Why come after me if you agree LFIM is in the wrong and breaking the law? Seems like you're on a nonsensical merry-go-round of your own making.
Thanks for all of your straw man arguments.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
You know, I agree with your comment that it is necessary to not lower to the same level of Peters and resort to name calling.
But I find the rest of your arguing to be awfully petty. What is the objective of all this? Just to have your say and stroll off into the sunset?
Whatever the legal position in California, or on a Federal basis, in terms of the NDA, it is unquestionable that Mr. Peters' insistence that refunds only occur is one of highly dubious ethical practice. What's more, he insists that he has not breached the terms of Kickstarter but seems unaware that he has a contract with his donors to deliver. If he does not deliver in the time specified then he is in breach of contract. Furthermore, it is arguable he used misrepresentation to claim that his project was authorised, or at least tolerated, by the rights holder. That was clearly not the case, which would be another breach of contract. He is therefore not in a position to then make refunds conditional. He has failed to deliver. On top of that he has used the donor funds questionably and has treated is own donors abominably online. So the extent to which "childish names" may or may not be appropriate is perhaps not cut and dried.
So really you have invested a lot of time bickering over whether or not the first amendment applies, but I am not sure what really that is going to achieve other than to cause tension and strife in here, and, to be blunt, argue for the sake of it?
Thanks for clarifying. I do respect your view. Personally I have asked mods to intervene once or twice when I felt someone was going off the deep end.
My point about "ridiculous" is that the conduct in question has reached the point that it is worthy of ridicule. Now, one could argue that a board like this is not the place for ridicule. Its a tough call... it can so easily go overboard, but at the same time a pointed observation might actually get through to the targets when their egos rebuff all arguments made on fact.
Is Axanar Productions, this shameful disgraceful stain on Trek, going to be played out to the bitter end? Might a little humorous criticism of the most stupid parts of it shift a few minds in the camp doing the damage? Might it have done so already? There are by my estimation at least 100 silent readers of this thread. Likely some of them are in a position to be thinking about what they are doing with Axanar.
Further, this thread seems to have been an early source of a number of the analyses which have manifest through more mainstream channels. Especially when everyone was trying to piece together what was going on through all the lies. So I wouldn't call the thread as closed-minded as the walled garden at Axanar.
I guess there *is* no final defense for pushing back on this mess with humor, and personal attacks are not appropriate. Maybe the personal quotient has gone up recently and needs to be dialed back, and you are noting that. But the situation *is ridiculous*, not to mention reprehensible. I think that within reason it deserves a few sticks poked at its conduct from time to time, until they admit they are in the wrong and stop. Just IMO.
Last edited:
There is no road lower than the one that Alec Peters, Robert Meyer Burnett, Mike Bawden, Terry McIntosh, Prime Diana and nuDiana, and all their sheep have been traveling, lo these many years. Some examples, since this long and winding road seems to have left some of us a little murky on the details:
--Alec accusing Carlos Pedraza, a respected journalist and writer of being a cyber stalker and a fraud, solely on the basis that Axa-monitor is regularly covering this case, creating a resource for unbiased reporting of the facts as they occur or come to light. Accusations, by the way, which are all the more ironic when one considers that Alec Peters himself is the Lord King of Censorship and Selective Fact Reporting on via his own social media outlets. Heaven forfend the actual truth be known!
--Terry trolling anyone and everyone on this message board during his time here last summer when the hard questions were posed to him, to the point that he ran away crying rather than simply engaging the discussion without making outright attacks and threats, much like his regular conduct on Facebook before a parted ways with Axanar.
--Robert Meyer Burnett's foaming at the mouth Twitter rants, again crybabying his way out of whatever latest development occurred that was not in Axanar's favor because god forbid this manchild not be allowed to play with Star Trek's toys any way he sees fit.
--Alec attacking, insulting, demeaning, (attempting to) discredit, doxxing, trolling, name-calling, outright lying about, intimidating, accusing, alienating, threatening, interrogating, and annoying anyone who dares to stand up to him, criticize his choices, or outright tell him he's full of shit for his misconduct. I should know; I've been calling him out on all of this since at least 2012 when he first started this whole scam to begin with, battling him against all three of his dual usernames here and observing the same behavior elsewhere on the 'net, from Blastr to io9 all the way to the Hollywood Reporter. The dipshit literally can't keep his mouth shut. How can someone with eyes that big be so blind?
Alec Peters has no problem attacking others when it suits his needs, or if he feels cornered (because he can't defend his appalling behavior) or if he thinks it will deflect negative attention or focus on his very clear and blatant wrongdoing. Time and again Peters shits on Star Trek Continues and Vic Mignogna in particular, and showed no compunction about throwing his own "good friend" James Cawley under the bus as well.
It doesn't end there, either. The internet is littered with legions of people from various sites -- including the TrekBBS (where Peters has been banned three (THREE!) times -- who are sick of his petty, immature and childish behavior. The man has no concept, no microscopic sense of the word "accountability" for his own actions, consistently and continuously offlaying blame and responsibility for any wrongdoing to others. Tony Todd isn't with the production anymore? Oh, well that's because he wanted too much money! It can't possibly be that Todd is a respected actor who has worked consistently in Hollywood for over 30 years having issues with Peters' ineptitude as a producer. Perish the thought! CBS sues because Peters tells everyone that he paid himself nearly $40K to work "full-time" on his fan film? Oh, well that's not fair at all! How is Peters supposed to support himself? It can't possibly be that CBS/Paramount are actually doing their due diligence to protect their property and property rights now that they feel someone has crossed a line beyond their generosity.
And let's not forget that Peters used the money he collected from goodwill of the fans and on the strength of a name and franchise he doesn't own to fund his own for-profit studio...and then announced exactly that plan to the world. That can't possibly be relevant to this case, could it?
The reason CBS and Paramount are suing is because Peters, the fool that he is, not only made money off this project but he broadcast it to the world and that -- making money on the STAR TREK IP -- has been, consistently, the one thing CBS and Paramount have said over and over and over again NOT TO DO. Peters/Axanar is the only group that seem to fail to grasp this simple little concept.
New Voyages, Exeter, Continues, Farragut, Valiant, Hidden Frontier, Intrepid, Secret Voyage, Excalibur, Dominion, et al... they all know how to play by the rules. Alec Peters and Axanar are the ones who have chosen to color outside those lines and are now paying the price for it.
Now, I don't believe that they started out this way intentionally nor do I believe that it was Peters' plan all along to hoodwink so many fans out of $1.1 million. I very much can see the likelihood that "scope creep" could be at fault as much as any of Peters' own stupid hubris and arrogance.
But make no mistake. Peters is arrogant as fuck. He encricles himself with an echo chamber on his Axanar Fan Page on Facebook, where only the "true" fans are safe from being banned. Peters, Burnett and Terry McIntosh are completely incapable of handling even the slightest negative commentary against them or their vanity project, or any critical discussion about anything Axanar or Peters may have done wrong to warrant this lawsuit. Peters himself has an IV of his own Kool-Aid hooked right into his bloodstream and he believes each outrageous and stupid comment he makes until it backfires on him and then he quickly backpedals it all. Newsflash, Darth Garth: If you only meet one asshole today, they're the asshole. But if EVERYONE you meet today is an asshole, then chances are, YOURE the asshole.
No, Peters deserves everything he's getting now. He's alienated, attacked, threatened, trolled, insulted, demeaned, interrogated, and annoyed enough people online that those same people are now speaking up. The only person Peters has to blame for any of this is himself. He is a spoiled brat, a man-child incapable of standing up and taking the heat for his own actions and will be summarily crushed by the legal right CBS has to crush his stupid ass for infringing on their rightfully-owned property.
Alec Peters and Robert Meyer Burnett have spent the better part of the past two years going all over the internet, podcast, convention and social media world loudly proclaiming all their plans for what they would be doing with Axanar, Ares Studios and how they'd profit off it while at the same time taking massive conversational shits all over the official Paramount Star Trek films.
Now, with the list of infringements, its hard to defend all the wrongdoing by Peters and his cronies. Even if these jokers survive discovery during trial and somehow win, they still have to face the obvious and looming second reality of all this:
The simple fact is the other studios ABSOLUTELY WILL join in the inevitable and certain appeal CBS and Paramount will launch. You think Disney is going to sit idly by while someone else establishes law that says Joe Blow Trekkie can freely do whatever he wants with Mickey Mouse? Good luck with that.
Now we see there are no limits to the pathetic and pedantic ruses both Peters and his lawyers at Winston & Strawn will go to in order to find something. hopefully, that will stick and give them some lifeline to hold on to whatever ill-gotten gains they've acquired in this whole debacle, up to and including the utterly laughable NDA that Peters has now released into the wild, expecting people to suddenly shut up because he refunded $20?
Give me a goddamn break.
Peters is screwed. And he has no one to blame for this but himself and his own stupid greed, hubris, and inexperience. Peters does not own Star Trek, thus he was never in a position to "hire" himself full-time nor draw a salary of any amount based on the content of the project. THAT's what the lawsuit is about.
That he is so deluded, so far gone that he maybe can't see himself for the moronic turn his every move now takes is perhaps all the more tragic. He clearly had some sort of redeemable or respectable skillset to get so many people involved with this to begin with but like the inept fool he is, he fell into the toilet bowl of his own grandiose ambition, and every time he tries to get out of it, he's just giving himself more swirlies.
All that being said, I do agree that while Peters makes himself a very easy target, it need not devolve into petty name calling. Not toward him, or any of his associates. I for one am going to do my part to refrain from this behavior since I know I've been prone to it occasionally. There's enough wrongdoing on the part of Peters, Burnett, Axanar, et al that name-calling is, at this point, hilariously redundant.
Last edited:
Nice, Karzak. I will join you and do some self-monitoring too. Nice. Thanks bunches.
Last edited:
Excellent points and a great summary. Speaking for myself, I call Alec Peters LFIM because it's an apropos jesting nickname describing what he does without fail.
Not a label I would use myself, but all in all I think it's pretty innocuous compared with some of the accusations Peters has made of others.Excellent points and a great summary. Speaking for myself, I call Alec Peters LFIM because it's an apropos jesting nickname describing what he does without fail.
Oh, oops, I didn't hit post (eek)
Sorry! And thanks for your patience (gets more coffee).
Just came on about 10 minutes ago, about time to.
I agree with you, @SITZKRIEG! that there needs to be oversight over crowdfunding. I am hoping it can be taken up after this eternal election is finally over. Donors have close to no rights and have started to sue. I would like to see that codified into law and am considering contacting Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey (my senators) about this. I am not even talking about Axa. I'm seeing a lot of these cases coming out of the woodwork. The public is getting screwed.
Then the public doesn't need to donate. No one is forcing them to give away their money. Its a donation, not a purchase. If people get screwed enough, then kickstarter as a fad or a thing will die out. If people continue to gamble, then who cares? Its not anyone's job but the donator, to investigate where they are spending their own money, and doing their own due diligence.
I think the point is that 'donation' for 'perks' is really in almost all cases a pre-sell not an actual donation, and thus, skirting applicable consumer protection. If we want to truly disambiguate, remove the perks.
And should kickstarters offering food be exempt from food safety regulations? No? Then why should they be exempt from financial protections standard between consumers and producers?
because a health issue (that can result in a lawsuit) and a financial issue (no health risk) are two completely separate things.
Well, yes, but the underlying motivation for public protections is perhaps stated as the overall well-being of the individual. A financial rip-off might mean no medicine, for example. A bank can't just arbitrarily keep your deposit. I am not really following how different types of public protection are separate, if the underlying thesis is accepted.
As a retired US service member sworn to protect and defend the US Constitution, I had to agree that a private contract cannot directly violate the First Amendment. However, comma, one must remember that many laws both at the Federal and State level that do apply have their roots firmly based on the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and other Amendments.
I'd happily donate $10 to Peters if the NDA gagged him instead.
Thanks to those who responded more recently to my concerns in thread. As others had stated at length, Alec Peters routinely dispenses more than enough rope to hang his company by which provides plenty to discuss/dissect. With the weight of actual facts and the law behind the viewpoint expressed here, there isn't much reason to resort to fantastical hyperbole or name calling him or our fellow (misguided) fans.
Of course it's wrong to say Peters is taking away a person's 1st amendment rights, that's a right granted by the bill of rights of the constitution to the people of each state. That said, the NDA did threaten in part to attempt it. There are people who would yield to the LFIM's demands because they are without half a clear understanding of where their rights even come from and I'll tell you, it isn't the LFIM.
You also have to understand that at times people chat metaphorically and it sounds absurd for one poster to go on and on about it.
You also have to understand that at times people chat metaphorically and it sounds absurd for one poster to go on and on about it.
Last edited:
This is a relaxed conversation thread, not journalism 101 & law 101 classes where people have to post per your idealized expectations and specifications. FYI, you're not a Mod just in case you hadn't noticed that fact.
Last edited:
- Status