciful (perhaps to achieve other ends) and protecting their IP.

I think the risk is perhaps minimal. I make no claims to be qualified to make such a judgement, but I just can't help but feel that the business models that could cause harm to CBS are not particularly good ones. It will be interesting to see what CBS does if someone is smart enough to come up with a good business model and dumb enough to try it. :)
 
Last edited:
But again, CBS has limited the guidelines to crowdfunding platforms. If someone wants to build a studio or soundstage with his own money, which is what Continues and New Voyages were doing initially, or builds a studio to rent out to different fan film productions, CBS doesn't care, as long as the actual fan films generally toe the line Re:Fair Use or the Guidelines.
Like I said, I think the sound stage itself is a greater threat than any fan films produced there, because the original content doesn't serve to reinforce the franchise. For instance, one could make the argument that a good Enterprise fan film probably makes people more interested in Enterprise, whereas now independent series Renegades doesn't really do this.
On this point, I think I will say that CBS was merciful in their decision to settle and establish some guidelines. You know the saying, "no good deed goes unpunished". Hence, there is potential for harm, but still I think they did a reasonable job of balancing being merciful (perhaps to achieve other ends) and protecting their IP.
I would agree if not for two points. First, cutting the run length to 15 minutes makes it impossible to tell the type of story that a Star Trek episode or movie tells because of time constraints, or to tell a story arch due to the series prohibition. Second, they don't provide any license or covenant not to sue, so film makers don't really have any form of legal protection no matter how friendly and respectful they are to CBS or Paramount. Either of these would go a long way to making me think it's balanced.
I think the risk is perhaps minimal. I make no claims to be qualified to make such a judgement, but I just can't help but feel that the business models that could cause harm to CBS are not particularly a good ones. It will be interesting to see what CBS does if someone is smart enough to come up with a good business model and dumb enough to try it.
I too question the whole idea as a profit-making business model. As for something akin to a non-profit sound stage, I'm cautiously optimistic.
 
Like I said, I think the sound stage itself is a greater threat than any fan films produced there, because the original content doesn't serve to reinforce the franchise. For instance, one could make the argument that a good Enterprise fan film probably makes people more interested in Enterprise, whereas now independent series Renegades doesn't really do this.

I would agree if not for two points. First, cutting the run length to 15 minutes makes it impossible to tell the type of story that a Star Trek episode or movie tells because of time constraints, or to tell a story arch due to the series prohibition. Second, they don't provide any license or covenant not to sue, so film makers don't really have any form of legal protection no matter how friendly and respectful they are to CBS or Paramount. Either of these would go a long way to making me think it's balanced.

I too question the whole idea as a profit-making business model. As for something akin to a non-profit sound stage, I'm cautiously optimistic.
I disagree. I think a soundstage/studio is fine, as long as it doesn't run afoul of existing copyright/trademark laws, or the guidelines - which seem to exempt it if the studio/stage whatever is not built as a "star trek fan production".
If New Voyages hadn't gotten the studio licensing deal, I imagine that he'd "loan" out the sets for visiting fan films to make their own productions - and $50k is a lot easier to raise if you dont need to build any new sets.
I have no idea what Continues will do when they wrap; I don't expect them to demolish or sell off the sets (who knows?). So they have a few options: Seek a legal licensing deal with CBS to run the STC sets as a museum, similar to NV. They could allow others to use their sets to make their own 15 minute fan films. They can make a new set of fan films following guideline rules, etc.
 
I disagree. I think a soundstage/studio is fine, as long as it doesn't run afoul of existing copyright/trademark laws, or the guidelines - which seem to exempt it if the studio/stage whatever is not built as a "star trek fan production".
If New Voyages hadn't gotten the studio licensing deal, I imagine that he'd "loan" out the sets for visiting fan films to make their own productions - and $50k is a lot easier to raise if you dont need to build any new sets.
I have no idea what Continues will do when they wrap; I don't expect them to demolish or sell off the sets (who knows?). So they have a few options: Seek a legal licensing deal with CBS to run the STC sets as a museum, similar to NV. They could allow others to use their sets to make their own 15 minute fan films. They can make a new set of fan films following guideline rules, etc.
STC wrapped last year and they sold their sets lock, stock and barrel to a guy named Ray Tesi a number of months ago. Unclear what he intends to do with them now.
 
I disagree. I think a soundstage/studio is fine, as long as it doesn't run afoul of existing copyright/trademark laws, or the guidelines - which seem to exempt it if the studio/stage whatever is not built as a "star trek fan production".
From the standpoint of violating the legal rights of CBS, I get what you're saying, but from a purely profit point of view, I can see a new sci-fi franchise being filmed at a sound stage initially set up for a fan film and legally "stealing" some of CBS's profits. Heck, it might happen at the sound stage AP created and lost when he had to vacate. Some new sci-fi franchise may come along and rent that very building.
If New Voyages hadn't gotten the studio licensing deal, I imagine that he'd "loan" out the sets for visiting fan films to make their own productions - and $50k is a lot easier to raise if you dont need to build any new sets.
Maybe. I question if they could have actually made a profit off of renting the sets without pissing off CBS.
I have no idea what Continues will do when they wrap
The sets have been bought by a company called Stage 9 Studios last January, and will remain in the same building. The company is run by a fellow named Ray Tesi (who was a writer and co-creator for Starship Republic). He's stated "This is NOT a money-making enterprise", and it seems like he's going to let other people film on the sets, but his exact plans are unclear. He did relinquish some of the space to reduce the rent, so they lost a few rooms and the planetary set, but I think they kept all the other sets. (The company that moved into that space makes egg rolls.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top