Tribbles in Trek (2008): Gerrold Sues?

[Sir Rhosis]

^^^Yes, that is true. According to Gerrold, Heinlein stated that he thought the similarities were slight and stated they both probably owed a debt to Ellis PArker Butler's short story "Pigs Is Pigs" (rapidly multiplying guinea pigs overrun a rail station) and possibly to Noah.

Again, this is according to David Gerrold. I've never heard or read of any other situation where RAH made mention of the tribbles vs. the flat cats.

Sir Rhosis

 

[Cary L. Brown]

CaptainHawk1 said:It wouldn't matter anyway. Neither Gerrold nor Heinlein have any rights to the tribbles. They are the property of CBS/Paramount, not the creators. Do you think Andy Probert has a copyright on the Enterprise-D? These people were hired by the production company to create a design for them. They have no rights to the design other than to say, "Hey, look... I created that."

-Shawn

Uh... everything you just said may make sense to YOU, but it's inconsistent with the LEGAL REALITY of the contractual relationships between screenwriters and studios, under legally-binding agreements between the Writer's Guild and the studios.

Ellison, CORRECTLY, stated that he created several key elements in "City on the Edge of Forever" and those cannot be reused without compensating him, in accordance with the contract under which he sold his original work.

Gerrold submitted his script "on spec" and I believe he was not a member of the Writer's Guild at that time. However, I still expect that he would have sold his script under the same "boilerplate" terms that the Guild usually requires (in fact, he may have been required to join the guild prior to the episode being shot... anybody remember?)

Unless his youth and inexperience resulted in him being taken advantage of by the studio (which is entirely possible), he would be entitled to compensation for the re-use of any of the following:

"Deep Space Station K-7"
"Tribbles"
"Cyrano Jones"
"Mr. Lurry"
"Arne Darvin"
"Niles Barris"
"Quadrotriticale"

Captain Koloth, on the other hand, was a character who had already been partially written (as a potential ongoing adversary for Kirk) prior to Gerrold's script, as I recall.

In any case, Gerrold should receive a stipend (albeit probably a small one!) if his Tribbles show up at all, and a larger stipend if they're SIGNIFICANT in any way.

 

[gastrof]

sturmde said:

...considering the physical appearance of Stanely Adams in TTWT, this could cry out as a perfect cameo for today's William Shatner!

You made me laugh.

I think it'd be too distracting, tho'. Plus, too many people would start screaming "They could have given us Kirk and they put Shatner in the Jones role?!?!?!?!"

 

[gastrof]

Sharr Khan said:
According to the wiki entry on tribbles - "Trouble with Tribbles" isn't considered a "first contact" since Jones and presumably others are aware of them. Just cause Kirk and crew don't know doesn't mean anyone else in the rest of the galaxy doesn't know what they are.

Sharr

Actually, according to the episode, the nature of the tribble brought it into the catagory of "dangerous animal". Kirk wouldn't have been able to threaten Jones with an "importing dangerous animals into Federation space" charge if that wasn't the case.

Look how quickly they took over both the Enterpreise and the station. Can you imagine an animal like that getting loose on a colony world? Even ONE?

Spock spoke of Jones having removed the creature(s?) from a natural, predator-filled environment, and Jones never protested.

I think if these things had been seen in Federation space before, they'd be known. Kirk would probably have had standing orders regarding them.

I just find it hard to believe that the events on K7 were anything but the FIRST appearance of the tribble in Federation space.

Sharr Khan said:

...they could appear in a later time period well after Kirk and crew had already dealt with "the trouble with tribbles." ...

On that point, I hope you're right.

Sharr Khan said:
...fans love to blow these tidbits into the sky is falling scenarios just to have a reason to be critical...

Actually, it's a case of someone being critical against other fans who want existing continuity to stay in place.

Some people seem to like the name "Star Trek" and will accept anything so stamped.

Others like the whole comcept, and would like future productions to treat previous ones as "real" in continuity.

Some people who don't feel that type of loyalty are known to complain against those who do.

 

[Sharr Khan]

Every last grain of Trek lore and how it fit used to bug me to no end. If some part of it didn't fit well with another part (there was alot of that. Long before anyone thought up "Enterprise"... easy to pick up on when I was younger - I would obsess about it even when I went to sleep at night) I noticed.

As I grew older (and personal experience taught me) I started to realize its a fictional universe where those running it are not databases nor should they be expected to be - one little piece of information out of place or even a whole book of it didn't detract from my enjoyment of it.

Trek fans often take the words from the characters mouths over literally as if they're omniscient beings and all they utter is double checked fact - actual humans don't speak so literally.

See I also started to notice there is always room for an alternate interpretation of fictional events as well.

Tribbles in the background of some shop (we completely don't know the context, its very likely the fuzzballs are off in the background and won't be noticed by anyone but the viewers of the film) aren't going to run over anything "The Trouble with Tribbles" did. No one said anything about them being central to the plot - just an in-joke for those in the know.

Complaining that simply having them there - is an overreaction!

Sharr

 

[gastrof]

Sharr Khan said:...Complaining that simply having them there - is an overreaction!

Sharr

A desire to not see what came before get ignored/forgotten.

It's bad enough they may go the "Superman Returns" route and treat standing continuity/facts as valid, but change how things look (the Enterprise, the uniforms, etc.) and imply it's always been that way.

To also change even a small event/element, especially because they think they're "waving" at us long-standing fans...

You wonder to what extent these guys really are long time fans.

One wonders the same about someone who calls sincere interest an "overreaction".

 

[Sharr Khan]

gastrof said:

Sharr Khan said:...Complaining that simply having them there - is an overreaction!

Sharr

A desire to not see what came before get ignored/forgotten.

It's bad enough they may go the "Superman Returns" route and treat standing continuity/facts as valid, but change how things look (the Enterprise, the uniforms, etc.) and imply it's always been that way.

To also change even a small event/element, especially because they think they're "waving" at us long-standing fans...

You wonder to what extent these guys really are long time fans.

One wonders the same about someone who calls sincere interest an "overreaction".

Trek isn't a "guiding star" in my life at this point. It stopped being that along time ago. Now my only concern is that it entertains me - if it fails in that then I don't want to hear about it anymore. Watching "fans" latch onto something that may (likely is) some throw away background thing only helps ruin it for me that much more.

Its hard to tell what's sincere interest and whats gripping simply cause they want to hate on the current team behind this project.

As long as the Enterprise doesn't at all resemble the "D" I'll be pleased. I'm not going to damn them for something GR couldn't even do in either Phase II or TMP - bring the ToS ship over as it was.

Sharr

 

[CaptJimboJones]

I've never been one of the continuity fetishists who shriek about a glimpse of a tribble or whether the NX-01 resembles an obscure ship that was featured on DS9 for about 10 seconds.

As long as Trek XI tells a well-written, compelling story I'll be happy. If the fetishists want to squabble or moan over brief lines of dialogue or momentary glimpses of trivia that "conflict" with other brief moments of Trekdom, well, more power to them. :thumbsup:

 

[Outpost4]

Hey, don't knock a tribble fetish until you've tried it.

 

[Stag]

Finally we will see the glorious Klingon Tribble War visualized on film.

 

[CommanderTrip]

Stag said:
Finally we will see the glorious Klingon Tribble War visualized on film.

I believe you mean the Great Tribble Hunt :thumbsup:

 

[TigerOfDarkness]

Does that mean they will sing songs?

 

[CaptJimboJones]

Outpost4 said:
Hey, don't knock a tribble fetish until you've tried it.

I was going to Google "tribble fetish" and then I stopped myself. That's something I just don't want to delve into.

But you just know it's out there somewhere.

 

[Woulfe]

^ If there is Tribble porn online....

THERE IS NO GOD !

- W -
* Just thought you'd like to know that before you go looking for it *

 

[MisterPL]

My biggest concern is that there appears to be a conscious effort by the filmmakers to pack in as much Trekkie-wank as possible into this production. Tribbles are just the latest ingredient. Unless we're going to be treated to a different take on tribbles (IE - reboot) I don't see the point in including them at this time. Having Gerrold's approval doesn't fill me with warm fuzzies either, no pun intended.

 

[FordSVT]

Starship Polaris said:
Oh, folks have to get another dig in at Ellison for having the temerity to assert control over something he thinks is his property.

Maybe people wouldn't feel the need to get their "digs" in at Ellison if the old guy would keep his pie-hole shut in public until he actually found out for sure they were going to use his properties.

Do you really think anyone would have a problem with him bitching at Paramount if they really were going to use his properties without permission or compensation?

 

[trevanian]

If you wait till you are sure about something, it is often too late to do anything about it. Sounding the alarm was fine, and damned smart, if they had been messing with his material it'd've made the issue public early on.

If Ellison had known about the original TERMINATOR's resemblance to a couple of his works in advance (and known that Cameron spoke of borrowing from OUTER LIMITS), you'd better believe he wouldn't have waited till after the movie came out to take legal action (which is why a credit acknowledging him is burned in on most but not all videotapes.)

 

[cooleddie74]

David Gerrold's not the alcohol-imbibing, bipolar dick Ellison is either.

 

[trevanian]

cooleddie74 said:
David Gerrold's not the alcohol-imbibing, bipolar dick Ellison is either.

Yeah, you want to show me ANY evidence of Ellison having picked up two alcoholic drinks in his life?

 

[cooleddie74]

trevanian said:

cooleddie74 said:
David Gerrold's not the alcohol-imbibing, bipolar dick Ellison is either.

Yeah, you want to show me ANY evidence of Ellison having picked up two alcoholic drinks in his life?

Just basing that comment on what I've heard from lots of people since I was a kid and teenager. For all I know it's false. But based on his mood swings, temper and overall "meh" personality I wouldn't be surprised if he were a drinker.