JAMES CAWLEY SPEAKS!

[STEPhon IT]

Your "point of view" is not fact. STC truncated its plans and only completed what was in the pipeline. Other groups stopping productions is irrelevant.

The guidelines, as it has been pointed out to you many times, are not law. Anyone can produce anything they want, and CBS will take action when it is deemed necessary.

By the way, you can't just "claim the 501 card." That's a legal status granted by the IRS. Just saying that you're a non-profit don't make it so.

:smh:

What??? Those 4 films were not shot yet until after the guidelines, while James Cawley had shot films before the guidelines existed. I am aware the guidelines are not laws which is why I'm saying other productions should ignore them... like Vic continuously had done. Own it.

I also understand a person can't claim the 501(c) but I can't see why other filmmakers can't apply for legal status through a US agency. Then have videos saying they're non-profit. Whatever it takes so they can have similar treatment like Vic I'm all for.

 

[STEPhon IT]

This is what I think happened.

NV. Personally I think Cawley was always keen to find a way to make a buck off Star Trek, and the guidelines were a convenient reason to step off the fanfilm treadmill (and have an excuse for never delivering a bunch of unfinished shows and episodes) and monetize the assets he had. Since his shows were peppered with pro Trek people, which the guidelines don't allow, I'm guessing that further diminished any interest in contiuning.

STC had already raised money and figured they're try the "grandfathered" approach and finish what they could with the budget they'd raised, then close up shop.

Renegades chose the legally safer route of filing off the serial numbers so they could do whatever they wanted, especially since they were heavy duty into using actual Trek production people and paying them, practically their entire cast was violating the guidelines.

Intrepid, Potemkin, Valiant, et al continue with minor course adjustments.

Is Farragut also making minor course adjustments or they're done?

 

[urbandefault]

I have no idea why so many are butthurt about STC. Alec Peters did the harm to fan films, despite his and others' claims that he saved them.

Fandom is Star Trek's worst enemy, and by the way, I'm happy to be on anyone's ignore list.

 

[Maurice]

Farragut was on their last episode anyway, and sold their interest in the studio they shared with STC to STC. They had planned to do a follow-up series but they decided that it wasn't worth it so long as the lawsuit was going on and the waters were murky. Last I heard they figured doing an original show was a safer bet, especially since they'd have to put up a lot of money to build new sets, et al. for what they'd planned.

I don't know what you mean by "What???", but as I recall STC had raised money to make more shows before the guidelines came down, so they did what they promised their backers: they made more shows. The implication from von Citters was that shows started before the guidelines would not necessarily have to hew to them. So they likely went to CBS and said "can we finish what we started since we previously raised the money?"

 

[STEPhon IT]

I have no idea why so many are butthurt about STC. Alec Peters did the harm to fan films, despite his and others' claims that he saved them.

Fandom is Star Trek's worst enemy, and by the way, I'm happy to be on anyone's ignore list.

Uh... butthurt??? No.

I would like fanfilmmakers to get a pass like STC did because there's no point in guidelines when someone else can ignore them.

 

[Phoenix219]

Cawley wasn't going to release any more of this stuff either way, guidelines or no guidelines. When STC stole his spotlight, he lost complete interest.

The biggest losses were things like the Tommy Kraft Enterprise movie, Farragut Forward (more movie era stuff is always needed), the rebranding of Renegades (thus ruining the swan song of Nichols/Koenig), and the (pipe dream possibilities) that the Capt Pike or Star Trek Begins projects would ever progress.

While I lament the fact that we lost 2 STC episodes, and that a few could have used more script polishing, its hard to complain when they are the only ones to have completed a full run of full length episodes, to the projects completion, with an ending. Honestly, my biggest pipe dream alternate universe wish is a version of Still Treads the Shadow with Shatner in it. hehe.


Other outfits and filmmakers don't need a pass. STC didn't get a pass. They took a chance, and made something, and no one complained. No one is stopping anyone else from doing the same.

 

[Maurice]

To this day I do not see what people see in Tommy Kraft's film, as I think it's a blurry eyesore, but vive la différence.

This STC dead horse has been beaten to the point it's pulp. It's stinky and smelly and I'm all for burying it and moving on.

 

[Matthew Raymond]

The blame for the guidelines can be placed squarely on the shoulders of Lord Precious Pants.

Peters asked for guidelines and brags about it even now. Place blame where it belongs.

I can't agree. It seems to me that the Guidelines specifically represent the views of CBS regarding fan films. The Guidelines were clearly made to target an entire category of fan films, not just The-Fan-Film-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named. AP may have given them the idea, but CBS never had to listen to him. They know what they're doing, and it's entirely fair to hold them accountable for their choices. And the way I intend to hold them accountable is to not waste my creative efforts on a franchise that grants my fan contributions less respect than they would a cockroach scurrying across their kitchen floor.

 

[Maurice]

Why in heavens name should a business that sells to millions of consumers worldwide give tacit support or even tolerate a tiny number of hardcore fans who want to play with their toys? None one seems has a cogent or convincing answer to that, and this circular discussion had become beyond tedious. So, outta...

 

[Matthew Raymond]

Why in heavens name should a business who sells to millions of consumers worldwide give tacit support or even tolerate a tiny number of hardcore fans who want to play with their toys? None one seems has a cogent or convincing answer to that, and this circular discussion had become beyond tedious. So, outta...

Oh, so when fans fund and create large, ambitious fan productions, they're a threat to the integrity of the franchise, but for everything else they're inconsequential peons of little importance or value, right? There's a reason this argument seems circular: You're arguments are based on two different models of fandom: one where fans are weak when it comes to benefiting the franchise, and one where it's powerful regarding how they can hurt the franchise. You have to do this, because if the fans were weak in both cases, it wouldn't matter what they do and the Guidelines would be petty waste of time, and if they were strong in both cases, they'd be important enough to listen too.

So make up your minds. Are they a powerful threat (in which case they'd make a powerful asset), or are they inconsequential (in which case it doesn't matter what they do and they can be safely ignored by CBS)? You can't have it both ways.

 

[Danlav05]

Cawley wasn't going to release any more of this stuff either way, guidelines or no guidelines. When STC stole his spotlight, he lost complete interest.

Yep. Bare in mind a lot of STC folk worked on STNV beforehand!

The biggest losses were things like the Tommy Kraft Enterprise movie

Weirdly I thought Horizon was great closure to Enterprise, but a sequel was announced and I was excited, then disappointed when it was canned

Farragut Forward (more movie era stuff is always needed)

This is the one I'm disappointed about most - not only would we have a high quality movie era film but we've al;ready had nearly half-a-dozen episodes to get to know these characters in the TOS era, like the real Trek we'd be taken them a decade on. Even just a single episode would have been cool.

the rebranding of Renegades (thus ruining the swan song of Nichols/Koenig)

Not entirely lost - Requiem is a better production than their pilot, and it's very easy if you want to ignore the changes which I did. In fact, it's quite funny how some things have changed so little (Koenig being called Walter, the Scotty reference, Jada's backstory) The main changes really are Aron Eisenberg's head, the exterior starships and the removal of the combadges.

The Nichols/Koenig thing is a single scene, shot before the changes.

and the (pipe dream possibilities) that the Capt Pike or Star Trek Begins projects would ever progress.

Well these just went quiet.

While I lament the fact that we lost 2 STC episodes, and that a few could have used more script polishing, its hard to complain when they are the only ones to have completed a full run of full length episodes, to the projects completion, with an ending.

And that's what I admire about STC - they set a goal and, even with a bit of compromise, saw it through to the end

Honestly, my biggest pipe dream alternate universe wish is a version of Still Treads the Shadow with Shatner in it. hehe.

Did they confirm this script was written for Shatner to be in? It must have been, right?!

 

[Jedi_Master]

You're arguments are based on two different models of fandom: one where fans are weak when it comes to benefiting the franchise, and one where it's powerful regarding how they can hurt the franchise.

No. It's one contiguous model. Fan creations offer very little benefit to the IP holder (thus they are a poor investment), but they can potentially cause great harm (especially if they are bolstered by unfettered crowdfunding, star cameos, intentional brand confusion, etc).

 

[USS Intrepid]

This again? The same handful of people post the same arguments over and over again, and get the same responses over and over again.

How long until the mysterious new, recently registered poster none of us have ever seen before pops in with the drive by attacks? It's almost as if there's a pattern.

 

[Matthew Raymond]

No. It's one contiguous model. Fan creations offer very little benefit to the IP holder (thus they are a poor investment), but they can potentially cause great harm (especially if they are bolstered by unfettered crowdfunding, star cameos, intentional brand confusion, etc).

Can you give examples of any serious IP holder investments in fandom? How about an example of a fan work causing serious and demonstrable damage to its respective IP? From where I'm sitting, it seems your conjecture that fans do more harm than good is entirely unsupported.

@USS Intrepid, your entire argument is snide ad hominem without citation, and an argumentum ad populum fallacy to boot. As for the "majority" you refer to, it's usually a group of the same half dozen people who spam their target with the same arguments over and over again and ignore any gestures toward compromise or attempts to advance a real conversation. If their target stops posting, it's usually from mental exhaustion rather than lack of a counterargument.

 

[Maurice]

The ability to Google latin phrases doesn't intimidate the billygoats crossing the bridge.

 

[USS Intrepid]

@USS Intrepid, your entire argument is snide ad hominem without citation, and an argumentum ad populum fallacy to boot. As for the "majority" you refer to, it's usually a group of the same half dozen people who spam their target with the same arguments over and over again and ignore any gestures toward compromise or attempts to advance a real conversation. If their target stops posting, it's usually from mental exhaustion rather than lack of a counterargument.

Oh I think it's quite clear what I meant. Nothing snide about it.

 

[Matthew Raymond]

Whatevs.

 

[USS Intrepid]

Well that certainly beats your usual passive-aggressive verbal diarrhoea.

To everyone else, sorry for the rare exception to my usual good manners. We now return you to your usual programming.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Other outfits and filmmakers don't need a pass. STC didn't get a pass. They took a chance, and made something, and no one complained. No one is stopping anyone else from doing the same.

Then that is what I think other enthusiastic Trekfan filmmakers should do; take a chance, go to the IRS for a 501(c), and the very important thing is to talk to the CBS reps on what you're doing with their IP. Because apparently CBS can turn a blind eye to a repeat offender to the guidelines.

As for Cawley, it sucks he gave up on it, and I didn't know he was looking for profit when he started his Trek fanfilms. I thought he raised the money for those projects through kickstarter and those films would be given to the folks who gave money in some way. The stuff he's done prior to the guidelines should get finished, and I guess Farragut Forward halted not because of the respect for the CBS Guidelines. A Guideline which is a big joke.

 

[fireproof78]

No. It's one contiguous model. Fan creations offer very little benefit to the IP holder (thus they are a poor investment), but they can potentially cause great harm (especially if they are bolstered by unfettered crowdfunding, star cameos, intentional brand confusion, etc).

It is largely pointless to argue. The rights of the property owner are not sufficent to interfer with people's ability to craft their "fan art." In this conversation, rights have no meaning as access to the property is largely expected as part of being a "fan" of the property. There is little in the way of compassionate understanding that if this property was actually someone we knew personally the discussion would take on a different tone I feel.

To my reading, it starts at a level of passion to express towards a property and morphs, quite readily, in to expectation of access.

Simply put, this discusssion will not be resolved.