Are there still issues with film vs. TV rights now that CBS and Viacom are one again?

[The Overlord]

They really should have known better. If there were indeed a restriction preventing the TV shows from using something from the movies, that would mean they couldn't use the Klingon language since that originates from the movies. And if there's one thing Disco definitely used plenty of in the first season, it's the Klingon language.

But then this and the whole 25% thing prove just what a state of utter and complete covfefe Disco was in behind the scenes back then.

Was this 25% rule ever actually proven to have existed? I am curious what evidence there is to back up this notion?

 

[fireproof78]

Was this 25% rule ever actually proven to have existed? I am curious what evidence there is to back up this notion?

Same here. It sounds like Internet hogwash, at bests.

 

[F. King Daniel]

FYI, the Starfleet shoulder patch logo from Star Trek Into Darkness and Star Trek Beyond appears in the first episode of Picard, on the roof of the Quantum Archive building.

It could be another case of Franz Joseph's UFP seal being used in Star Trek IV and early TNG when they don't have the rights to it, or perhaps it's indicative that all Trek is fair game now.

 

[Christopher]

Was this 25% rule ever actually proven to have existed? I am curious what evidence there is to back up this notion?

It's a total myth, thoroughly debunked here: https://www.quora.com/Is-the-25-difference-rule-of-Star-Trek-Discovery-a-real-thing?

A while back, designer John Eaves (who has a long history with creating the look of the ships and tech of Star Trek) responded to a question on his private Facebook group about why they weren't sticking with the older designs. He explained that they'd been given a directive to try to make the tech look “about 25% different” from the stuff from the sixties. When asked if this was a creative choice or a legal directive, he said legal. When pressed on how this could possibly work with CBS continuing to issue licenses for model kits, games, comics, and books to use the original designs he replied that he wasn't the best person to ask, as he didn't really know that much about the legal wranglings that went on.

This entire exchange was later deleted by Eaves, and a correction was issued clarifying that this had in fact been a creative choice to try and update the original 60’s designs to take better advantage of modern effects technology rather than any legal requirement of their various licensing deals. Several YouTubers, however, seized on Eaves's original statement and suggested that the retraction and correction was some kind of conspiracy to hide some kind of legal chicanery and/or fool fans into embracing a false canon, which is why it has continued to spread.

In truth, it's far more likely that Eaves simply misinterpreted instructions he was being given as coming from the legal department rather than the creative team and, since he's already admitted to not following the details of the legalities for their various licensees, simply didn't question it.

 

[The Wormhole]

Was this 25% rule ever actually proven to have existed? I am curious what evidence there is to back up this notion?

Nope. The post Eaves made on his Facebook was the first time it was ever mentioned, and the next time was CBS officially debunking it. As for where Eaves got the idea, that's for him to know.

 

[1001001]

It cracks me up that anyone even believed that.

How in the hell do you measure "25% different"?

 

[The Wormhole]

I like the image in my head of a team of lawyers scrutinizing a fictional spaceship design to determine if it's legally different enough. "I graduated Harvard Law School for this?"

 

[1001001]

"I'm sorry, but this captain's chair is only 23% different. DENIED!"

 

[FreddyE]

"I'm sorry, but this captain's chair is only 23% different. DENIED!"

Wouldn´t that be "This captain´s chair is only 23 % different. Sheer fucking hubris! Request DENIED!" now? ;-P

 

[Tim Thomason]

It cracks me up that anyone even believed that.

How in the hell do you measure "25% different"?

Sigh.

Easy. If something is 50% different, it's halfway between the "original" and a new thing, sharing many elements between two ideas. If it's 25%, it's halfway between a 50% difference and the original.

Eaves had been instructed to make a ship that looked mostly like the original, but then halfway different, and then halfway to the original. Sharing design elements with Discovery, but mostly with TOS.

He was only talking about the Enterprise, and the reasoning from on high was probably not to cause a whiplash in design lineage, which would've happened if they used the Star Trek Continues ship or something.

25% isn't some android-level measurement of all the design elements measured against a base model. It's just shorthand for "mostly the same". It's not meant to be taken exactly literal, by fans, paralegals, or art designers.

 

[fireproof78]

It cracks me up that anyone even believed that.

How in the hell do you measure "25% different"?

Even if you do, as people no doubt will, it is entirely subjective.