Case dismissed! Discovery and Tardigrade game "not similar"

[Rahul]

If you have to put innocence in quotes then it is no longer presumed.

That was kinda the point though: Trump is "innocent" of using campaign money to pay off Pornstars. OJ Simpson "innocent" of killing his girlfriend. And Harvey Weinstein "innocent" of his behaviour toward women. Because none of these have been proven in court. This is in stark contrast to cases the public actually knows nothing about: When Joe Everymen gets questioned by the police, you should presume innocence until proven otherwise. If on the other hand a public thing happened, where all the details are readily available and obvious for anybody, but the courts don't manage to convict because of legal obfuscation, hung juries, or just plain old corruption, the situation is a little different. It's the difference between being legally innocent and actually innocent - i.e. never actualy doing the thing. Official media would use the word "allegedly" in such a case. BP "allegedly" criminally ommitted safety measures resulting in the Deep Water Horizon spill.

CBS allegedly stole the Tardigrade idea.
Better?

 

[Rahul]

I think the Dennis the Menace example is quite instructive (thanks, to whomever posted about it upthread, IIRC): exactly the same name, arrived at independently in the same medium, at the very same time, both originally published on exactly the same date, though in two different countries, but it's two different, though similar, characters, both of whose signature weapon is the slingshot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_the_Menace_(U.S._comics)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_the_Menace_and_Gnasher

Come on, indeed!

Good point!
Stuff like that actually happens. Since I'm sadly not familiar with each of these: How similar to each other are they actually beyond using the name for a schoolboy-protagonist?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Good point!
Stuff like that actually happens. Since I'm sadly not familiar with each of these: How similar to each other are they actually beyond using the name for a schoolboy-protagonist?

I'm unfamiliar with the UK version, so I can't say beyond some general observations.

Mr. Wilson is the man who the US Dennis regularly annoys. There seems to be no analog of him in the UK "version." It would also seem that the UK Dennis is more of a delinquent than the US Dennis, because Sergeant Slipper is a recurring police character in the UK version who is always trying to catch Dennis, but who has no analog in the US version.

Given this, I think it would be very safe to say that at least some and probably most of the stories are completely dissimilar.

 

[Photoman15]

Nailed it. While I don't like Discovery much at all, it's really CBS that I want to see get screwed by this lawsuit.

If you are a Trek fan then that is a stupid position to take. If they lose (or have to settle), they could decide ANY new Trek is not worth the hassle, and Trek dies. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

No, the judge would then have to recuse him/herself.

Why? Human judges sit on cases with humans.

 

[DaveyNY]

That was kinda the point though: Trump is "innocent" of using campaign money to pay off Pornstars. OJ Simpson "innocent" of killing his girlfriend. And Harvey Weinstein "innocent" of his behaviour toward women. Because none of these have been proven in court. This is in stark contrast to cases the public actually knows nothing about: When Joe Everymen gets questioned by the police, you should presume innocence until proven otherwise. If on the other hand a public thing happened, where all the details are readily available and obvious for anybody, but the courts don't manage to convict because of legal obfuscation, hung juries, or just plain old corruption, the situation is a little different. It's the difference between being legally innocent and actually innocent - i.e. never actualy doing the thing. Official media would use the word "allegedly" in such a case. BP "allegedly" criminally ommitted safety measures resulting in the Deep Water Horizon spill.

CBS allegedly stole the Tardigrade idea.
Better?

In that case...,
Abdin allegedly stole his uniform design from ENTERPRISE, cause they look exactly the same and ENTERPRISE was around a decade before Abdin started his project.

 

[BillJ]

I really don't care who "wins" as it doesn't affect me in the slightest.

 

[jaime]

I'm unfamiliar with the UK version, so I can't say beyond some general observations.

Mr. Wilson is the man who the US Dennis regularly annoys. There seems to be no analog of him in the UK "version." It would also seem that the UK Dennis is more of a delinquent than the US Dennis, because Sergeant Slipper is a recurring police character in the UK version who is always trying to catch Dennis, but who has no analog in the US version.

Given this, I think it would be very safe to say that at least some and probably most of the stories are completely dissimilar.

They are completely different, the US version cartoon and movie just drops ‘the menace’.
UK Dennis is....an antihero perhaps. A villain protagonist in the old days. He’s undergone...changes in the recent years. His female analogue is Minnie The Minx, Who May be Scots.

 

[fireproof78]

That was kinda the point though: Trump is "innocent" of using campaign money to pay off Pornstars. OJ Simpson "innocent" of killing his girlfriend. And Harvey Weinstein "innocent" of his behaviour toward women. Because none of these have been proven in court. This is in stark contrast to cases the public actually knows nothing about: When Joe Everymen gets questioned by the police, you should presume innocence until proven otherwise. If on the other hand a public thing happened, where all the details are readily available and obvious for anybody, but the courts don't manage to convict because of legal obfuscation, hung juries, or just plain old corruption, the situation is a little different. It's the difference between being legally innocent and actually innocent - i.e. never actualy doing the thing. Official media would use the word "allegedly" in such a case. BP "allegedly" criminally ommitted safety measures resulting in the Deep Water Horizon spill.

CBS allegedly stole the Tardigrade idea.
Better?

Not really, mostly because I think the conclusion has already been reached regarding the Tardigrade case. So, there is no presumption of innocence on the part of the public. So, why make such a statement and use "innocent" in quotes. It's pretty much just double speak at this point and serves no purposes in the discussion.

But, what do I know? I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV.

 

[Rahul]

In that case...,
Abdin allegedly stole his uniform design from ENTERPRISE, cause they look exactly the same and ENTERPRISE was around a decade before Abdin started his project.

Blue uniforms only function as "clothing" in each series - a concept certainly not able to be copyrighted. The design for the uniform is close, but considering the design pattern is the only property that would make each one unique - and they indeed aren't the same design - this design is not "stolen". So much is obvious even without being a lawyer.

Now, if said uniform had a very distinctive property that made it different from "regular" clothes (say, a third arm in the front), and if it would have a very specific plot purpose - say, it's the uniform that FTL-transports people through the galaxy, and - THEN, yeah, there would be an obvious case of copyright infringement.

 

[DaveyNY]

Blue uniforms only function as "clothing" in each series - a concept certainly not able to be copyrighted. The design for the uniform is close, but considering the design pattern is the only property that would make each one unique - and they indeed aren't the same design - this design is not "stolen". So much is obvious even without being a lawyer.

Now, if said uniform had a very distinctive property that made it different from "regular" clothes (say, a third arm in the front), and if it would have a very specific plot purpose - say, it's the uniform that FTL-transports people through the galaxy, and - THEN, yeah, there would be an obvious case of copyright infringement.

Better tell Abdin that, cause his lawyer used the uniforms as an example of CBS ripping him off in the suit.
(no pun intended)

 

[Rahul]

Better tell Abdin that, cause his lawyer used the uniforms as an example of CBS ripping him off in the suit.
(no pun intended)

Which is... stupid.
I mean, he could (and should!) make a point about the overlaying similarities in the work: Both the set design and the uniforms. Especially since the uniforms on DIS were originally supposed to be in the traditional Trek tri-colore (yellow, red, blue), but were mandated from above to follow the current design.
That can work as an indication(!!! - not more!) that someone higher up from CBS was familiar with the game - nudging the overall look to a similar aesthetic - and that familiarity could support the idea that the Tardigrade idea was actually directly lifted from the game.

But neither the look of the unifroms itself, nor pretty much anything else from the game (the hallways, space station, characters) actually are "stolen" - all these elements are very common and generic looking. It's really only the mansized FTL-Tardigrade that would be a case IMO.

 

[DaveyNY]

What I find fascinating is that a Human sized Tardigrade would not even be able to survive.

Tardigrades have an Exoskeleton, not an Endoskeleton.
(talk about screwing up the Science)

In order to survive being as big as a human, one needs bones on the inside to keep one from turning into a blob of skin, muscle, organs, and blood.

Physics act a lot different as an organism gets that much larger.
(that's why ants can lift many times their body weight but most humans can't)

 

[gblews]

It already has. This discussion would not even be taking place if it hadn't been eating into Trek mindshare.

If by "eating into mindshares", you mean DSC fans (and Trek fans in general) refusing to watch DSC (or other Trek shows) because of The Orville, then I would say that short of polling individual fans of both shows, this statement is simple unproven speculation on your part.

In fact, this is probably the reason for the humor in the DSC season 2 trailer (which doesn't appear to be filtering much into the season itself based on the newest trailer) and perhaps also led to greenlighting the Picard show. Subverting expectations and messing with canon has turned out not to be a successful way to nurture the brand.

DSC season 1 had it's share of humor, though thankfully, it never undercut the overarching drama of each episode. I expect that same low key approach humor to continue in season 2.

If you think that the reason we're getting another Trek show is because DSC was unsuccessful, then you may not understand how television works. Networks are loathe to throw "good money after bad", so if a concept or show is truly unsuccessful, it is highly unlikely that you would see a repeat of the concept or the show. If DSC had really failed, it likely would have been viewed as further proof of "franchise fatigue", the fake "illness" created by the Beebs to shift responsibility for their own failings to the fans, and Trek would once again be mothballed, at the least.

But obviously, that is not the case. At the least, the Picard show is proof of DSC's success.

So, on behalf of the fans who loved season 1, to all of the fans who "hate watch" the show, thereby further ensuring DSC's success, i say, thank you for your support. We luh y'all.

 

[Lord Garth]

I still don't get why so many people are determined to force an Orville vs. Discovery Rivalry, other than they need to have some type of rivalry. It's complete and total bullshit. I have no issue with The Orville and I'm not going to indulge in this nonsense just because I like Discovery.

 

[Rahul]

I still don't get why so many people are determined to force an Orville vs. Discovery Rivalry, other than they need to have some type of rivalry. It's complete and total bullshit. I have no issue with The Orville and I'm not going to indulge in this nonsense just because I like Discovery.

It's MARVEL vs. DC! Trek vs. Wars! Stones vs. Beatles!
I think the closer things are to another - and the more fanbase they share - the more obvious become the differences. It's easier to compare "Discovery" to "the Orville" than to, say, "Breaking Bad". And we humans love to compare and evaluate stuff. These are the perfect examples where the simple nuances shine brightly through, and people can (and will!) say which ones they like better.

 

[Lord Garth]

It's MARVEL vs. DC! Trek vs. Wars! Stones vs. Beatles!
I think the closer things are to another - and the more fanbase they share - the more obvious become the differences. It's easier to compare "Discovery" to "the Orville" than to, say, "Breaking Bad". And we humans love to compare and evaluate stuff. These are the perfect examples where the simple nuances shine brightly through, and people can (and will!) say which ones they like better.

The worst I have to say about The Orville is Seth MacFarlane's humor isn't my style, but it's kept to a minimum. That's all I've got. I have no issue with this show. I watched all of S1 as it aired and not since. I'll probably binge S2 at some point.

It does what it sets out to do, and FOX's categorization of shows for promotional purposes is too narrow. They want to market it as a comedy whereas it's a sci-fi show with comedic elements. The Orville is lucky Seth MacFarlane is at the helm or FOX would've tried to make him change the show beyond all recognition. Like they tried to do with Sliders 20 years ago, which was probably my favorite Non-Trek show during the '90s.

I'm a bad choice for an Orville vs. Discovery Flame War. For it to be effective, I'd have to believe The Orville sucks and I don't. I don't feel the same way towards The Orville that people who hate Discovery feel towards Discovery.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm a bad choice for an Orville vs. Discovery Flame War. For it to be effective, I'd have to believe The Orville sucks and I don't. I don't feel the same way towards The Orville that people who hate Discovery feel towards Discovery.

I'm the worst. I like Discovery (flat finale aside) but think it fails completely as an in-continuity prequel to TOS. As it's own version of Trek, no problems. I like The Orville too, but you'll never convince me it's anything more than an ultra-derivative, nostalgia-driven Trek wannabe with dick jokes.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm a bad choice for an Orville vs. Discovery Flame War. For it to be effective, I'd have to believe The Orville sucks and I don't. I don't feel the same way towards The Orville that people who hate Discovery feel towards Discovery.

Same here. Neither show I feel the need to compare one over the other. And, since I hate comparisons as a general rule (natural human behavior aside-thought this was a franchise that espoused humanity improving and evolving?) I will enjoy these shows as what they are.

 

[BillJ]

I like The Orville too, but you'll never convince me it's anything more than an ultra-derivative, nostalgia-driven Trek wannabe with dick jokes.

Except they have hardly any dick jokes. Those diminished greatly after the early part of season one.

 

[CaptainMurdock]

I can only think of maybe two instances where a dick joke was used. To call The Orville "TNG with dick jokes." is such a bad exaggeration.