Tell that to OJ SimpsonUnless you are a minority.![]()

Tell that to OJ SimpsonUnless you are a minority.![]()
Tell that to OJ Simpson![]()
If I create "Space Trek", the court wouldn't care when and who told me about "Star Trek" - it's enough they published it first and then they would simply look at how similar my "Space Trek" is to theirs.
Well, way to take a joke and kill it.Tell that to the people on the streets who are given summary justice for the skimpiest of reasons.
Infraction for referencing your old threat towards Rahul, which you already received an infraction for referencing before. Comments to PM.I'm always a bit worried replying to @Rahul, since he accused me of threatening to murder him once (lol), but I think he's just a bit upset CBS keeps #winning when it comes to Star Trek.
What's obvious is - these guys most likely copied his ideas - they were publicaly available, the final product is waaay too close to be coincidental - and now they using the law in a way to evade any kind of responsibility.
You're wrong on this. I don't know how much more plainly it can be said. Of course the plaintiff must demonstrate there is evidence of a case to answer, or people would be in court defending against frivolous lawsuits all the time. They need not prove it to the standard for a finding in their favour at this stage (convictions are criminal) but they must show the is evidence to back up their claim.
Edit: Taken to PMs.Infraction for referencing your old threat towards Rahul, which you already received an infraction for referencing before. Comments to PM.
You're already on thin ice, and your repeated mentioning of the threat and summoning him to read your post where you mention it is harassment. Knock it off.
You're wrong on this. I don't know how much more plainly it can be said. Of course the plaintiff must demonstrate there is evidence of a case to answer, or people would be in court defending against frivolous lawsuits all the time. They need not prove it to the standard for a finding in their favour at this stage (convictions are criminal) but they must show the is evidence to back up their claim.
Whelp, I guess I don't have to worry about hiring a lawyer now...So you're saying I'm not going to win in court for CBS stealing my childhood USS Discovery?
![]()
We're confusing two things here:
1) Could they have copied his stuff?
2) Did they actually copy his stuff?
No. 1) is clear: He published his work. CBS most definitely could have accessed and copied his stuff.
Thus, the court should go into phase 2): Did they actually do that. Which would be pretty easy to prove by just looking at the series bible from an earlier development stage.
At the very least, it's clear that Cosmos was much more widely viewed than Abdin's video shorts.I disagree. I think it is very possible they both watched Cosmos and through human sized tardigraades would be cool to make a sci-fi story about.
After the tardigrades, all the other stuff he is trying to claim CBS copied has no resemblance at all and trying to list all this stuff that clearly doesn't apply to me actually hurts his case more then helps it because it really looks like he is grasping at straws.
For a conviction - you'd actually have to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt".
That's would they should do IMO, to a reasonable amount.
No, we pretty much all know that being wrong doesn't mean you dis DIS.Also: Everybody here seems to think I want to use that to bash DIS somehow.
Why should CBS write a check if it is truly a coincidence? Do you realize what kind of floodgates that would open? They would be inundated with lawsuits.
Matt Damon. Don't tell Kimmel.Incorrect. The case is decided in that matter based on a preponderance of evidence. Not on "likely"
Honestly, this is really like kids that made a vinegar-and-soda volcano discussing how to terraform mars. I include myself in that.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.