Star Trek Uncharted...

Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by Overgeeked, Jun 19, 2015.

  1. BillJ

    BillJ History's Greatest Monster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Covington, Ky. USA
    But wouldn't his packaging say...

    ...if Paramount owned any part of the franchise?

    The thing that still seems to make the most sense is that CBS owns the intellectual property and Paramount licenses it from them.
     
  2. BillJ

    BillJ History's Greatest Monster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Covington, Ky. USA
    I pulled out my TNG movie Blu-ray set which was released in 2009. It also lists CBS as trademark holder for Star Trek and related marks and logos.
     
  3. Tom

    Tom Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Location:
    In your Mind!

    Similar thinking with fan films. For example New Voyages owns all original footage they filmed, but anything that contains a trademark or Copyright from Star Trek can be claimed by CBS. So you end up both entities having ownership claims in the production. Bill I have always believed that Paramount is just licensed to do the films, I just can't prove it.
     
  4. BillJ

    BillJ History's Greatest Monster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Covington, Ky. USA
    Star Trek: The Motion Picture has the same notice on it as the TNG films. I think the copyright is that no one can sell or copy that particular material. The trademark indicates who owns the intellectual property.

    http://www.marcaria.com/articles/trademark-and-other-intellectual-property-resource-guide.asp

     
  5. Michael_Hinman

    Michael_Hinman Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Location:
    Florida
    There is no simple answer to that, because it comes down to distribution. In Hollywood, it always comes down to distribution. :)
     
  6. Phantom

    Phantom Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Thank you. If memory serves correctly, that was one of the articles I remember. Furthere IIRC, there was a small piece in Variety with many of the same thoughts.
     
  7. Michael_Hinman

    Michael_Hinman Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Location:
    Florida
    I'm not an IP attorney, but I don't think you can say trademarks protect broad IP. It's very specific IP ... like the name of something.

    For instance, NBC Universal has a trademark on Syfy as a name, but the content inside is not trademarked, rather it's copyrighted.
     
  8. Michael_Hinman

    Michael_Hinman Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Location:
    Florida
    If you want something pre-split, it would have to be 2005 or earlier.
     
  9. Phantom

    Phantom Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Actually, the article you cite in fact says that the rights issues are not clear. It certainly does not say that Paramount only licensed the characters.
     
  10. Michael_Hinman

    Michael_Hinman Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Location:
    Florida
    Why would it say that? You already listed the copyright to Paramount in the opening part of that statement. The second part refers specifically to trademarks and logos ... meaning, the words "Star Trek" and how it's presented.

    Remember, NuTrek uses the logo from the original "Star Trek" series ... and guess who has the right to that logo? CBS.

    I am not sure why you would think Paramount would need to own the trademarks and logos, when those are just the name and how it appears.
     
  11. Michael_Hinman

    Michael_Hinman Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Location:
    Florida
    Here is the link again: http://www.thewrap.com/how-web-star-trek-rights-killed-jj-abrams-grand-ambitions-91766/

    And just to quote from that story:

    "A major stumbling block: "Star Trek's" licensing and merchandising rights are spread over two media conglomerates with competing goals. The rights to the original television series from the 1960s remained with CBS after it split off from Paramount’s corporate parent Viacom in 2006, while the studio retained the rights to the film series. CBS also held onto the ability to create future “Star Trek” TV shows.

    "Paramount must license the “Star Trek” characters from CBS Consumer Products for film merchandising."

    So not only does it make it clear who has rights to what, it also specifically states that "Paramount must license the Star Trek characters from CBS Consumer Products for film merchandising." And please note that my original statement was not that Paramount just licensed the characters, but that they licensed the characters for merchandising.

    Anything else? :techman:
     
  12. Tom

    Tom Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Location:
    In your Mind!
    I wonder why in 9 years know one can get a clear definition of how the rights are laid out. You would think it would not be a big secret.
     
  13. BeatleJWOL

    BeatleJWOL Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Depends. There are similar questions that spawn similar arguments about who actually owns and/or distributes the original Star Wars film, whether it's Fox or Lucasfilm.

    The 1977 film is the only one of all six to suffer from this...
     
  14. Timby

    Timby Game ... OVER! Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    But there's no question about that. Fox owns the distribution rights to the original Star Wars in perpetuity -- Lucas had to make that deal in order to get the financing to finish the movie -- and the other five films until 2020.
     
  15. BeatleJWOL

    BeatleJWOL Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    Winston-Salem, NC
    That's the basic understanding but you should tell some of the folks on Blu-ray.com about that...
     
  16. Michael_Hinman

    Michael_Hinman Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Location:
    Florida
    Because there was probably never a need to.

    I mean, Paramount and CBS might know what they have worked out -- but whether they have shared that with the public, well, that's a whole different story. :)
     
  17. BillJ

    BillJ History's Greatest Monster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Covington, Ky. USA
    My Deep Space Nine season four DVD's lists Paramount as the trademark and copyright holder. It is from 2003.
     
  18. Michael_Hinman

    Michael_Hinman Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2015
    Location:
    Florida
    I am not sure if you are just reinforcing what I am saying, or what it is you're doing ... so I am just going to assume these are messages supporting my statements. :)
     
  19. BillJ

    BillJ History's Greatest Monster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Covington, Ky. USA
    My position is that CBS owns "Star Trek". It doesn't make sense any other way. You can't have two owners of Captain Kirk. Heck, Paramount could do a buddy comedy with Jack Black and Will Ferrell as Kirk and Spock and devalue the brand if they owned a piece of it. They could wring every last dollar possible out of the franchise in "unorthodox" ways and CBS couldn't do anything about it. Or vice-versa.

    Someone ultimately has to be in control of the IP. That someone, from everything I understand, is CBS.

    Fan film makers don't work with Paramount and CBS, they work with CBS.
     
  20. Nerys Myk

    Nerys Myk Tomorrow Never Knows Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Location:
    Here, There and Everywhere
    The actual disc for STID reads Motion Picture: © 2013 PARAMOUNT PICTURES ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TM ® & Copyright © 2013 PARAMOUNT PICTURES ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. STAR TREK and related marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

    To me that means CBS owns Star Trek. The characters, the concepts, the names, the images and the kitchen sink. Even characters created in a film are CBS property. What Paramount seems to have are the rights to the film as a singular product.