Babylon 5 and the absurdities of the plagiarism charge

[Bad Thoughts]

Dude you need to get off the forums and read some articles:
https://trekmovie.com/2014/10/13/be...-roddenberry-hated-star-trek-deep-space-nine/

Marina Sirtis said:
“The truth is that if Gene (Roddenberry) was alive- had been alive- DS9 would have never been made, because he absolutely said “no” to it when it was presented to him. He said ‘Star Trek is about exploring space, it’s not about a hotel in space.’ So, it would never have happened.”

I am aware what Marina Sirtis has said. She is not the only person to have weighed in on this. Maybe you should read further rather than cherry pick quotes.

Bear in mind. That JMS was pitching B5 for 5 years and was in discussion with Paramount about possibly doing the show until discussions suddenly stopped.

Yes, he did shop the outline to Paramount. And when it fell through, he revised it. I address this all in the OP.

Rick Berman said Sirtis is wrong and Gene loved the idea. Then later he said they never showed it to him at all.

No, that is not what Berman said. In Fifty Year Mission, Berman is quoted as saying that he, Roddenberry, gave his approval to start developing the new series, but that his health prevented him from participating in its creation.

What's a contemporary issue? Racism? So like when aliens were getting murdered on B5, and Delenn's friend got her forehead branded with a human supremacy symbol? Was that racism?

Homelessness. Malaise. All that stuff in Past Tense that literally takes place in our era.

You know what episode star trek never did? Believers. The episode where Dr Frankling does an operation to save a child against the religious beliefs of the family, and the episode ends with *spoiler* the parents killing the child. Did Star Trek ever do that episode? I doubt it.

Thank you for proving my point. Ds9 and B5 were two different series that happen to share a few premises. They were conceived independently. They evolved independently.

Hey guess what that's great but that wasn't my argument so, it doesn't mean anything to me. I never said JMS didn't borrow from tolkein, I mean they're called Rangers. Of course he borrowed from it. I also didn't say the shows different differ from the start, because they did- but the basic premise has a lot of similarities, the timing is very obviously in response to B5 as well, and the tonal change is probably in trying to make it more like B5. Or maybe just they wanted to get away from Gene's original vision which DS9 certainly did.

And the basic similarities are all scènes à faire. And if you knew more about the evolution of Star Trek from the creation of TNG onward, you would know how natural the creation of DS9 was. Read Fifty Year Mission.

Here's a history lesson for you.
Babylon 5 was a 5 season story.
During production of Season 4, they were told they wouldn't get a season 5, so JMS took all of the story left and crammed it into one season.
Then in the final hour of the show, they got a season 5.

That's why it sucks. I'll wager everyone who is a fan of Babylon 5 knows this. The fact that you don't know that, says you didn't do your research because a quick google search of "why does babylon 5 season 5 suck?" would have probably given you the answer.

I do know why season 5 sucked. JMS was inflexible and rigid. He decided to tell two seasons worth of stories in half a season. And then the series was picked up by another network. Had he worked with the parameters available to him, the outcome would have been more appealing.

It's not that he ran out of ideas. The story was done. He'd finished it. Imagine if DS9 or VOY had another season after its current finale? Would probably suck right. If you've ever watched the japanese anime Macross it's the same thing. TV has a story arc. Arc finishes. Then they want more episodes added on and the story after the main arc sucks.

He was done with THE STORY by the end of season 4. He was just filling out episodes thereafter that he had not anticipated writing.

 

[Akalabeth]

No, that is not what Berman said. In Fifty Year Mission, Berman is quoted as saying that he, Roddenberry, gave his approval to start developing the new series, but that his health prevented him from participating in its creation.

From the very article I linked you, that you obviously didn't read:

Rick Berman 2014
"Contrary to a comment from NY Comic Con, Michael Piller and I pitched our ideas for DS9 to Gene, and he gave us his enthusiastic approval."

Rick Berman 2006
"When Gene died, both Michal Piller and I were involved in creating and writing Deep Space Nine, and we never really got a chance to talk to him about it because he was quite ill at that point. But even with Deep Space Nine and later Voyager, and Enterprise I felt it was important that as long as something had the Star Trek name on it that it stayed true to Gene’s belief of what Star Trek was all about.""

Rick Berman, 2000
"I really never had the opportunity to discuss any ideas with Gene [Roddenberry]. This was very close to the end of Gene’s life, and he was quite ill at the time. But he knew that we were working on something, and I definitely had his blessing to develop it."


In case you missed the important points, Berman never discussed ANY ideas with Gene. He knew we were working on "something".

 

[Farscape One]

I love B5 and I love DS9. When I judge how good a scifi series, I use four shows as a basis for judgment... the above two shows, FARSCAPE, and THE TWILIGHT ZONE (1959). Different reasons for each.

I stopped the plagiarism charge game YEARS ago, because it ultimately doesn't matter. Both were high quality series, both had many excellent hours, both had great world building, both had a great cast, both had VERY quotable dialogue, both had some of my favorite ship designs, both had...

My list can go and on. My point is this...

Instead of arguing about a charge that may be coincidence or may be ripping off, how about sitting back and enjoying the shows as presented?

I've always hated these 'franchise vs. franchise' wars. STAR TREK vs STAR WARS... B5 vs DS9... Marvel vs DC. We can't help but compare, and I do the same thing. And I do love talking about some of the similarities and differences. But I have never let it stop my enjoyment of both sides of those 'wars'.

(Side note: while an 8th season of VOYAGER likely wouldn't be very good, I'd argue an 8th of DS9 would still be great. It can be the epilogue season, because DS9 was about more than the Dominion War. There was still Bajor to talk about, and the path to rebuilding the Alpha Quadrant would have led to some good arcs.)

 

[Akalabeth]

I stopped the plagiarism charge game YEARS ago, because it ultimately doesn't matter. Both were high quality series, both had many excellent hours, both had great world building, both had a great cast, both had VERY quotable dialogue, both had some of my favorite ship designs, both had...

Because it's a matter of integrity:

If someone out there, let's say George Lucas, makes Star Wars, and then he comes out and says that he loved flash gordon and he loved kurosawa then great. Cool.

But, if George Lucas doesn't do that, and after making Star Wars someone asks "Hey man, did you rip off Hidden Fortress?" and Lucas is like "No. Never heard of that movie until just now" then it's a different story.

And from what I know, George Lucas did the former. So Kudos to him. For naming his inspirations.

But that's the difference. Just give credit where it's due.

But Rick Berman instead went on to say:
"There was a time when, I don’t know whether it was specifically Straczynski or other people, it was implied that he had pitched an idea similar to DS9 to Paramount and that it had been rejected and that, lo and behold, a year or so later DS9 came about. The implication being that Michael Piller and I perhaps stole all or part of his idea, which was always amusing to Michael and I because it was completely untrue. We had no knowledge of this gentleman. If he did pitch something to Paramount, we never heard about it. DS9 was a show that was created by Michael and me and Brandon Tartikoff, who was the recent head of Paramount at the time, without any knowledge of Straczynski or of anything that he had ever pitched. So when we were accused of stealing his idea it was a little sad but at the same time a little comical to us."

Note the belittling and insulting manner at the end. "a little sad . . . a little comical". Seems a bit unneccesary, no? How about a simple "No, I never heard about it". But given Berman's own changing story about whether Gene's knowledge of DS9 I'd be suspect of anything Berman says.

There is also this quote from a former-WB employee:

A commenter named Steven Hopstaken left the following comment in the io9 article:

I was working at Warner Bros. in the publicity department when Warner Bros. and Paramount were preparing to launch a joint [emphasis mine] network. Warner Bros. already decided to buy Babylon 5 for their adhoc PTEN network (a group of independent stations that agreed to show Warner Bros. shows in prime time.)

Paramount and Warner Bros. both agreed that Deepspace 9 would be the show that would launch the new network and there wouldn’t be room for two “space” shows on the network. I was told they purposely took what they liked from the B5 script and put it in the DS9 script. In fact, there was talk of leaving the B5 script in tact and just setting it the Star Trek universe. I had to keep rewriting press release drafts while they were trying to make the final decision.

But then, suddenly, Paramount decided to launch a new network on their own and screwed Warner Bros. over. That sent Warner Bros. scrambling to create their own network; grabbing up any station not already committed to Paramount and getting WGN to show the WB network on cable.

So Paramount definitely knew about the Babylon 5 script, I don’t know about the DS9 show runners, but I find it hard to believe they didn’t know.
https://www.tor.com/2013/02/26/is-this-the-smoking-gun-proving-deep-space-nine-ripped-off-babylon-5/

 

[Farscape One]

EVERYTHING rips off something from other sources. It's been that way for decades... LONG before 90s.

I understand the integrity argument... I agree that integrity is very important.

But I don't think you realize the full history of DS9. One of THE cornerstones of that show is Ben and his son. We NEVER got that with B5. The closest was "BELIEVERS", and that is stretching the comparison to Stretch Armstrong levels. Note that Brandon Tartikoff was a major driving force in DS9's development. Berman's own words, too. You heard of a show called THE RIFLEMAN? DS9, at its core, is basically that show in space. He was the guy that offered that idea in and it clicked really well with Berman and Piller.

There's going to be similarities with both shows simply because of the setting. A station in one spot, at the center of commerce and political intrigue. It was bound to happen sooner or later.

And by the way, a lot of the groundwork that sets up DS9 was done on TNG. Cardassians, Bajor, the idea of a stable wormhole was done in a one-off in season 3, the battle at Wolf 359... and I'm only going by the pilot of DS9. Other things in TNG was created but expanded on later, like the DMZ. So TNG ripped off JMS' ideas?

Another thing to consider... DS9 did indeed have ships from the start. They're called Runabouts. The producers later felt it was too confining because they couldn't get the bulk of the cast in a tiny ship like that, which was one of the factors in creating the Defiant. B5, with the exception of Starfuries and the very rare transport to Sector 14 and Epsilon, had no ships where the leads can come and go.

 

[Takeru]

Everyone is on the verge of doing something, but actually doing the thing is what matters.

So what? JMS still didn't invent serialized storytelling.

Dude you need to get off the forums and read some articles:
https://trekmovie.com/2014/10/13/be...-roddenberry-hated-star-trek-deep-space-nine/

Marina Sirtis said:
“The truth is that if Gene (Roddenberry) was alive- had been alive- DS9 would have never been made, because he absolutely said “no” to it when it was presented to him. He said ‘Star Trek is about exploring space, it’s not about a hotel in space.’ So, it would never have happened.”

Roddenberry said "no" to a lot of things that Paramount then did anyway, he wasn't the one ultimately making decisions, if Paramount was interested in a show like DS9 they could have out in in development wether Gene liked it or not.
But Gene hadn't been in charge of TNG for quite some time when DS9 came around so what he would have done doesn't really matter.

They wanted a second Star Trek show, to differentiate it from TNG it wouldn't be set on a space ship and to allow for more conflict they wanted some non starfleet main characters, that's basically how we got DS9.

Note the belittling and insulting manner at the end. "a little sad . . . a little comical". Seems a bit unneccesary, no? How about a simple "No, I never heard about it". But given Berman's own changing story about whether Gene's knowledge of DS9 I'd be suspect of anything Berman says.

JMS himself says Berman and Piller didn't know, so why even bring him up?

Paramount and Warner Bros. both agreed that Deepspace 9 would be the show that would launch the new network and there wouldn’t be room for two “space” shows on the network. I was told they purposely took what they liked from the B5 script and put it in the DS9 script.

So the general idea of a space station and a female first officer? Yup, I'm convinced.
The scripts are have barely any similarities, DS9 did not rip off Babylon 5 because of some superficial similarities, this has always been a ridiculous claim. The shows are ultimately very different.

 

[Tosk]

The evidence which you neither refute [...]

Because there's not much to refute when it comes to supposition.

But if you insist, I'll do one.

8. Both feature small, cutting-edge hero ships specifically designed to tackle large interstellar threats (Shadows or Borg).

The Defiant appeared over a year before the Whitestar.

 

[Akalabeth]

JMS himself says Berman and Piller didn't know, so why even bring him up?

So what?
If JMS says Berman is innocent, we should believe JMS.
But if JMS says Paramount is guilty of stealing his ideas, then JMS is full of shit?

Does that about sum it up? If true, that's interesting how JMS's credibility changes to suit your opinion.

As for Berman. His own words prove him a liar. Mistaking the details is one thing, but mistaking the events? Something else entirely. Just because he's a liar doesn't prove that he knows, but the maliciousness of that statement I quoted suggests that he knew full well. Like Lady Macbeth. He doth protest too much.

Because there's not much to refute when it comes to supposition.

But if you insist, I'll do one.
The Defiant appeared over a year before the Whitestar.

We've heard that already, whether by you or someone else.
So if you pick one point to contest, I take you're conceding the other seven or more? Like if your counter argument addresses one thing, and ignores everything else, it just tells me you don't have an answer to that everything else.

 

[Akalabeth]

But I don't think you realize the full history of DS9. One of THE cornerstones of that show is Ben and his son. We NEVER got that with B5. The closest was "BELIEVERS", and that is stretching the comparison to Stretch Armstrong levels. Note that Brandon Tartikoff was a major driving force in DS9's development. Berman's own words, too. You heard of a show called THE RIFLEMAN? DS9, at its core, is basically that show in space. He was the guy that offered that idea in and it clicked really well with Berman and Piller.

Well of course they have to add some new elements. Don't want to get sued right? There's basically no children on B5 at all, whereas DS9 has Keiko's school. Some differences because like I said, plausible deniability- copy, but don't make it completely blatant. Like name the Lion Simba and make him normal colour, not a white lion named Kimba. Too obvious.(Even though oops, some concept art of a white simba survived). Also people are always going to change some things, execs in particular want to put their stamp on a product.

There's going to be similarities with both shows simply because of the setting. A station in one spot, at the center of commerce and political intrigue. It was bound to happen sooner or later.

Yeah bound to happen sooner or later, or, bound to happen so as to coincide with a potential competitor with a surprising number of common story elements.

And by the way, a lot of the groundwork that sets up DS9 was done on TNG. Cardassians, Bajor, the idea of a stable wormhole was done in a one-off in season 3, the battle at Wolf 359... and I'm only going by the pilot of DS9. Other things in TNG was created but expanded on later, like the DMZ. So TNG ripped off JMS' ideas?

Are you claiming that an episode which probably saved TNG from cancellation was simultaneously the groundwork for a spinoff series? Dubious. That isn't ground work, it's just drawing material from the show to try and make it fit into the series. Or- they like Sinclair's story and Wolf 359 was the parallel to the Battle of the Line. So slap it on Sisko.

But let's look at some timelines:

B5 was publicly announced Nov 1991.
Cardassians first scene in January 91.
Ro Laren first scene in Oct 1991.

Now we know Ro Laren was supposed to go onto DS9 to be Kira but Michelle wanted to be successful instead of typecast, so she bailed- but as the Bajoran she would be the first recognizable groundwork for DS9. And she's put onto the show a mere month before Babylon 5 is publicly announced? Or in other words, Paramount tries to get the ball rolling as the deal with WB is finalized? That's weird timing isn't it.

Now maybe the Cardassians are put in there for DS9 from the start- or maybe they're a cool enemy to add, which got adopted for DS9. Either way, they would've come in after JMS's pitch to Paramount. But in the end I'd think Ro Laren would be the first solid groundwork. O'Brian was tied to the Cardassian's first episode but it doesn't seem like he was pegged for DS9 early at all. He's only in 3 TNG episodes in 92 after being in like 10 in 1991.

Another thing to consider... DS9 did indeed have ships from the start. They're called Runabouts. The producers later felt it was too confining because they couldn't get the bulk of the cast in a tiny ship like that, which was one of the factors in creating the Defiant. B5, with the exception of Starfuries and the very rare transport to Sector 14 and Epsilon, had no ships where the leads can come and go.

Come and go where? In the first season:
- Starfuries went to other systems, mostly to fight raiders
- Shuttles to the planet below
- Shuttles to B4
- Delenn shuttle to Minbari Cruiser
- Catherine Sakai to Sigma 957
- Mollari would go to Centauri Prime, often, not sure if he did in season 1
- Season 2 started with G'Kar in a fighter on the rim
etcetera

But more importantly, B5 would show other perspectives. You didn't need a main character in a place to see the Shadows wipe out a Narn base for example. Earthforce 1. The Centauri base attacked. etc The viewer knew more than the characters did much of the time.

 

[Farscape One]

So JMS absolving Berman and Piller but saying Paramount ripped him off? Okay, let's address that.

Looking back at that time, when TNG, DS9, and VOYAGER was on the air... which, by the way, except for those first few months in season 3, DS9 never had time on the screen by itself... Paramount was in charge, overall.

They clearly made a lot of notes and asked for a lot of changes during VOYAGER's run, and they had their hands in TNG's cookie jar, too. Lots of interviews from numerous sources confirm this.

DS9 was left fairly alone by Paramount. They oversaw the money, of course, and a few major things, but they were pretty much left to their own devices. I've always argued that's part of the reason why DS9 was so awesome.

If Paramount was indeed guilty of the plagiarism, then how is it that the similarities you brought up occured on a series that they basically left alone because they were more focused on their more higher profile shows? (TNG being the big brother they were grooming for movies, and VOYAGER because it launched their new network.)

Like Kasidy Yates. She debuted after Piller handed the reigns over to Ira Steven Behr. (Even the episode credits show Behr went from Co-Executive Producer to Executive Producer at least 3 episodes before she appears. Production time wise, that's about a month or so.)

How about some of your other points?

1. Both commanders are broken survivors of a battle where their side got decimated (Wolf 359 and Battle of the Line)... Agreed, there are similarities. The big difference is Sisko is raising a son alone. Sinclair never had kids. THE RIFLEMAN in space. Changes a LOT of things for any person, real or fictional.

2. Both XOs are no nonsense women, and according to the B5 bible, both are prejudiced towards a former aggressor race (Ivanova was supposed to be racist against the Minbari as her brother died in the war)... Since we never saw Ivanova have a problem with the Minbari on screen, that point is rendered moot. Ivanova and Kira have a MASSIVELY different upbringing. So I think this nullifies that point, as well.

3. Both are set on space stations with diplomatic aims which are situated near an interstellar gate important for trade and commerce... DS9 was not setup as a diplomatic station. It was originally there to help REBUILD Bajor after the Occupation. It's not even built by the Federation, like B5 was built by Earth with lots of funding from Minbar. Which, by the way, THEY had the final say in who got to be station commander. Starfleet assigned Sisko there without consulting Bajor. And trade/commerce? I challenge you to find a scenario where any station, in space or on a highway, is NOT used for some kind of commerce.

4. Both feature a religiously-minded race that recently gained freedom from an occupying empire.... Exactly when were the Minbari occupied? Because if you are referring to the Narn, we don't really get a sense of them being so totally religious minded as the Minbari. Bajor is much more like Minbar in that regard.

5. Both Commanders are romantically involved with civilian ship captains... Refer to my earlier point about Kasidy.

6. Both stations become central bases in a large interstellar war... Both shows are the hero setting of each, so it's hard NOT to make them a central figure. Otherwise, why would an audience watch?

7. Both feature advanced, god-like aliens central to the plot which have a particular relationship with the Commanders... I will say this is hard to defend against. But while the Prophets were mentioned throughout DS9 and played key roles in some episodes, I'd argue they didn't get quite as central as the Vorlons and Shadows did.

8. Both feature small, cutting-edge hero ships specifically designed to tackle large interstellar threats (Shadows or Borg)... The Defiant debuted long before the White Star.

 

[Tosk]

We've heard that already, whether by you or someone else. [...] I take you're conceding the other seven or more?

I'm conceding there are similarities, absolutely. I'm not conceding that DS9 stole from B5 because I've yet to see proof.

Out of curiosity, if you already knew the Defiant came before the Whitestar, why did you include it in your list of circumstantial evidence that DS9 stole B5's ideas?

 

[kkt]

This is so ridiculous. The same coincidences blown up out of proportion.

You know what else had stations in space? Star Trek the original series, and other science fiction well before that.

You know what else had a strong, no-nonsense woman as 2nd in command? "The Cage" in Star Trek's original series.

You know what else had war stories? Millions of stories, from The Illiad on. Good, dramatic stories need conflict to drive the plot... and war generates a lot of conflict.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Because it's a matter of integrity:

Note the belittling and insulting manner at the end. "a little sad . . . a little comical". Seems a bit unneccesary, no? How about a simple "No, I never heard about it". But given Berman's own changing story about whether Gene's knowledge of DS9 I'd be suspect of anything Berman says.

Integrity? Interesting concept. JMS posts accusations in obscure parts of the internet, riles up his fans, who lead a crusade against the other series. When his studio reads him the riot act, he slinks away, claiming that "probably" nothing happened and the similarities don't matter. Every few years, he redeploys the accusation. He never provides DIRECT evidence of plagiarism occuring. Instead, he and his followers cut and paste a list of similarities that is terribly flawed and terrible vague. That's not integrity. He is not someone who in his words and those of his fans, is mature enough to move on. It is cowardice.

A commenter named Steven Hopstaken left the following comment in the io9 article:

If you note from my OP, Hopstaken never reappeared to provide evidence for his claims. More cowardice.

So what?
If JMS says Berman is innocent, we should believe JMS.
But if JMS says Paramount is guilty of stealing his ideas, then JMS is full of shit?

If JMS says that Berman (and presumably Piller as well) did not steal anything, that is the end of the discussion. Berman and Piller were television industry veterans with proven records. To believe that they could be duped into producing a replica of another series is beyond the pale of absurdity. They knew how to make characters. They knew how to make stories. They knew how to work with maekup artists and set designers and FX departments--all of which they had in place. They knew Star Trek after producing it for five years. They did not need help to make more. Moreover, we know a lot about how the studio inserted itself into the creation process. For instance, there is evidence, both from interviews and documentation that says how the studio, disappointed with the performance of DS9, told Berman and Piller and Taylor, "make it more like TNG!" A lot of ink was spilled on Star Trek in the Eighties and Nineties. There were whole magazines dedicated to it. People made it their jobs to just report on Star Trek. We know how each of these series was made in great detail.

Well of course they have to add some new elements. Don't want to get sued right?

How did you ascribe these motivations to Berman and Piller? This is the Tetris effect.

B5 was publicly announced Nov 1991.
Cardassians first scene in January 91.
Ro Laren first scene in Oct 1991.

Now we know Ro Laren was supposed to go onto DS9 to be Kira but Michelle wanted to be successful instead of typecast, so she bailed- but as the Bajoran she would be the first recognizable groundwork for DS9. And she's put onto the show a mere month before Babylon 5 is publicly announced? Or in other words, Paramount tries to get the ball rolling as the deal with WB is finalized? That's weird timing isn't it.

What does this matter? TNG built its own lore, adding to it over time. If the Federation had help to administer a Borg cube that had been taken over by the Ferengi, you would be ok with it?

This is a major fallacy behind those who push the conspiracy theory: they deny the right for DS9 to have any similarities, even when those can be proven to have long roots. Moreover, it shows that this is really a turf war. DS9 can't have a station, can't have ships, can't have other races, can't have women officers, can't fight, can't explore religion, can't keep coming back to the same stories, ... .

 

[Bad Thoughts]

2. Both XOs are no nonsense women, and according to the B5 bible, both are prejudiced towards a former aggressor race (Ivanova was supposed to be racist against the Minbari as her brother died in the war)... Since we never saw Ivanova have a problem with the Minbari on screen, that point is rendered moot. Ivanova and Kira have a MASSIVELY different upbringing. So I think this nullifies that point, as well.

It should be pointed out that Kira and Ivanona were both evolutions of Private Vazquez and Sarah Connor tropes. Indeed, it was Star Treks second attempt at this trope, Tasha Yar not working out in the long run.

 

[Farscape One]

Very true, and good point.

I figured I would keep to exactly what was shown on screen as evidence, which is one of the reasons why I didn't think that footnote was needed to nullify that particular point.

 

[Maurice]

You know if the circumstances were reversed, if DS9 were pitched to Warner who then made B5, many Trekkies would treat these plagiarism accusations as fact.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

You know if the circumstances were reversed, if DS9 were pitched to Warner who then made B5, many Trekkies would treat these plagiarism accusations as fact.

Don't most Star Trek fans appreciate what the Orville accomplishes creatively in spite of what it has borrowed from Star Trek? Some may dismiss it, but I see no apopletic reactions to the Orville.

 

[Akalabeth]

Out of curiosity, if you already knew the Defiant came before the Whitestar, why did you include it in your list of circumstantial evidence that DS9 stole B5's ideas?

For the same reason that people allege DS9 stole from B5 even though DS9 hit the air first. Just because DS9 went first to TV, doesn't mean an idea wasn't stolen from the pitch or from discussions with JMS. If B5 was conceived of and discussed as an idea first, then everything is suspect. Maybe the B5 bible, if it is accurate and complete- says otherwise, never saw it in its entirety.

Also demanding proof, I mean what do you expect? Some exec at Paramount to come clean with a public tell-all? The timing alone is suspect.

You know if the circumstances were reversed, if DS9 were pitched to Warner who then made B5, many Trekkies would treat these plagiarism accusations as fact.

Maybe- or given how many people supported that Axanar project, maybe a lot of Trekkies celebrate stealing ideas. Who knows.

 

[Akalabeth]

So JMS absolving Berman and Piller but saying Paramount ripped him off? Okay, let's address that.

. . .

DS9 was left fairly alone by Paramount. They oversaw the money, of course, and a few major things, but they were pretty much left to their own devices. I've always argued that's part of the reason why DS9 was so awesome.

. . .

If Paramount was indeed guilty of the plagiarism, then how is it that the similarities you brought up occured on a series that they basically left alone because they were more focused on their more higher profile shows? (TNG being the big brother they were grooming for movies, and VOYAGER because it launched their new network.)

Okay so then, JMS was wrong about Berman and company.
Really, I find it so funny that people place such importance on JMS's words when it suits their own narrative but completely disregard what he says when it doesn't. HE's either credible or he's not, and on the subject of Berman . . . Not sure if you're aware of JMS would have zero knowledge of whether Berman saw the pitch or not. Unless he was actually IN the pitch meeting, which JMS probably have mentioned. But evidently he wasn't there, so he wouldn't have clue whether Berman and crew saw or discussed the pitch or not.

And he absolves them because he assumes that their artistic integrity means they would reject the notion of stealing someone's ideas, but we already can see Berman is a liar from his quotes about showing Gene DS9. So personally, I think JMS gives them too much benefit of the doubt, at least publicly.

1. Both commanders are broken survivors of a battle where their side got decimated (Wolf 359 and Battle of the Line)... Agreed, there are similarities. The big difference is Sisko is raising a son alone. Sinclair never had kids. THE RIFLEMAN in space. Changes a LOT of things for any person, real or fictional.

I mean it changes things, but it also doesn't. Losing his wife makes the tragedy more personal. Give a more personal reason for him to be broken by the battle. Jake's inclusion allows for other story opportunities, sure.

2. Both XOs are no nonsense women, and according to the B5 bible, both are prejudiced towards a former aggressor race (Ivanova was supposed to be racist against the Minbari as her brother died in the war)... Since we never saw Ivanova have a problem with the Minbari on screen, that point is rendered moot. Ivanova and Kira have a MASSIVELY different upbringing. So I think this nullifies that point, as well.

I don't think it really renders it moot if it was in the bible. Especially since season 1 with IVanova came out a year after DS9 so JMS might have now been trying to distance it from DS9. Whether Takashima was prejudiced, don't know.

3. Both are set on space stations with diplomatic aims which are situated near an interstellar gate important for trade and commerce... DS9 was not setup as a diplomatic station. It was originally there to help REBUILD Bajor after the Occupation. It's not even built by the Federation, like B5 was built by Earth with lots of funding from Minbar. Which, by the way, THEY had the final say in who got to be station commander. Starfleet assigned Sisko there without consulting Bajor. And trade/commerce? I challenge you to find a scenario where any station, in space or on a highway, is NOT used for some kind of commerce.

Uh. Regula 1 didn't have commerce. The starbase in Star Trek III doesn't seem like its flowing with civilian ships either.

As for DS9. Picard specifically tells Sisko that his missions is to get Bajor ready to join the Federation, and he's concerned about inter-faction fighting on Bajor preventing this. Those are pretty diplomatic aims. There's not really much said about rebuilding at all. At the end of Emissary, he mentions commerce and science. Ds9 certainly doesn't have a full range of diplomats on board or anything. It's not the UN in space as B5 is meant to be.

4. Both feature a religiously-minded race that recently gained freedom from an occupying empire.... Exactly when were the Minbari occupied? Because if you are referring to the Narn, we don't really get a sense of them being so totally religious minded as the Minbari. Bajor is much more like Minbar in that regard.

The Minbari are spiritual and ritualistic, not really religious.
Whereas we see G'Kar praying, on screen, for a favourable outcome to his people's fleet getting decimated. There's another whole episode of Mollari screwing over G'Kar by buying a plant that G'Kar needs for a ceremony. We also have the Narn bible, the book of G'Quan, figuring prominently multiple times in the story. And G'Kar himself becoming a prophet or spiritual leader, in his own right, at the end of the series.

5. Both Commanders are romantically involved with civilian ship captains... Refer to my earlier point about Kasidy.

Sure, it's possible the new producer came up with the idea, and it's also possible that Sisko's character arc would have him meeting her from the get-go. I don't think it's unusual that he's going to find a new mother for his kid, as that's an interesting story to explore, but- her choice of profession is a notable.

6. Both stations become central bases in a large interstellar war... Both shows are the hero setting of each, so it's hard NOT to make them a central figure. Otherwise, why would an audience watch?

Yeah but the important thing is, Large interstellar war. Which until DS9 was completely antithetical to Star Trek. All of the major Federation conflicts, against the Klingons and Romulans, were pre-TOS. Everything since has just been an incident, or incursion, not a full-scale conflict.

8. Both feature small, cutting-edge hero ships specifically designed to tackle large interstellar threats (Shadows or Borg)... The Defiant debuted long before the White Star.

Yeah but was it mentioned in the bible, that's what matters. I'm sure Paramount and maybe any other studio JMS pitched the idea to would have asked "do they never leave the station" and the idea of a ship would have come up. Whether it was cutting edged and advanced, who knows. That could be the shows borrowing from each-other as they went along. Would need to see the pitch bible.

7. Both feature advanced, god-like aliens central to the plot which have a particular relationship with the Commanders... I will say this is hard to defend against. But while the Prophets were mentioned throughout DS9 and played key roles in some episodes, I'd argue they didn't get quite as central as the Vorlons and Shadows did.

Sure, the shows differ after the start. I think the main allegation would be that the people who made DS9, took ideas from the B5 bible. If Babylon 5 got announced, and they're like "oh man another space show, on a space station. We better make something similar" then sure right. They don't want competition, they want to bury the other show and make all the money- fine. But when DS9 comes out BEFORE B5 and a bunch of things are similar, then you're like- hey what, did you guys look at the pitch bible they sent?

JMS says I got an idea.
Paramount says we like your idea, no, wait, we don't like your idea. Thanks anyway.
Paramount releases DS9
JMS says hey a lot stuff here was my idea.

I didn't mention another thing that's specifically brought up, the Changeling Net. Which a Minbari uses to disguise himself- whereas Odo comes out and he's even called a changeling. The same bloody word. They don't call him a shape shifter, or a morphling, or I dunno- a doppleganger? or a morph. Or, anything right. there are options. But no, he's a changeling.

So what, did DS9 just happen to have a shapeshifter they called a changeling too? I kind of dismissed that at first, but- I think that's the real smoking gun now that I consider it . It's too on the nose.

 

[Farscape One]

You realize the name 'changeling' is actually from our own legends, right? A changeling is a fairy-child left in place of a human one because the human one was believed to be stolen by fairies.

The changeling net in B5 was a piece of technology that allowed the user to take on another identity. It couldn't turn said person into a bird or a stone. Odo was a living being that had the ability to actually change form. Birds, rocks, reflective material on a panel... though he had incredible difficulty with faces, which was part of the reason why we never saw him assume the identity of any solid.

You're really reaching with that one.


Wait a second... the crew of DS9 mentions that they are on a station. B5 crew also mentioned they are on a station. Stop the presses! The word 'station' was used. DS9 creators are plagiaristic!


And also, I give weight to what JMS said. He absolves the writers on DS9's staff. He mentions Paramount guided them throughout, but they very clearly left DS9 pretty much alone. I'm not saying he is lying or anything, but it is pretty clear he is mistaken. You don't have to be crazy or a liar to simply be wrong. No one's perfect.


Regula I... okay, good example of not being a commercial station. But that place was specifically for the Genesis project.


B5 being a diplomatic station... you made my point for me, saying DS9 was not set up to be that. Sisko was assigned to help them get ready for membership, and the best way to go about that? Rebuilding their broken society. It's a thread that was present for a long time on DS9. Hell, building is part of his nature... he came up from Engineering to command. He's building a life for his son and the people on the station. He built a solar ship himself.

And just because a series bible says it, doesn't make it absolute. If it's not onscreen, it's conjecture or planned but not done. Which is why I dismiss those things you mentioned as part of the series bible.