Star Trek 2017 will not be set in the JJ-Verse

[Dukhat]

Methinks the OP feels the need to justify his own original post while at the same time berating everyone else for some oddball reason...which is made all the more humorous because of the total lack of information (and misinformation) on which to base any accusations.

Here's what he said originally:

This show will be produced by CBS. When Viacom and CBS divorced in 2005, the Star Trek franchise was unknowingly split up between the reformed companies. Viacom and it's subsidiary Paramount retained ownership of the movie franchise both past and future, whereas CBS held the rights to the television franchise, past, present and future.

First of all, this is completely wrong. Paramount only has ownership of the Star Trek films through Nemesis. CBS gave them a license to produce new Trek films, but sole ownership of Star Trek itself rests with CBS. That means that if CBS wants to make a new show about the Abramsverse, they can damn well do so because they own the Trek property in its entirety.

Also, the new trailer with its use of nuUniverse CGI visuals, while again not definitive proof of anything, at least shows that there really is no "division" between CBS and Paramount as to what can and can't be used.

 

[eyeresist]

It has been reported the series is not tied to the current films and that the first season is set in the period between TUC and TNG. The show will also be an anthology.

Not "reported". "Speculated".

 

[Khan 2.0]

new rumour of series to be set in the JJ verse?
http://1701news.com/node/1209/treks-prime-universe-closed-business.html?platform=hootsuit

 

[JoeZhang]

"could be a prequel of sorts, taking place after Capt. Kirk and his voyages of the USS Enterprise"

eh? surely in that context they mean sequel?

 

[Greg Cox]

"could be a prequel of sorts, taking place after Capt. Kirk and his voyages of the USS Enterprise"

eh? surely in that context they mean sequel?

Well, I guess it would be a prequel to TNG and its heirs. In theory.

Not that I'm going to take this rumor more seriously than of the others.

 

[Jedman67]

"could be a prequel of sorts, taking place after Capt. Kirk and his voyages of the USS Enterprise"

eh? surely in that context they mean sequel?

Prequel to the TNG+ era, maybe?

 

[Dukhat]

If such a rumor were true — and remember, this has not been confirmed by anyone at CBS, so it should be treated as any rumor — this could mark a major sea change for CBS, which has avoided stepping into the movie universe that is now owned by a separate company, Paramount Pictures. The Star Trek rights split with the Viacom Inc. breakup at the end of 2005, spinning off CBS Corp. with all the television and library rights to Star Trek, and keeping Paramount Pictures in the new Viacom, complete with the film rights and film library.

Apparently this "source" thinks the same way that the OP does...and is just as wrong. CBS can use the Abramsverse if they want, because they own Trek in its entirety.

 

[JWPlatt]

It has been stated elsewhere that Paramount's rights do not simply derive from a license, but ownership.

It would be nice to get a primary source on the issue and not just retellings of it.

 

[cultcross]

Paramount own the movies. They wouldn't be able to sue Axanar as a mere licensee. However, that doesn't mean that the IP within them isn't open to CBS to use.

 

[Dukhat]

Paramount own the movies. They wouldn't be able to sue Axanar as a mere licensee. However, that doesn't mean that the IP within them isn't open to CBS to use.

Paramount indeed owns the movies. But CBS owns the intellectual property, which again means that anything shown or used in the new films can be used by CBS because they allowed someone else (in this case, giving Paramount a license to produce Trek films) to use their IP, but didn't sell it to them in toto.

 

[Mr Awe]

I don't think a bunch of fans are going figure the rights issues. Let's just see what happens.

Mr Awe

 

[Greg Cox]

I don't think a bunch of fans are going figure the rights issues. Let's just see what happens

Exactly. There seems to be an awful lot of armchair lawyers out there speaking authoritatively regarding contracts and agreements that none of us have ever seen.

 

[Mudd]

CBS and Paramount will not get in each other's way over this kind of thing because they're not run by morons.

Well, except for whoever said to J.J. Abrams "just go out there and wing it," last Friday.

 

[JWPlatt]

CBS and Paramount will not get in each other's way over this kind of thing because they're not run by morons.

To quote CinemaSins:
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahaha

 

[Trekkin]

Yet the people running CBS and Paramount are doing what they're doing, whilst CinemaSins makes increasingly long and error-riddled videos on the Internet.

And we nitpick both from the comfort of our armchairs.

 

[Capn Nick]

I don't mind if it is in the JJ Abrams universe continuity wise or if it uses stylistic points of design, I just don't want the episodes to be like the JJ Abrams plots.

What I miss about Star Trek is exploration and thought provoking situations. If it is just running, shooting and saying one liners than I, for one, am not interested.

 

[mos6507]

We don't know how pliable the nuVerse is yet. I like that the bridge has been darkened (a lot less lens flare) in the ST: Beyond trailer. There's no hard and fast rule that everything top to bottom has to stay JJ-like, just as Wrath of Khan was stylistically different from TMP.

 

[eyeresist]

To quote CinemaSins:
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahaha

I think that, given the chatter we've heard from the Beyond production, the nature of the recent "fan event", and what we've heard about the producers of the new series, Trek makers seem to have got their shiz together recently.

 

[Mudd]

To quote CinemaSins:
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahaha

You, on the other hand...

 

[rahullak]

Exactly. There seems to be an awful lot of armchair lawyers out there speaking authoritatively regarding contracts and agreements that none of us have ever seen.

Didn't you know? Everyone's an expert on the Internet, that great democratizer of authority.