• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you've ever met Peters in a comments section under any of his user names you'll know he's like this all the time to everyone. Not saying it makes him guilty, but this isn't a strategy. It's him.

I've heard that in several places, and I'll readily admit that most of us here wouldn't rally around to defend Peters or his actions. At the same time, I have to think some segment of fandom out there does believe Peters is the victim here; certainly on the Axanar Facebook group. He wouldn't even have to gain a tremendous amount of support, just a small amount could be considered a "success".

The danger is that Peters and his supporters are so vocal, we're running the risk of having them be perceived as the "voice of fandom". Peters and his Facebook followers do not speak for me or anyone but themselves. I wouldn't want them speaking for me unless I wanted to be characterized as a crazy person.

That has happened to a certain extent. Trek fandom is filled with the so-called "voice of fandom." Peters and Burnett, along with a few others, have become go-tos for quotes about STAR TREK. And the pop culture media generalizes and lumps all fans together because it makes for better clicks and views.

I've seen both Peters and Burnett at two separate conventions. I didn't care for either. However, when Peters is amongst his acolytes, he is very charming. It's easy to see how he's snake charmed an entire following. He's convinced them him and his project are Trek's salvation.

Burnett is a blowhard who pontificates like he is a bastion of STAR TREK.

Even worse than those two (IMHO) is David Gerrold, who should know better, even if this is a benign comment. Here's what he had to say about this incident:

David Gerrold's statement about the Axanar lawsuit

Apologies if this has already been posted.
 
I just responded to a guy who said he couldn't wait for CBS to be under oath, explaining why their work doesn't look as good as Axanar. I tried to explain to him that his subjective idea of "what looks good" isn't going to have any bearing at all in testimony, at least not on CBS. I explained that if anyone will have to explain themselves, it's Axanar, since CBS is the one who filed the lawsuit.

Because CBS has to actually abide by union regulations, state and Federal laws! :guffaw:
 
As for licensing fan productions to create an unofficial expanded universe that will never and should never happen as it really does dilute your source material

I don't think CBS/Paramount will try to meet fans half-way, but your argument that fan-films are only negative due to dilution of brand is contradicted by the volume of ancillary story material that has and continues to come out legitimately--through books (or comics).

I didn't mean, or intentionally mean, that fan films are negative; I think they are a positive thing and have enjoyed a number of them. Not all are to my taste and just like any series not everything put out by a producer that I like do I enjoy. What I meant is an endorsed expanded universe could run into trouble keeping everything straight and lead again to franchise fatigue.

I prefer to keep my official and unofficial timelines seperate and for me its not that hard and actually enriches the experience of enjoying whatever franchise is at hand. Like comic books and comic book movies; I like it when the source material is referenced but I am not going to get funny if they change something to better fit their cinematic universe as they are separate entities. So with Star Trek the books have always been removed from the shows and films (which is funny watching friends more heavily invested in the Star Wars EU try and do the same now) just as the Prime and NuTrek timelines are now seperate... Means I can enjoy more than some others who can't get past the changes.

Sorry if none of this makes any real sense my head can be a real strange place to inhabit :techman:
 
I just responded to a guy who said he couldn't wait for CBS to be under oath, explaining why their work doesn't look as good as Axanar. I tried to explain to him that his subjective idea of "what looks good" isn't going to have any bearing at all in testimony, at least not on CBS. I explained that if anyone will have to explain themselves, it's Axanar, since CBS is the one who filed the lawsuit.

Because CBS has to actually abide by union regulations, state and Federal laws! :guffaw:
Exactly. Right now, the big hope is that CBS either partners with Axanar (damned unlikely), or lets Axanar continue (highly unlikely). I don't want to take their hope away, but I'd have better luck of signing with CBS.
 
I don't get these people saying that Axanar is true to Roddenberry's original vision of Star Trek. It's almost like Errand of Mercy never happened. Don't remember TOS being about a full blown war either. It was more of a Federation-Klingon cold war, wasn't it?

Axanar isn't true to the so-called Roddenberry vision. It's nuBSG dressed in STAR TREK drag.

Next thing you know, Peters would have included star fighter combat in the movie as well, with Klingons and Federation fighters shooting at each other and blasting capitol ships. Or he would have included it in a sequel.

Re Gene's vision: Axanar is based on FASA RPG lore. And does everyone remember what Gene did to FASA? Hint: there's no FASA RPG any more.

Figures that they would do that.
 
licensed expanded universe fan fiction exists

https://kindleworlds.amazon.com/worlds

Interesting... Never seen anything like this, will have to take a look.

I just responded to a guy who said he couldn't wait for CBS to be under oath, explaining why their work doesn't look as good as Axanar. I tried to explain to him that his subjective idea of "what looks good" isn't going to have any bearing at all in testimony, at least not on CBS. I explained that if anyone will have to explain themselves, it's Axanar, since CBS is the one who filed the lawsuit.

Hows it even relevant? Yes visually Axanar looks amazing (and while the scripted portions look promising based on Prelude the VFX is all he can be getting at) as does Star Trek Beyond (as were 2009 and Into Darkness when the lens flares weren't blinding you :rofl:) I can't see how a judge would let that line of questioning go anywhere when the specifics of the case are whether or not Axanar/Ares Studios illegally made money from the Star Trek brand for profit and not how Tobais' excellent work compares to who ever is doing the work on Beyond or whatever effects house they hire for the 2017 series (which I would have hoped could have included certain names on the staff which may not be possible due to association at this point).
 
licensed expanded universe fan fiction exists

https://kindleworlds.amazon.com/worlds

Interesting... Never seen anything like this, will have to take a look.

I just responded to a guy who said he couldn't wait for CBS to be under oath, explaining why their work doesn't look as good as Axanar. I tried to explain to him that his subjective idea of "what looks good" isn't going to have any bearing at all in testimony, at least not on CBS. I explained that if anyone will have to explain themselves, it's Axanar, since CBS is the one who filed the lawsuit.

Hows it even relevant? Yes visually Axanar looks amazing (and while the scripted portions look promising based on Prelude the VFX is all he can be getting at) as does Star Trek Beyond (as were 2009 and Into Darkness when the lens flares weren't blinding you :rofl:) I can't see how a judge would let that line of questioning go anywhere when the specifics of the case are whether or not Axanar/Ares Studios illegally made money from the Star Trek brand for profit and not how Tobais' excellent work compares to who ever is doing the work on Beyond or whatever effects house they hire for the 2017 series (which I would have hoped could have included certain names on the staff which may not be possible due to association at this point).
Because as fans, they're only focusing on what they think is important. A court would laugh a lawyer out of the courtroom for it.
 
At this point there's Prelude and a buttload of money collected for a film that doesn't exist. Oh, and a studio built and equipped. And salaries paid. And sushi. And a NYE party.

Maybe it's just me, but I never expected the film to ever get done. Not this one, anyway. I expected delay after delay, while other projects took priority, because, and the true believers would keep contributing, and nothing would ever get done except for more fundraisers and more salaries and more sushi.

If I were CBS, I'd drop the hammer too.
 
I've heard that in several places, and I'll readily admit that most of us here wouldn't rally around to defend Peters or his actions. At the same time, I have to think some segment of fandom out there does believe Peters is the victim here; certainly on the Axanar Facebook group. He wouldn't even have to gain a tremendous amount of support, just a small amount could be considered a "success".

The danger is that Peters and his supporters are so vocal, we're running the risk of having them be perceived as the "voice of fandom". Peters and his Facebook followers do not speak for me or anyone but themselves. I wouldn't want them speaking for me unless I wanted to be characterized as a crazy person.

That has happened to a certain extent. Trek fandom is filled with the so-called "voice of fandom." Peters and Burnett, along with a few others, have become go-tos for quotes about STAR TREK. And the pop culture media generalizes and lumps all fans together because it makes for better clicks and views.

I've seen both Peters and Burnett at two separate conventions. I didn't care for either. However, when Peters is amongst his acolytes, he is very charming. It's easy to see how he's snake charmed an entire following. He's convinced them him and his project are Trek's salvation.

Burnett is a blowhard who pontificates like he is a bastion of STAR TREK.

Even worse than those two (IMHO) is David Gerrold, who should know better, even if this is a benign comment. Here's what he had to say about this incident:

David Gerrold's statement about the Axanar lawsuit

Apologies if this has already been posted.

Beat ya to it a few posts ago. ;) See: http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=11410977&postcount=1665

But I agree with you on Gerrold. He's become one of these Trek pundit's who makes his contribution to the franchise much more than it really is. And continues to speak as if he's the end all authority on STAR TREK.

Hey guys,

Working on a new blog now. I found the smoking gun.

w00t!
 
That has happened to a certain extent. Trek fandom is filled with the so-called "voice of fandom." Peters and Burnett, along with a few others, have become go-tos for quotes about STAR TREK. And the pop culture media generalizes and lumps all fans together because it makes for better clicks and views.

I've seen both Peters and Burnett at two separate conventions. I didn't care for either. However, when Peters is amongst his acolytes, he is very charming. It's easy to see how he's snake charmed an entire following. He's convinced them him and his project are Trek's salvation.

Burnett is a blowhard who pontificates like he is a bastion of STAR TREK.

Even worse than those two (IMHO) is David Gerrold, who should know better, even if this is a benign comment. Here's what he had to say about this incident:

David Gerrold's statement about the Axanar lawsuit

Apologies if this has already been posted.

Beat ya to it a few posts ago. ;) See: http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=11410977&postcount=1665

But I agree with you on Gerrold. He's become one of these Trek pundit's who makes his contribution to the franchise much more than it really is. And continues to speak as if he's the end all authority on STAR TREK.

Hey guys,

Working on a new blog now. I found the smoking gun.

w00t!
I used to respect Gerrold a lot more than I do now. Not as much these days; mainly cause of the attitude that you mentioned, I find a lot of his opinionated stuff short sighted or needlessly antagonistic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top