CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[JWPlatt]

Axanar Mods delete posts they don't like. Stuff like that hasn't happened in this thread. Yes, some posts were Moderated, but such Moderation wasn't based on positive or negative views on Axanar - the Modded posts violated the general posting rules of TrekBBS.

If you can show one of your posts was removed/edited for reasons other than a general rules violation - THEN you can accuse TrekBBS Mods of doing the same as Axanar Website Mods.

Posting in response to one of your posts with an opinion or remark contrary to your opinion as expressed in a post ISN'T eliminating opposing views - it's DISCUSSING them - that's a BIG difference.

Discussion doesn't happen on any Axanar controlled boards beyond: "Is Alec Peters and Axanar great; or REALLY GREAT!?!?"

Nothing you just wrote applies to the context of my post that I wrote in response to people who put others on ignore just because they don't like the message. It's not just me. I've seen it several times in this thread, and elsewhere, where people announce when they put others on ignore. My post had absolutely nothing to do with moderation, deletions, banning or responding in disagreement. It has to do with the hypocrisy of criticizing entities for revisionistic behavior when said critics themselves also choose to omit or make invisible opinions they find offensive.

If I am put on ignore, that's okay and a choice. I have no real complaint about that because there's a good chance I won't miss them. But don't complain if others, such as Axanar mods, make you disappear unless you are willing to read things with which you disagree or are offended by.

 

[muCephi]

The people I'm seeing continuing forward are more like devoted followers. Just as much as the devoted Pepsi or Coke lovers remained, and remain for that matter. Or the devoted chili eaters. Or art lovers. Or cat vs dog lovers.

FWIW, I just can't see kids taking up their parents' passion about one person's unrealized goal of reviving pewpew "authentic" TOS. So it will die out eventually

 

[Squiggy]

But I believe Alec's ability to spin is still dependent on his audience's attachment to Trek.

Yeah, this was all sold as "Star Trek". Their audience had a demand to see their version of Star Trek and Peters had the willingness to supply it, if not the legal, budgetary, or technical ability to do it.

A "Hey, let some Hollywood nobody, a bunch of D-list actors, and Tony Todd appear in a generic sci-fi franchise you know nothing about produced by a prop auctioneer and directed by a guy who once directed some other thing you've probably forgotten about and some DVD extras" Kickstarter won't exactly bring in the money.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

The people I'm seeing continuing forward are more like devoted followers. Just as much as the devoted Pepsi or Coke lovers remained, and remain for that matter. Or the devoted chili eaters. Or art lovers. Or cat vs dog lovers.

FWIW, I just can't see kids taking up their parents' passion about one person's unrealized goal of reviving pewpew "authentic" TOS. So it will die out eventually

 

[Trekkin]

If I am put on ignore, that's okay and a choice. I have no real complaint about that because there's a good chance I won't miss them. But don't complain if others, such as Axanar mods, make you disappear unless you are willing to read things with which you disagree or are offended by.

Situation 1: Somone tell's you that they don't think you're saying anything that's worth their time. You then keep posting, but they don't bother reading your posts anymore. End of story.

vs

Situation 2: Somone tells you that they disagree with your opinion/criticise a piece of art you shared publically. So you stop them from posting altogether, bad mouth them to other members whilst they literally can't do anything to defend themselves, and will then block everyone from accessing their old posts - whether the others posters want that 'protection' or not.

Oh, and they may have actually paid money to post in that area. You're also doing all this, whilst simultaneously trying to build a case in a court of law that relies on outrage over CBS not letting you express your fan-love.

Why, there's no difference in those situations at all! What a bunch of hypocrites we are. We're almost as bad as that guy who whined about 'immaturity' and trolling, then started posting a bunch of off-topic personal comments when he worked out that no one cared.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

If I am put on ignore, that's okay and a choice. I have no real complaint about that because there's a good chance I won't miss them. But don't complain if others, such as Axanar mods, make you disappear unless you are willing to read things with which you disagree or are offended by.

Sorry... Was there something you said?

 

[Mudd]

Nothing of any consequence whatever, no.

 

[dmac]

I don't define a Fan Film as crowd funding for a boat load of money and shelling it out to people in order for them to recreate something that belongs to someone else. It's not about being nearly as good as the pro's, it's about doing it and being creative with what you have. It's about people being involved and creating a product in homage of something they loved.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

But I believe Alec's ability to spin is still dependent on his audience's attachment to Trek.

Yeah, this was all sold as "Star Trek". Their audience had a demand to see their version of Star Trek and Peters had the willingness to supply it, if not the legal, budgetary, or technical ability to do it.

A "Hey, let some Hollywood nobody, a bunch of D-list actors, and Tony Todd appear in a generic sci-fi franchise you know nothing about produced by a prop auctioneer and directed by a guy who once directed some other thing you've probably forgotten about and some DVD extras" Kickstarter won't exactly bring in the money.

Yeah, I do agree at this time that his future funding successes probably could take a strong hit in crowdfunding support much past his current followers without his attachment to Star Trek. Maybe even losing a percentage of them in future crowdfunding ventures.

He's good though. A wild card. His future is still unclear to me.

 

[trynda1701]

Here is a point my partner made to me last night while discussing the lawsuit. She said, what interest could be being generated by the raised money in whatever bank account/s it is stored in?

 

[Michael Hinman]

Here is a point my partner made to me last night while discussing the lawsuit. She said, what interest could be being generated by the raised money in whatever bank account/s it is stored in?

Well, a lot of it has been spent, but even $500,000 would be generating some interest. And not small interest, either.

 

[trynda1701]

Exactly the point she made!

 

[Sgt_G]

even $500,000 would be generating some interest

I don't know about you, but I'd be interested in a half-million dollars.

 

[cultcross]

Having the movie lose every aspect of Star Trek, even to changing the name, could still be a movie well received by the followers because I do think the defendant has the ability spin and more importantly 'sell' any rewrite move made by the production, including removing every single IP that could be an issue for the Plaintiff, into being a Win for the production and the followers.

And my question to AP would be "funded with what?" Even if he's allowed to continue, he is still being sued for more money than he's ever conned his way into, where does the money come from to make an original science fiction film about the Blingots new G-8 class vessel and the race to construct StarArmy's new Declaration class ships in time?

 

[Ithekro]

Some of the support for Axanar are from people that don't care for CBS or Paramount and don't particularly care about copyright law at all. At least one case was more or less done caring what Paramount wants after they pulled FASA's license around 1990, and is fully behind the Axanar concept because that fits what they wanted to see (I suppose you could call it youth, since that was 25 or so years ago now). Basically the likes of the fan fiction groups that really don't care about copyright infringement because they want to play in the Star Trek universe on their own terms, and Axanar appealed to them.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

And my question to AP would be "funded with what?" Even if he's allowed to continue, he is still being sued for more money than he's ever conned his way into, where does the money come from to make an original science fiction film about the Blingots new G-8 class vessel and the race to construct StarArmy's new Declaration class ships in time?

Good point.

Some of the support for Axanar are from people that don't care for CBS or Paramount and don't particularly care about copyright law at all. At least one case was more or less done caring what Paramount wants after they pulled FASA's license around 1990, and is fully behind the Axanar concept because that fits what they wanted to see (I suppose you could call it youth, since that was 25 or so years ago now). Basically the likes of the fan fiction groups that really don't care about copyright infringement because they want to play in the Star Trek universe on their own terms, and Axanar appealed to them.

Also a good point.

Here is a point my partner made to me last night while discussing the lawsuit. She said, what interest could be being generated by the raised money in whatever bank account/s it is stored in?

Interesting question.

 

[RedForman]

And my question to AP would be "funded with what?" Even if he's allowed to continue, he is still being sued for more money than he's ever conned his way into, where does the money come from to make an original science fiction film about the Blingots new G-8 class vessel and the race to construct StarArmy's new Declaration class ships in time?

Some of the support for Axanar are from people that don't care for CBS or Paramount and don't particularly care about copyright law at all. At least one case was more or less done caring what Paramount wants after they pulled FASA's license around 1990, and is fully behind the Axanar concept because that fits what they wanted to see (I suppose you could call it youth, since that was 25 or so years ago now). Basically the likes of the fan fiction groups that really don't care about copyright infringement because they want to play in the Star Trek universe on their own terms, and Axanar appealed to them.

Despite the somewhat intense interest of but one group of fans, they apparently don't understand that despite their interest and LFIM's willingness, C/P can and most likely will make their continued adventures cost prohibitive. - no matter what outside ventures anyone banks on.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

I'll be glad when this is all over - at least we have Continues, Renegades and Aurora still on the go

 

[jespah]

....

Intelligent, non-stupid, non-fool people digging in to stand firm on something they have come to believe in for one reason or another. ....

What follows is my opinion.

For many adults, financial responsibility is inextricably linked with self-thoughts re maturity. E. g. you are an upstanding individual, you can pay your own way, stand on your own two feet, be the man (or woman, etc.) - all of those things are understandably valued in our society.

When you tell someone they have made a bad financial decision, that is all undercut. They dig their heels in, and it becomes a face-saving move. This continues; they can't admit they were wrong because that might mean other major decisions they've made were wrong.

I manage a large Q & A site and we get all sorts of questions, including those from people who are hewing and hawing to try to figure out whether they need to/should leave an abusive relationship. Over the course of over 13 years, I have found you can't tell these people they're dumb or yell at them or anything of the sort. Instead, this is what works:

• Validate them as mature human being. They are good parents or they are trying to be independent, they are artistic or athletic or strong or kind or any other positive characteristic you can believably convince them that they are.
• Give them the old 'walk a mile in someone else's shoes' test, e. g. ask them what they would say if a friend or sibling was in their exact situation. Much of the time, when their own emotions and feelings of self-worth are removed from the equation, they see what's really going on.
• Remind them they need to be able to protect their children or other loved ones. Don't make it about them as they can often feel they don't deserve help or protection, but they can generally see when their kids do. And/or also -
• Give them a view of the future. A slap today will be a punch tomorrow. A loose tooth this week will be a black eye in a month.

This is not a perfect analogy, and I certainly don't pretend it's scientific. But a lot of this heel-digging seems similar. Telling people they are doing something nutty does not do any good. They are prepared for that. They are not so prepared to hear that you think they are good people but .....

 

[Earthrise]

What follows is my opinion.

For many adults, financial responsibility is inextricably linked with self-thoughts re maturity. E. g. you are an upstanding individual, you can pay your own way, stand on your own two feet, be the man (or woman, etc.) - all of those things are understandably valued in our society.

When you tell someone they have made a bad financial decision, that is all undercut. They dig their heels in, and it becomes a face-saving move. This continues; they can't admit they were wrong because that might mean other major decisions they've made were wrong.

I manage a large Q & A site and we get all sorts of questions, including those from people who are hewing and hawing to try to figure out whether they need to/should leave an abusive relationship. Over the course of over 13 years, I have found you can't tell these people they're dumb or yell at them or anything of the sort. Instead, this is what works:

• Validate them as mature human being. They are good parents or they are trying to be independent, they are artistic or athletic or strong or kind or any other positive characteristic you can believably convince them that they are.
• Give them the old 'walk a mile in someone else's shoes' test, e. g. ask them what they would say if a friend or sibling was in their exact situation. Much of the time, when their own emotions and feelings of self-worth are removed from the equation, they see what's really going on.
• Remind them they need to be able to protect their children or other loved ones. Don't make it about them as they can often feel they don't deserve help or protection, but they can generally see when their kids do. And/or also -
• Give them a view of the future. A slap today will be a punch tomorrow. A loose tooth this week will be a black eye in a month.

This is not a perfect analogy, and I certainly don't pretend it's scientific. But a lot of this heel-digging seems similar. Telling people they are doing something nutty does not do any good. They are prepared for that. They are not so prepared to hear that you think they are good people but .....

The lovely jespah makes an excellent point. Additionally, people naturally form groups based around a shared identity. This small in-group identification is reinforced when there is the existence of an out-group, or people who share a competing identity. When those groups come into conflict, the result can be that in-group identification and solidarity go through the roof. (Think of athletic rivalries.)