If he had just made the movie, he probably wouldn't have been sued.
You don't get to start up a for profit business on the back of someone else's property.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
If he had just made the movie, he probably wouldn't have been sued.
You don't get to start up a for profit business on the back of someone else's property.
Actually the argument is really easy:
Peters and Company don't produce any shred of evidence. They just expect everybody to trust them and their "coming announcements", whereas Carlos and almost everyone else of us produce evidence in the form of footnotes or links to documents available for anyone to read. It's not just your "Friendly Neighbourhood Interpretation" but, in fact, reliable or circumstantial evidence.
If anyone on the Axanar side would produce something, anything similar, the whole discussion could and would have been abbreviated, cooled down, factual, whatever... instead of so heated! But the whole world shall just rely on promises and revised statements.
No, as long as those shenanigans don't stop, this thread earns it's existence alongisde any Facebook group relying on this topic.
So anyone can see that what Alec and Axanar have done are no different to any other production WORLD wide.
Now I can already hear those saying “Yes but this is a fan film”
So what? when has it ever been stipulated that a FAN FILM has to be “low tech”
This so much skips over the fact that while true, no one ever said a star trek fan film has to be "low tech" and it doesn't. A fan film is a group of like minded people that pool their talents together to create a fan film. This differs greatly from raising a million and a half dollars and sub contracting the creation out to professionals for financial gain.
Where's the gain you might ask?
A.) The funds were wasted on products and services which never produced a movie bringing financial gains to people around the production. (as we were told)
or
B.) The funds were never spent for the purpose they were collected for and spent or set aside in other accounts.
Either way, this is not an acceptable way to create a "Fan Film" Did the donated funds end up covering the rent for other "for profit" business such as Propworx? Money is spongeable, nobody accounts for money saved or not spent and rent alone could make a difference between making a profit or loss.
Alec and his associates said in their 2015 podcasts that they intended to make themselves a business and incidentally do Axanar as a calling card to convince the studios to contract them for more work. They were very very clear about this.
They induced donors to support this idea by saying in fundraisers they needed to fund a studio first, which I think is where the righteousness comes from -- "we told the donors what we intended to do, and they funded it, so we didn't cheat the donors".
Except
- it was illegal
- they never made the film, and overrepresented work done
- the expenditures make no sense, money gone
- supporters treated like a**s if they questioned anything
My touchstone: if DeForest Kelley were running this, would it have been done this way?
I would like to think they could have succeeded if they had just stuck to making the film. But it is clear the personalities they stood upon had entirely different motivations and qualities. I don' t think it could have happened, honestly.
My goodness this is spot-on. Although for TNG, the one on the lower left should say, "Trekkies start to say things like 'It's no TOS but...'"Saw this on one of the facebook groups and it struck a chord. The people blindly supporting LFIM as well as his other acolytes need to realize that this is really the 'order of things' (as the Jem'Hadar like to say). What is presented on screen (JJTrek, StD etc.) is hardly all that there is (they should really dive into TrekLit, ST: Online or start checking out some of the fan-produced stuff, whether filmed or written). I think once that point really sinks in, it will become easier to see LFIM for the arrogant charlatan that he is
IIRC that Kickstarter campaign was not really all that celear the money was going to a studio. I think most people thought it was going to make Axanar. Look at how many times he has revised the campaign page in the IGG during the campagn. Does anybody think that is the first time he did that?
The folks at "Swear Trek" posted a brief clip from Whom Gods Defraud
https://twitter.com/swear_trek/status/854349178910244864
https://twitter.com/swear_trek/status/854349178910244864
No... I'm not. I gave up any "hope" that Axanar was going to make it to existence a long long time ago. I'm just saying, that team demonstrated that they could do that style with Prelude, and doing the series that way would have been less expensive and more interesting, since we hadn't really seen that in Trek yet.
I don't think it would have triggered the guidelines, no. I think all the broo-ha-ha Alec stirred up himself personally is what caused this nonsense. I think Axanar Coffee and all that unnecessary merchandising is what caused the hammer to fall.
They don't have any excuses left, so it's time to scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Exactly, It's sort of another insult in a way.
But what about non-productions? That's really the comparable.
Yep which is why they are blaming the destractors for the failure of the IGG and interfering with Alec's business and lifestyle. lol. It could neve be because Alec did something wrong and people don't want to donate? Oh no.
Thanks bunches
I don't read it the same way
Who is Steven? From the wordpress url I am going to guess Steven Mayhew. Who is Steven Mayhew? I'm going to presume a donor/supporter.
Point well made
I will disagree. I saw someone reacting from his-or-her perspective to a perceived wrong and unkindnesses. Never mind that I also see mirror versions of this same thing being expressed from the dissenters being banned, dismissed, vilified, etc., by some of the donor/supporters, and its project head. What I read is someone pointing out his-or-her perceived hypocrisy in employing hate to take a stand against something.I'm going with hilarious.
Point well made
Reading that first article (I'm assuming more will follow) I read someone advocating for something he-or-she is strongly supporting.
I noticed information that conflicts with my own research.
I identified no use of 'blanket' terms grouping all dissenters together. I appreciated this. It is unusual in my own experience of some of those supporting this project. And in fact In Charge of this project.
Haterville. May I assume this is a FB page? And/or a subset of dissenters who are expressing their dissent, dissatisfaction, frustration, etc., in what one could observe to be a hateful way?
Who is Shawn O'Halloran? Did he write what is shown there about the IndiGoGo crowdfund? Is this true?
Reading further it looks to me like M. O'Halloran has a Very Good Reason to be angry and pissed as hell at the defendant.
Actually, I myself, feel the same. I believed 'in' the defendant. I felt betrayed by the defendant. I've felt anger & frustration too. I've researched the defendant and Strongly feel the defendant poses a significant danger of misuse of Other People's Money. His documented history is what brings me to this conclusion. I Strongly believe the defendant's past and present history with business practices and the use of Other People's Money should and needs to be highlighted for easy access to anyone who may in the future be considering giving him more money.
So since Mr. O'Halloran has actually known the defendant, been witness to abuses dealt out by the defendant, he is in a position to feel a dozen times more strongly than I. Feel the need to speak out a dozen times more strongly than I.
There is also an inherent danger in standing against that which Needs to be stood against. In doing so I risk becoming something akin to what I'm standing against. "When chasing monsters...." I "risk awakening the same evil within" myself.
Carlos is also pointed out as part of Haterville. I have no information on that.
That he is a journalist, or at least has been, is a point of fact. That his journalistic skills in researching are used in AxaMonitor is a point of fact. That the reason for the existence of AxaMonitor is to make public the false presentation of the defendant with thiswholething and to give an accurate accounting of what is going on with thiswholething is clearly stated from the get go.
Does doing this attach journalistic integrity for the facts, man, just the facts, to it? Is it instead an editorial blog? @carlosp, are you writing a personal editorial blog using your skills as a journalist, or are you doing reporting 'as' a journalist with AxaMonitor?
Anyway.... about this Haterville thing. I'm proceeding on the assumption this is a Facebook group. Please do correct me if I am wrong.
Is it one of the X vs X Facebooks? Is it public/private? Does it display posters using hate, mockery, vendetta directed at the defendant and the donor/supporters?
Last edited:
Carlos is the King of Haterville.
Through interactions with some of their more militant supporters (I know one good guy in the camp - love the guy, but the others I've had the misfortune to interact with are incredibly abusive!) Carlos is the devil. It's all his fault, he's the spreader of lies etc.
Obviously I've interacted with him here (outwith that I've emailed to ask if it was cool to use Axamonitor for some research in an article - not necessary by his words, but it's the decent thing to do in my mind and even credited him in my "thanks to..." section) but I doubt anyone from that camp has seen those interactions; yet it's HIS name that comes up at all points; he's a liar, a hater, don't listen to him (and other unsavoury comments they used towards the wrong man!).
He's the new Himnan, the focus for all things bad said about Alec Peters. Which is terrifying in a way.
Haterville, again from uninvited interactions with these types is CBS/Paramount v Axanar, a Facebook group. Which I think has dwindled with most falling to Mr Pedraza's own Axamonitor group
@jamestyler, thanks.
(am going to watch Jake Tapper right now to see if we're in a thermonuclear war yet with a crazy dictator who's threatened one)
EDIT:
Nope. Not yet.
(am going to watch Jake Tapper right now to see if we're in a thermonuclear war yet with a crazy dictator who's threatened one)
EDIT:
Nope. Not yet.
Last edited:
Point also well made
I choose not to comply. Idiocy has to be met with verbal objectiveness.
To quote the Talosian Keeper: "That is your choice."
- Status