Ha! Very true, but...
He insists that he has the perfect future for official Star Trek and demands that Paramount consider it. This will never happen.
Mark R. Gaebler
- Thread starter Mark R. Gaebler
- Start date
Okay? We all have unobtainable goals at some point in life. If he wants to mail them a script, more power to him.
I'm not interested in telling someone what they should or shouldn't do in life, it is their time to spend.
In your opinion.
And by the way, as far as I know, Judge Klausner has not made gender preference public.
The law says that a transformative, nonprofit, noncompeting work, which Axanar was (or was until Peters stole from the crowdfund), is fair use, so the judge's ruling was factually in error, but errant rulings are unfortunately often allowed to stand.
Lol.And by the way, as far as I know, Judge Klausner has not made gender preference public.
He said he's already tried to contact them multiple times and has been ignored, so he wants us all to demand that Paramount give him a meeting. That's ridiculous.
I can demand that everyone demand ice cream for dinner. I can demand it, but no one has to follow through as there is no gun to anyone's head.
Nor does it make them deeply delusional.
Yes, and if the ruling is unlawful there is an appeals court process.In your opinion.
And by the way, as far as I know, Judge Klausner has not made gender preference public.
Ah, there's the rub.
His Majesty proclaimed across the cosmos that Axanar was to be professionally produced, independent Trek: the Trek that fans wanted. That sounds a little like direct competition to me. Then he raised (and spent) over a million bucks, using someone else's intellectual property to do it.
That's not fair use or whatever else you want to call it. That's a con game, a grift. And when CBS/Paramount realized what was going on, they put their foot down.
You can disagree if you like, but Alec Peters took the settlement and has had his hands slapped for violating the deal.
That's the last I'm going to comment on the subject. There's plenty of in depth reading material covering the entire history of the debacle on this BBS if you care to take the time. I was there as it unfolded.
Cheers.
He thinks he deserves a meeting with Paramount and that there's a real chance of that happening. That's deeply delusional.
Yes, but there's also the reality that fans have very limited funds for legal proceedings while major corporations have unlimited funds and knowingly use protracted lawfare to bully others into going away.
It was going to be made for people who either had no interest in current official productions or were interested in both, so, no, definitely not competing. There's really no way for it to have competed against productions with over one hundred times its budget, anyway, and Abrams and Lin knew that.
Peters deserves punishment for stealing from the crowdfund, but not for raising a million dollars for a fan production.
*reads Axanar's Financials. *
Well, they use to have it.
No, it's not.
It's wishful thinking at best, and fanaticism at worst. Something all fans I've worked on fan films with have had.
It is competing, no it isn't competing. It was theft, pure and simple. No different than someone coming to your home, taking something and selling it. He then took the money, and spent, giving himself a paying job funded by CBS IP.
This isn't hard, he's a crook. And, he's a crook who screwed other and future fan film productions with his antics.
Why do their opinions matter?
Peters himself said it wasn't a fan film and he was trying to get it shown on Netflix. That's not what fan film producers do. He believed he was competing.
Yes, he is, but only because he stole funds, not because he crowdsourced a million dollars for a movie that would have been released for free.
That's been my point all along, that other productions shouldn't be limited or prevented. This all started because someone suggested following the fan film guidelines and I pointed out that those guidelines are ridiculous (especially the no more than two fifteen-minute segments rule) and are routinely ignored.
I acknowledge that Alec Peters is certainly a criminal.
It isn't our call to make, Trek belongs to CBS. People who take issue can either violate them, create their own IP or use a different IP.
It is the job of CBS corporate folks to protect the value of the company for shareholders and employees. I struggle to be mad about them protecting what is their property.
TOS belongs to them (until 2062-2065) because corporate lobbyists and lawyers succeeded in illegitimately rewriting the law against the public interest and explicitly against the original intent of copyright as established by the Constitution. Under the law in force when TOS was made, it would now be entering the public domain. The outrageous extensions Disney and others forced through with millions of dollars in 1976 and 1998 are essentially legalized theft from the public domain.
Someone made the asinine suggestion that I change the law back, as if I can do that. I can't, but I can acknowledge the illegitimacy of TOS being kept out of the public domain until the 2060s.
Shareholders and employees don't suffer from the timely entry of works into the public domain.
You can lobby for it to change.
Calling it out amounts to nothing.
And use trademarks to make money.
There are nonprofits such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Internet Archive, the Free Software Foundation, and the Organization for Transformative Works which lobby for copyright reform, but they lack the funding of Hollywood.
It amazes me still the cynicism. We're talking about a fan film that raised millions of dollars but raising money for a supposedly important cause? Hopeless.
I didn't say it's hopeless. One major point of optimism is that courts all the way up to the Supreme Court consistently refuse attempts by corporations and estates to illegally create de facto perpetual copyrights through misuse of trademark protections. The DMCA exemptions for videogame archival are another. Also, further copyright term extensions beyond the Copyright Acts of 1976 and 1998 are highly unlikely. However, those extensions are also highly unlikely to reversed, which is realism, not cynicism.
