Trekzone Releases Response to Alec Peters Interview

Trekzone’s follow-up to their interview with Axanar’s Alec Peters has hit the web.

A few weeks back, Trekzone’s Matt Miller spoke to Axanar producer Alec Peters about the fledgling fan film and many of the issues surrounding it.  Peters bristled at some of the questions, leading to a few testy exchanges.  You can see the interview and read more about it here.

In this segment, Miller plays more of the Peters interview and speaks to Axanar’s PR representative Mike Bawden and AxaMonitor’s Carlos Pedraza.   They discuss the interview itself as well as a variety of topics related to Axanar, from the copyright infringement lawsuit filed by CBS/Paramount, to speculation about the potential effect the lawsuit could have on other fan films, and much more.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Sorry, but this guy stole CBS’s IP and should pay the price. I hope it is high as a kite>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

And here comes the hate bashing…

Here comes the mob…

If someone stole your car and people said “gee that was wrong of him to do, I hope they throw the book at him” would you defend the thief? This is clear theft of IP for gain. Clear.

Is that really a fitting analogy? CBS was well aware of Axanar’s activity from the very start. This can hardly be compared to car stealing. It’s more like borrowing some artists’ themes or painting ideas and using a bit more than you should have or using those inappropriately. No one was screaming “thief!” prior to this lawsuit, but now Peters is percieved as a criminal, and Axanar as some kind of heist. That’s a bit absurd. However, making any kind of profit would be “stealing”. But, was Axanar really making profit?

A more appropriate anology:

Axanar didn’t steal the car. Axanar was handed the keys to the car by CBS, and told to stay under the speed limit, and they could keep the car. When Alec Peters decided to take his Axanar for a joyride well above the speed limit, CBS called in it’s lawyers to put an end to his joyride and reclaim the car for themselves.

Or CBS saw them trying to steal the car but instead of telling them not to and having no basis for “charges” they waited until the car was stolen, driven off and stripped for parts and they had a stronger case.

analogy would be better if you referenced FERRIS BUEHLER. The guys who joyride with Cameron’s dad’s car are the Peters equivalent, lawbreakers plain & simple.

The risk disclosures on the later Axanar fundraisers said the risk was that the studios own the IP and could say no. The statements assured that the Axanar management were all industry professionals and had prior relationships with the studios and knew what they were doing with regard to studio concerns. Anyone can look this up.

The risk statements did NOT say “and Axanar also incurs a much higher risk of being shut down than typically allowed fan films, because of the proposed plans of building a studio for future for-profit use, paying salaries widely, selling unlicensed models etc, etc., so please also take that into consideration”.

Donors may therefore have a case for saying they were not properly advised of the risks.

The efforts to paint every Axanar critic as a hater that donors should not listen to seems a lot like the efforts of submarine crew who tries to silence everything to avoid sonar detection and depth charges.

Reasonable inquiry should not be painted as the work of “haters”.

Man. Steven Spielberg and JJ Abrams do not come across so arrogantly, and THEY have stuff they could be arrogant about if they wanted to be.

Exactly. Peters is a complete nobody who stole someone’s IP and then acted like a jerk to everyone.

Wait. Peters can’t act his way out of a paper bag.

Oh, you mean his actual real character, not his acting as Garth.

Good point. Peters is his own worst enemy.

Peters is such an arrogant douchebag–and his arrogance is entirely unwarranted and undeserved.

A shame you can’t even communicate effectively without resorting to juvenile insults and pejorative language. Not taking you seriously.

We’re just hitting this down on the level Peters has demonstrated he lives at. Actually I don’t think anybody here has gotten THAT far down in the gutter, because it takes work to come off as consistently jerk-like as Peters has. And in terms of ‘juvenile insults and pejorative language’ … well, again, that seems to be where he lives, though I doubt he could spell pejorative. His support of that hack Cushman was enough to let me know which side of the credibility fence he was on a long ways back, and that was before I even found out he was the propworx guy. It’s been a long time coming, I hope he gets a whole library thrown at him rather than just a book.

Your name is “AntiJJVerse.” Not taking YOU seriously.

That username is probably about the only worthwhile part of his post. I’m really hoping Lin repudiates/avoids a lot more than just the moronic supertransporter.

Nah. Lin is dumber than Abrams and will drag it down to an even goofier level. The guy isn’t a good match for Trek and come summer nobody is going to be offering a spirited defense of the ensemble acting in his schlocky car movies.

Honestly this has gotten ridiculous. I been hearing so much abou this online I finally went and looked at the Axanar preview clip and it was good. Not perfect but yes solidly made. But that said they dont own the IP. Thats just the reality. If CBS wants to pull it they have zero ground to stand on and the Peters guy come off bitter and defensive. I never heard of this guy until that first interview I watched here and clearly hes put a lot of sweat and tears into this thing but he seem to have crossed a line. Its too bad no one will be able to see his work, especially the people who funded it but those are the breaks.

I’ve been looking forward to Axanar probably most of all the new Trek coming out since prelude and even with the lawsuit have hoped they will work something out…I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask about some of these things though and think it could be handled better. I don’t think questioning what’s going on is the same as “wanting to bring it down” or knock the project. Honestly though I don’t know all the inside baseball when I see it go this way I tend be more wary… Not accusing just doesn’t sit right with me. Axanar looks like the Trek I’ve wanted for awhile having been let down a bit by the reboot/JJ-Trek so I’ve been hopeful.

I do not trust Peters and he has given me very little reason to do so.

He is hugely egotistical, and cannot act. He should have had the humility to hire a good actor to play the central character.

But there were a lot of important things he should have done. Or, more properly, should NOT have done.

Great interview, and nice to see people communicating with civility on the Axanar case. That said, it’s still past time for Peters and co. to call it quits on this one. There is no path to victory here, CBS/Paramount own Star Trek, pure and simple. They need to find a way to end Axanar now.

Sorry ’bout the double post again, TM. This is an edit to my website

Once more.

As I try battle for the respect that the original series deserves and was sadly neglected for oh so many 40 years.

Paramount and CBS never honored their own properties as it relates to the original series. The movies and the Next Generation was a clear departure from the brand and trademarks that made the original such a classic.

They clearly abandoned their claims in the 70s.

In my opinion, and many others I know, the series never looked back to what made it so great and in fact deserted their claims as it relates to any fan production that would appear to infringe on the original series.

Just take that to the court along with a smart jury filled with TREKKIES.

But then again, I am biased, having authored over 60 videos on my website – – that some would say are a also bit derivative.

Enjoy! and remember. Don’t Litter!

I have a problem with your position here.
What you seem to be saying is that if other people and/or organisation(s) does not agree with how someone is taking care of their property, that an outsider can come in and take over. This has serious implications.

You may disagree with how Paramount/CBS have handled their franchise, but it still belongs to them. What is more, many Star Trek fans find (some of) the TV series and movies (most) enjoyable, so therefore do not share the same anxiety you seem to have as to how the franchise has been taken care of.

When I read your post, I keep thinking this, for some reason –
Unfortunately, similar actions have taken place in relation with what has happened with indigenous people and their cultures around the world.

Dandru (what a name) and Keachick, the Enterprise, uniforms, logos, title gtapics, prop designs, alien makeup, sound effects, and even the format all changed after the 60s show. I cant believe you cant see aALL those things changed – drastically!

That is whai mean by saying they abandoned the look and feel of tos trek. And with the limited defense positions that are open for Axanar, I would persue this option.

BTW, this IS the reason behind these prductions.TOS style trek was NOT being made for over 40 yeats.

Once again, I cant believe that you do not understand this argument.

And thanks for the good reviews of my website and its message, NOT. You just might understand my position on copyrights and trademarks better.

You should take a look, and remember – Don’t Litter!

@Trek – there were design changes but not critically so. The Animated series, films and everything else were clear derivatives of TOS.

Seriously, TUP. Then WHY all the success with the TOS styled fan films? Cawley specifically. They have the most views.PS. throw me a review on my site, why don’t you?(s)

Im not a fan film fan so Im not the best judge but perhaps “success” is not the word I’d use. I doubt they’d be *that* popular to the general public.

Continues is decent in a nostalgic way but mostly the fan films are really high quality backyard amateur projects but compared to professional projects, they suck.

I wouldn’t say they all suck. The better ones are of the same quality as some of the middling-to-good 3rd Season TOS eps.

Eh what? Seriously?

Was’nt it Scotty that said hemissed the old Enterprise some 70 years later (Trek timeline).

I am pretty sure the producers admitted it themselves, right there in the appropriatley titled episode ‘Relics’.

This would be like if TUP was interviewed by Trekmovie. LOL

Looks like nobody is buying is fake-ass claim to celebrity.

It’s interesting to see the vote flipping whenever Prodigal Son comes back.

@ Ahmed. Yes, it’s interesting because I shamed TUP (or whoever else it might have been?) into stopping his multi-voting…now I think we are seeing more real voting. For weeks on end, every time Phil, Keachick and I posted, within a couple hours, we would typically get around 5 negative votes, and TUP would typically have around 5 positive votes. Now we are seeing voting that more reals the fan opinions here — the fans on this site by a 2:1 margin are looking more forward to Beyond than the new series…this is the vast majority here.

What is interesting though is how ALL OF A SUDDEN you care about the voting?. Where was your concern when TUP was obviously multi-voting constantly against Phil, Keachick, and I…oh whoops, you supposedly don’t care about the voting and lectured us all to not worry about it? You have a hypocritical habit that Phil, Keachick and I all see repeated time and again — you only step in to offer you fake-ass “guidance” here when it suits the anti- nuTrek crown. You very rarely scold anyone who disagrees with your views — it’s all one sides. Fact!

I’ve deleted a reply to this comment that I felt inappropriate. Apologies for other comments in the thread being deleted as well. I’m not sure what caused that, but I will look into it.

Let’s keep these threads a safe place, guys.

Prodigal, this comment is in itself not entirely appropriate. Please keep discussion on topic and away from name calling. IDIC!

Sounds good, Kayla — I understand. And thank you so much for deleting that completely inappropriate reply.


Thanks a lot.

Irrespective of Peters’ demeanour, arrogant or otherwise, I think a lot of fans on here are becoming “Anti Anaxar” now only because of the prospect of more official trek coming out in 2017. When Anaxar was conceived there was no such prospect and I’m sure that all the people on here saying “I told you so” would have been more than happy to watch it regardless of IP issues simply because as fans we were desperate for more quality star trek. Personally I though Anaxar was poised to deliver on this judging from the high quality trailer they produced.

Furthermore, I doubt CBS would have been as bothered had they not decided to pursue a new series so I do have some sympathy with the Anaxar production team. Perhaps this can be attributed to just bad timing/luck on their part. Unfortunately from a legal standpoint they are clearly in violation and I think it would be best to let go and just move on.

Since I saw “Prelude to Axanar” I have been mystified by all the praise. Yes, it *looks* more professional than fan films, but other fan films are set in the TOS era with corresponding production values, except some CGI scenes. And the basic plot, the Battle of Axanar, does not appeal to me much.

Axanar’s writing and the acting were middling to poor. Very poor when it came to Peters and the Klingon. Tony Todd and JG Hertzler were the only actors that I found bearable, and their dialogue was not very well written, either.

It seemed to be a clear example of a vanity project, even moreso than Mignona’s STC and Cawley’s Phase II, the latter two being written and designed with the original ethos of Trek in plot, and thus more appealing to me. Okay, Mignogna always wanted to be Kirk, but he and his crew put out a pretty good-quality project with the love of Trek being paramount [ugh, sorry for the pun], and Cawley, who was the first, is also doing it for the love of Trek, and has had at least two very good scripts to work with, one of which was written by David Gerrold.

My memory of what I watched of Prelude was, first of all, pomposity, followed by a lot of starships blowing one another up. It seemed quite well done, but I did not care for the subject matter.

I don’t think so. Many fans were “anti-Axanar” or more correctly anti-Alec Peters, long before the making of a new TV series was announced. It has to do with how Peters has behaved.

Why are you promoting this idiot? It looks like through his childish “rules lawyering” he may have destroyed ALL fan productions. “They are doing it, why can’t I?”

Horizons is done, thanks to him. If we lose New Voyages and Continues too, he’s going to answer for it. One way or another.

don’t be ludicrous. New Voyages and Continues are doomed too, you can’t go around asking people for hundreds of thousands of dollars when CBS is actively making a Trek tv series. Their amateur garbage damages the brand and they should go get real jobs instead of leeching off Trek IP.

[This comment has been deleted by the moderator]

Phase II and STC have nothing to do with the upcoming series, which will be set in a different era of the original canon universe.

However, CBS may want to stop them to consolidate interest in their brand and their new series because outsiders to Trek would “get confused.”

IMHO, it would be too bad.

“he’s going to answer for it. One way or another.”

That sounded dangerously like a threat to me. And no, Peters hasn’t destroyed any fan productions. Thank your CBS/Paramount overlords for that.

“Thank your CBS/Paramount overlords for that.”

In other words, you have NO understanding of this situation whatsoever.

It’d be a real shame if he kills those two productions, which are clearly done for the love of Trek, not for one big ego.

Can we be done with this guy?

TrekMadeMeWonder: Um… what? That was a bit incoherent, so I’m not entirely sure what you were even trying to say.

I have a feeling that Mike will soon be the “former” PR guy for Axanar. Way too candid and honest and I don’t think Alec will put up with somebody who is not a sycophant.

When all is said and done, Peters will primarily be known for contributing to CASE-LAW in what will then affectionately be called the “Axe-a-nerd lawsuit.”

dmduncan – “Axe-a-nerd lawsuit” – LOL

Or, “Axe-a-D**k” … I think Peters believes he is above “nerd-dom.”

I do appreciate your pun though, and you’re right, it’s quite apt!

Numerous people have made fan films- should they all pay up?
Showld Parmount sue all fans who have watched fan films? where does it end? Where were the guyidlines- do we know Paramount gave them stipulations- how did they know what they could or couldn’t do?
Seems very Grey. Did paramount give guidelines with their blessing for fan films at the time?

Carlos Pedraza and Mike Bawden sound sane. Alec Peters does not…

Just an observation.

@Trekboi – I think common sense can be a guide. No they wont sue fans for watching. But they are generating significant revenue making fairly high quality full length episodes/films using IP owned by the studio. This isnt murky in the general sense.

Is any of this airing on Youtube and if so, why hasnt the studio filed a notice with Youtube to remove?

Agreed, Keachick. Peters sounds very defensive and peeved that anyone dare criticize any action of his. Or even question those acts.

Paramount did give them stipulations, which Phase II and STC [and probably other fan productions] have obeyed. Make no profit is the big one, and Peters violated it.

..and STC is a legal non-profit as well registered with the IRS. The first real Non-profit of the bunch.

Oh that explains a lot… He is THAT Alec Peters aka Propworks guy. Didn’t know that till the above post. Really glad I chose not to donate to that Kickstarter now. Nuff said.

I don’t understand why everyone cares about this project. I watched Prelude to Axanar again and was, again, underwhelmed. Oh sure the effects are pretty but that’s old hat now so how can Trek fans get excited about 20 minutes of people sitting around and talking. . . oh right. I forgot boardroom meetings are good, action and adventure are bad. So glad I’m normal and not a “real” Trek fan. I’d probably want to slit my wrists if I had to sit through another one of these horrible fan films Vote me down people. I can feel your anger!

Long live the JJ-verse!

I think Mark Lenard explained the balance best:

“Parts of it [STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE] were quite marvelous, but I guess, in general, when you do something like that you have to have at least a semblance of action, even if it isn’t fighting action. Star Trek as a television program never really had too much fighting, but it had a certain amount of action — action that was intrinsically tied up with the story. The TV series was never too complicated.

My feeling in general about Star Trek the TV series is that it has become such a part of American mythology that it combines good entertainment with something important to say. It’s a moral show searching into peace, brotherhood and all the noble, worthwhile ideas in society but it also has lightness and entertainment values.” — Mark Lenard, January 1981

Naw, “Prelude” was supposed to draw people to the action and adventure to come! If you give money now!

I would just like to point out right here that whatever else we can say about Axanar, Mike Bawden has the patience of a saint.

Goes to show that 90%;of Axanar’s PR problems is Peters and his ego, and that ego is the root of their current legal troubles.

I have never been in the fan film community and nothing against Mr. Peters but in this interview he does appear less like Captain Kirk and more like Captain Queeg. He seems to have a massive chip on his shoulder for some reason. Why does it bother him so much that there are people– some quite vocal– who disapprove of his project and hope to see it fail? Every project has such people, so why do they seem to get under his skin so much?

I found his defense of his IP use to be patently ridiculous, and– again– I have nothing personal against Peters or his project. But suggesting that CBS and Paramount are at fault for not providing clear guidance would be laughable if it weren’t so sad. They’re under no obligation to do so and any IP lawyer would have told him so had he bothered to consult one before raising money on the back of non-authorized IP. This one miscalculation on his part could end up costing him a great deal.

Probably because he is living under a 3 month shitstorm. No wonder he is getting defensive. I´d probably just have a nervous breakdown… :)

Wow… Alec is kinda a d**k.

Now this gets interesting…

Cause copyrighting a language is stupid really.

Mark Okrand deserves to have the copyright, but it probably belongs to Trek/Paramount, because it’s work product he designed for one of the TOS movies.

I do agree that Mark Okrand should hold the copyright for the creation of the Klingon language, but unfortunately if US copyright laws are like NZ’s, then the copyright does belong to the employer, not employee. I don’t think that is necessarily very fair always. Perhaps the law(s) do provide for exceptions?


Definitely, when the reality of the law is considered. But what are we to do when the corporate kool-aid keeps being swallowed that what’s being violated is that intellectual property is fungible with actual physical objects and can be “stolen”, when all that can actually be alleged under the U.S. Constitution is that a limited monopoly’s exclusive distribution rights are being infringed upon beyond what’s permitted under said law?

There is a ton of damage control that needs fixing within the Axanar camp. The nay sayers have already made up their minds about Alec Peters. I agree that questions need answering and that someone should be held accountable for the mistakes but the nonstop bashing has to end. Alec has indeed made poor choices. Whether this can be resolved or not is up to the Axanar team (preferably without Alec as their leader) and CBS/Paramount.
This has been an ongoing soap opera. -Way too much drama-

I just wonder about the mentality behind the notion that just because you’re a fan of Star Trek (or Star Wars, or whatever) that you should be able to create any sort of product based on that franchise for no other reason than you’re a fan. You could be making some similar type of space opera containing your own content. CBS/Paramount are, presently, the only ones who can make “real,” authorized Star Trek. Get a job with one of them and you might be able to make Star Trek for real, rather than a some sort of facsimile.
While I have great admiration for the people who make the various fan projects and commend their talents and abilities, I think, in the long run, everyone should be making original works based upon their own original ideas. The chances of being sued would be significantly reduced. And the potential rewards could be much greater.

P Technobabble,

In reply to your comment:

But you can’t get a job working in the industry unless you have experience and you can’t get experience unless you have the exact same mentality that you suggest one shouldn’t. As related by none other than Bjo Trimble:

‘’Some of our “Equicon kids” grew into the film industry. We met Greg Jein when he was a Star Trek fan making beautiful copies of ST props for his own amusement; he worked for both Filmcons and Equicons putting up display rooms with wonderful props, models, sketches and other goodies from movies. Greg is now a miniaturist of great repute in Hollywood, having won an Academy Award nomination for his “mothership” work in Close Encounters.

Mike Minor, already an established artist, brought to Equicons his panorama displays of George Pal movies; little items he’d throw together with a glue-gun and spray paints! Mike was responsible for the classy parts of Flesh Gordon, the ship sets. His name appears on the credits of several movies, including ST-TMP.

Paul Gentry, a rising young cinematographer, photographed a TV commercial for the ’76 Equicon, using the hotel taking off into space, with dozens of costumed volunteers “beaming down” to attend the convention. Frank van der Veer, who did the special space-going amoeba for Star Trek’s “Immunity Syndrome” episode, as well as visuals in Star Wars, etc, did the beaming down for us. Paul Gentry has since moved into the ranks of a professional cinematographer with several horror movies to his growing credits.

Makeup was always of special interest to Equicon attendees: how it was applied, how prosthetics were made and applied, how to create certain effects. Our futuristic fashions shows used all the makeup talent available for fantasy makeup, including one fast lady with a lipstick brush, Veonity Wayne. She moved on to do some of the major makeup for ST.TMP, working with Fred Phillips .

Tom Scherman, an experienced model-maker for an animation studio, exhibited beautiful models he made for his own amusement. One Equicon saw a 12- foot model of the Nautilus, with cutaway sides and exquisitely miniaturized interior with lights. So beautiful was it that Disney Studios decided they couldn’t do better and bought the model for their 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea exhibit at Disneyworld, Florida.’‘ == Bjo Trimble, ‘Equicon Filmcon Nostalgia’, STARLOG No. 42, January 1981, p60

You make a good point and I completely understand where you are coming from. The one big advantage for doing Trek-related stuff is that one may get a lot of attention, especially if what one does is of high quality and really shows off the talent.
I will mention that the examples you point out (and I’m willing to bet there are many others) do not include the making of a Star Trek film. I think that’s where the main issue lies. Showing off one’s ability to make models, do make-up, etc. isn’t quite the same as making a film that takes place in the Trek universe.
I do know what a huge wall there is preventing people from getting an industry job, and doing something Trek-related is a good way of being noticed. But now we see the potential shut-down of fan-made works (at least it seems more likely now than ever before). If all of the artists who planned on making more Trek have that opportunity taken away, will they continue persuing their dreams by doing their own thing or give it up because the Trek-universe is off limits? I’ll bet most of them will come up with something, even if people could look at it and say, “Hey, this would’ve made a good Star Trek story.” You can see Trek all over Galaxy Quest but it wasn’t Trek, y’know?
Personally, I’ve enjoyed watching the fan-made stuff and I give all of those creators a lot of credit for getting it done (unlike those who bash them but have nothing of their own to back up their words). I just don’t think making a Trek film is worth facing a lawsuit. In my opinion, of course.
Again, I totally get what you’re saying and I would love to make my own Trek movie because I know how much fun that would be. But if I got into trouble, my wife would be very, very angry!

And I should’ve added that my wife being angry would be far more painful than a major lawsuit.

I have found out something interesting about copyright law as it stands in NZ under the Copyright Act 1994. According to the text from a workbook I have from MIT Auckland, it states,

“Copyright lasts for a limited period of time which varies depending on the category of copyrighted work – (for example, copyright for a book lasts for the lifetime of the author plus 50 years after the death of the author, whereas copyright in a film lasts 50 years from when the film was made).”

This is under NZ law. Is it the same under US law?

Interesting discussion. I sat through the whole video. It’s one of those cases where I’d love to see the film, but understand why CBS/Paramount are unhappy. Alec Peters looked rather strained and worried, so didn’t make a particularly good impression.

I rather feel it’s time to update the copyright laws to make sense of some things. If a corporation owns something, there needs to be a decision on how long a copyright lasts, much as a pharmaceutical company has a limited time before generic versions of a drug they’ve developed can be made by other companies.

Imagine if Star Trek goes the way of the Django films! Or Doctor Who does. Or Dark Shadows…

The mind boggles!

The Dr Who franchise was, and still is, owned by the BBC. The present series is yet another BBC Dr Who production in a long list of BBC Dr Who shows. The first show aired in 1963.

I do wonder how (NZ) copyright law affects franchises, where the original series may be more than 50 years old, but the original makers are still continuing to produce more episodes based on the premise of the first.

Yeah, I think it’s 75 in the UK now. However, James Bond is now in the public domain in Canada, a book of new short stories has been released and someone’s apparently adapting the short story For Your Eyes Only for film – which will have little to do with EON’s movie.

As an outsider, it’s all quite amusing. I’m instinctively in favour of CBS/Paramount, but at Disinvited’s nudging I’ve been doing some reading and it all becomes much more murky, hence my jokey remark about the likes of Who, Trek and Shadows doing a Django (ie throw any old scifi film together and put the words Star Trek in the title to sell it: effectively do ‘Star Trek: Star Crash’ or ‘Star Trek: Battle Beyond the Stars’ or Star Trek: Queen of the Galaxy!!’ as well as respectful fan films.)

You need to look up US copyright laws as it pertains to film. In NZ, copyright only extends 50 years from the year that the film was made. However, for authors, the copyright covers them for their entire lives and 50 years past their deaths.


In the US each time the copyright limits come close to putting Mickey Mouse into the public domain, the Disney corporation dumps a ton of money on Washington, D.C. in lobbying to get it extended and hasn’t met with a failure to extend it yet.

In light of your research, it might behoove the fan productions’ legal advisers to contact NZ lawyers and think about raising funds to move their productions and facilities there. But I can’t expect that with so many films filmed there that there isn’t some way Hollywood has around it? Perhaps treaties?

It wouldn’t make any difference. It all depends on what US law stipulates and since Paramount/CBS are US companies, NZ law would not apply, necessarily. No one here either could make a Star Trek film without the permission of the Star Trek owners.

While Peters is pretty clearly guilty, I think this highlights the need for some serous intellectual property rights reform. You shouldn’t be able to hold a monopoly on an idea. This art form has permeated and ignited fires in the minds of millions, and it is morally wrong to stifle their creativity in defense of an artificially constructed monopoly.

I think it’s petty of CBS and Paramount to pursue this. And it might be made easier by the fact that Peters has not always conducted himself in a respectable manner, taking swipes at other projects, and flaunting his own ‘greatness’ arrogantly… but still, his project doesn’t harm anyone. The lawsuit is a raw exercise of power by the big guys.

Copyright doesn’t hold a monopoly only an “ideal” only the expression of that ideal. Peters could make a pew-pew space epic about some bad ass super captain, and CBS couldn’t say word one about it. But the minute he dresses it up in Trek’s “expression”–the ships, the uniforms, the storyverse, etc, and says hey “this is Star Trek!”–then CBS has every right to step in and crack his knuckles with a ruler and say stop.

Yeah, and that’s the problem with intellectual property as it exists. It limits free expression. Star Trek created a universe, and that universe is now running free in the minds of fans everywhere.

It’s wrong to monopolize the ideas that can come from that universe. It’s wrong to limit other people’s free expression.

As I said before, some would see things a little differently if it was them or a family member who owned the copyright. This is not just about not getting monies owed. It is a lot more than that.

It is the idea and the creators may not want to see that idea muddied, taken out of context etc. Copyright law protects the creator (or who had bought the idea, eg Paramount from Gene Roddenberry) from having that happen.

Last week I began studying DCT (Digital Communication Technologies). (NZ) copyright law has come up. Apparently, (according to NZ law), I own the copyright to my story dealing with the Menosian people and the Nulis (my own creations), without having registered it. I have the story in print (along with notes etc) and I feel quite protective about who I see these fictional alien people being. It may not be much of an idea, but it is mine. I would be terribly upset if someone took that story and then had my characters acting in a way that was contrary to my vision. These are my people, my world, my story. At this point, it has little, if anything, to do with what money I may gain. It is about the idea.

It is also mine to do with as I please, as it is CBS/Paramount’s right to do with their part of Star Trek as they please. We don’t have to agree with all that they do.


In reply to your comment:

“Copyright law protects the creator (or who had bought the idea, eg Paramount from Gene Roddenberry) from having that happen.” — Keachick

I have posted enough about this so I fail to comprehend why you still promote this absolute fiction of how Paramount came to control STAR TREK. PARAMOUNT did NOT buy the idea of STAR TREK from Roddenberry. Desilu did when it made the first pilot. Paramount didn’t even buy Desilu. Gulf & Western did when Desilu became financially distressed. Just as G&W had shortly earlier purchased Paramount when it was distressed.

Paramount came to control STAR TREK over the protests of its executives, who did not want to be straddled with what they regarded as a money pit that would only cause them additional financial distress, when Bludhorn, the head and owner of G&W, ordered his newly bought Paramount suits to do something with it. Thus giving Paramount the copyrights Desilu had for the two pilot movies outright and THAT’S what gave them STAR TREK.

There’s more to the tail of other STAR TREK copyrights but these are the only ones pertinent to the IDEA of STAR TREK which Paramount NEVER paid for. It was given to them, i.e. dumped in their laps, and they neither graciously nor gratefully accepted it.

Anyone is free to make a film about space travel. It can even have government made up of many planets. It can have space ships. It can have aliens. CBS isn’t restricting the idea of space travel or the majority of ideas that Trek contains. But common sense tells us this is over stepping on Peters part.

Why doesn’t he make a film inspired by Trek that contains no Trek ideas? Because no one would donate money and no one would care. They care and donate because of the IP owned by the studio.

Bingo. That’s the point right there: Anyone can do it—hell people have and done it with less. But Peters and Co. had to go out and raise money using the Trek brand-name. if the script was so good, they could have tried to sell it on it’s on merits. But they didn’t, they’ve not even tried it, they are steadfastly trying to claim they’re entitled to use Trek’s name to profit for themselves.

My mistake – I thought that Paramount had paid Gene Roddenberry for the rights…However, irrespective of how Paramount ended up with Star Trek, Star Trek is now theirs. Just because something is given to you does not make it any less yours than if you had to pay for it. I would think that making Star Trek movies etc would constitute acceptance.

interesting. Havent weighed in. love fans. hate corporations. but please. as i mentioned before, it was amazing to read an article about some of the things that were up for grabs, in terms of who owned what. When my own uncles name came up (Richard Robau, captain of the Kelvin).


“love fans. hate corporations.”

Corporations are people, my friend :)

uhuh. so how come when they commit a crime, they dont all go to jail?


When you see politicians are treated differently under the law, like the child molester former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, it’s not surprising then that corporations also get away easily.

Equality under the law is a fiction.

Bob’s family gets to immigrate to the U.S., he gets to marry a native born American, get’s to make millions in Hollywood, and gets to criticize freely the government and the corporations who have made his life so much better.

Sounds to me like the USA is still a pretty decent democracy!

We agree for once. Some of the bleeding hearts should see what happens with citizens of certain sympathized dictator countries criticism their leaders. Not so pretty.

On this subject, I think reasonable people take the stance that if fans want to make some home-made fan films that pay homage to a franchise they love, then great. This isn’t like me using my handicam from the 90’s to film my buddies playing Star Trek in the backyard. Its professional level and budgeted. Using someone else’s IP.


So what are you saying here? That if the government is not arresting/killing their dissenters, all must be well with the law?

That it’s perfectly normal for corrupt politicians & corporations to be treated differently under the law?

gets to?

first, let me say Amerca is great. love it. is it perfect? no. american exceptionslism is a myrh.

so back to your statement. I didn’t get to do anytjing. i TOOK IT. get the difference?

boborci Today 5:32 pm

I didn’t get to do anytjing. i TOOK IT. get the difference?

Did you “take” your Hollywood connections and the doors that they opened for you?

Well said, Cygnus.

yes. Sounds like you understand.

boborci Today 4:09 am

yes. Sounds like you understand.

What I understand is that you seem to be giving yourself a lot of credit for what likely comprised a significant degree of good fortune and serendipitous timing—meeting and getting in with the right people at the right time—and/or benefiting from nepotism in some way.

Nepotism? You mean the helping hand of the gigantic Cuban/Mexican Orci clan that ran Hollywood before me? Met the right people? Obviously. That is how every profession works. I suppose you like to tell your doctor it’s lucky for him that you’re sick or he would’t know the right people to be a doctor. Or that its luck for him he knew the right professors to get him through med school.

I get that it pisses you off that I can show up here at 10 years old not even speaking the language and that I pretty much hit the lotto. But you only win the lotto if you play.

boborci Today 1:07 pm

Didn’t your father work in media? In any case, there are many people who play the lotto and don’t win. The gutters and bars of this country are filled with very talented people who didn’t meet the right people soon enough and didn’t have stable support systems to hold out long enough before they hit the right numbers. “Falling stars” a friend of mine used to call them.

Bob, you’ve got your charms. You’re obviously diligent, hardworking and responsible. But, modesty has never been your strong suit.


“Bob, you’ve got your charms. You’re obviously diligent, hardworking and responsible. But, modesty has never been your strong suit.”

From reading various actors/directors/writers biographies, I can tell that modesty is NOT a desirable trait in Hollywood.

Ahmed Today 7:09 pm

I’m not surprised.

And yet there are modest people in the biz. George Clooney comes to mind.

his father was actually in the entertainment industry as a US citizen.

boborci Today 2:55 pm

…And his more-famous aunt, Rosemary Clooney. I went to a concert of hers back in the mid-90s. She was lovely and doted on her nephew, George, in between songs.

Come on, you guys. Bob Orci is no different from any other immigrant to a new country. Some immigrants do well in their country, just as many do not do as well. The same goes for native born citizens of a country as well.

Remember – envy/jealousy is one of the seven deadly sins and is not a nice look either. It is also dumb.

Some people put Chris Pine’s success down to nepotism as well, because his family also work in the acting business. Sure, maybe his father (Robert Pine) may have been able to help him by having doors open, but it is Chris who has to walk through them, be and do. His father (or anybody else) can’t audition for him, or be alt. Kirk (played by Chris Pine). Only Chris Pine can do that. The same goes for Bob Orci and indeed for (just about) anybody/everybody else.


In reply to your comment:

Where you said, “Bob Orci is no different from any other immigrant to a new country. ”

Well, as a child, Bob didn’t cross the border, undocumentded, by himself as many do today. So I suppose there’s that difference.

Really? Even if Bob did, it would not be his fault as he was a child.
Is this your attitude to all immigrants to the US?
Where is the IDIC – As that klingon said, “…it seems we still have a long way to go.”

I’m sorry, but I have to object to this kind of commenting and it is NOT because it is directed at Bob Orci. I would still be saying this, irrespective of who was the subject of these kinds of comments.
They constitute prejudice (tinged with a certain amount of envy/jealousy) and are of a personal nature.

Bob Orci would be, at the very least, a permanent resident and more likely a American citizen. He is subject to the same laws, responsibilities, obligations, rights and privileges provided for under those laws as anybody else is. He has also lived in the United States long enough to know as much, if not more, than anybody born in the US. Under the law he has a right to question policies that he does not like, and uphold those he does agree with and be involved and as uninvolved with the political process and so on, just like anybody else.

This issue and attitude has raised its head before here and it is shameful.


In reply to your comment:

I’m not sure what motivations you are divining but mine was just to point out that it is simply a fact of life in these United States, that immigrants with money and connections such as Rupert Murdoch or Justin Beiber, are not treated the same by my Federal government and its various states, as immigrants with lesser resources.

And, as much as I wish what you assert to be so, to the contrary, my country, sadly, does not treat all people attempting to immigrate here from all countries and various social and economic classes equally or fairly. It simply doesn’t.

NZ also has immigration laws which allow some people to settle here and others not. NZ tends to welcome people who have good educational qualifications, particularly in fields where there is a shortage of people here who have those skills, with no criminal record etc, just like any other country. Then there is the refugee quota that NZ has chosen and obliged to meet and most of us are happy that we can. Some want the quota to be higher than it is. However, most refugees tend to be those who have nothing, either in education or anything else and also tend to have various health problems, which our public health, education, housing and welfare systems need to address.

However, this was not the point I was making. The point is – that once a person has been accepted for permanent residence or citizenship, then they should be treated no differently from anybody else living in that country. You guys were treating Bob Orci differently in a denigrating, arrogant fashion.

Also, as Bob Orci has pointed out, his father was always an American citizen, who I believe was born and brought up in the US. It is his mother who was not. She was Cuban(?) by citizenship. His father, a US citizen, had every right to have his wife (and any children) join him in his country of birth.


Some of them do.

The poorer ones.

Just like people.

“The personal, as everyone’s so f**king fond of saying, is political. So if some idiot politician, some power player, tries to execute policies that harm you or those you care about, take it personally. Get angry. The Machinery of Justice will not serve you here – it is slow and cold, and it is theirs, hardware and soft-. Only the little people suffer at the hands of Justice; the creatures of power slide from under it with a wink and a grin. If you want justice, you will have to claw it from them. Make it personal.”

So say Quell!

I dun know, man. Any nation that has the eye of Sauron floating above a pyramid on its money is at least highly unusual, if not exceptional.


It wouldn’t make for a completely smooth experience, but one strategy Peters could adopt is to redact the Star Trek specific elements either by bleeping words and/or digitizing pointy ears, etc.

When positions soften in the future those things might be removed and/or added back.

Don’t holler at me about how that would look or sound. It’s a heuristic, kapeesh? He’s got people’s money, he’s spent a good portion of it, Kickstarter took its share — now what do THE FANS get in return?

The whole context of understanding Axanar is as Star Trek history. Peters would have to alter that. Fans would have to supply that context using their own imagination by understanding the original reason it came into being.

He might follow the Galaxy Quest example and see how close to the line of being Trek he can get without crossing it.

I agree. I think the Axanar concept is quite good, no matter what universe it takes place in. Sure, the Trek references here are pretty heavy but I believe there are ways to make this work as an original drama. I also think fans who were looking forward to this would still support it, knowing what the harsh realities are.
I imagine it must be quite heartbreaking to have put so much thought and energy into this project only to have the rug pulled out from under them. But I think, somewhere, somehow, everyone had such a scenario lurking in the back of their minds. It was just a matter of time, I think…

dmduncan Today 10:54 am

I’ve thought about that idea, too. Change it to the Battle of Something Else. Change the backstory and the relation of the battle to it. Change the species names and distinguishing characteristics. Change the character, ship, planet, organization and place names. Change all of the Trek terminology.

Is the AXANAR story good enough to stand on its own, without standing on the shoulders of Trek? It would seem a fair test. Make a deal with CBS to settle the proceeds gained by selling Trek coffee. If the whole project becomes a truly independent crowdfunding effort to produce a truly independent and original work, will CBS still fight it? Would they have standing to? With all of the Trek IP excised from the project, Alec could potentially keep Ares Studios and all of his other related projects. At that point, he might be vulnerable to claims from donors, and might have to give some of the crowdfunds back. But, if he handled the PR right, he might be able to retain enough to go through with at least the movie, if not the studio and the rest. Of course, the rebuttal to all of this is that few of the donors would care to fund the project without its Trek connection. But, AXANAR has apparently—believe it or not—collected its own fanbase at this point. I wouldn’t be surprised to see some portion of that fanbase remain loyal in the absence of a nominal Trek connection. And there are ways creatively to rewrite the AXANAR story such that it retains a subtext of Trek without any overt references to Trek or infringements thereupon. Like Galaxy Quest did, as you mentioned.


Or, convince CBS to choose the win/win/win scenario of distributing fan-Trek.

Well I’ve been advocating CBS/Paramount just license the damn thing to fans who want to make stuff, and let fans include a licensing fee in the cost of raising funds. And I’ve never heard a coherent reason why it won’t work.

That being said and with Bob admitting one of the reasons he left was the lack of coordination between the new show and STB (did I get that right?), reminds me of the last place I worked for.

You get people who are very comfortable in the corporations they work for and they do not WANT to fix problems. They make a good living and they don’t work hard and when someone comes in to shake things up — they get scared and try to stop what’s happening. All kinds of dirty political stuff starts happening so that nothing changes in the company, so that things do not get improved, and problems do not get fixed. And the more money that’s involved the nastier it can be.

I get that same sense from how CBS and Paramount is doing things. You can talk about licensing the Star Trek canon of premises and you are just going to rile up some corporate d*uchebags who don’t want any new idea invading their tiny comfortable little world.

It has to be done very smartly and strategically, pitching it to the right people at the right time.

Life on Earth probably began with less difficulty.

The only problem at this point is that he fought back. It’s likely that CBS will prevent him from making this particular project at all, citing that he raised funds for it by trading on their copyrights and trademarks.

Curious Cadet Today 4:38 pm

The only problem at this point is that he fought back. It’s likely that CBS will prevent him from making this particular project at all, citing that he raised funds for it by trading on their copyrights and trademarks.

I agree that Peters would have had a better shot at a joint venture had he not self-righteously fought the lawsuit. But, can CBS still sue AXANAR to quit the production altogether if it no longer infringes upon CBS IP? That they raised the funds based on a plan that would then be defunct, a plan that promised a Trek-related product, would seem to be an issue pertaining to the donors rather than to CBS. Is it copyright infringement to raise funds based on the promise of future copyright infringement (the AXANAR film), even if no such future copyright infringement occurs (the AXANAR film is rewritten, the CBS IP excised from it)? We’re not talking about any sales transactions here. There has been no exchange of product or services for money with respect to the actual film (only the coffee). So, if there’s no more infringing product going forward, and there has been no sale of infringing product in the past, would CBS have standing to sue the non-infringing rewritten product?

…to sue AXANAR to *quit* the non-infringing rewritten product.

The arrogance and denial by Peters is stunning. I donated hundreds of dollars to his production and when I had the audacity to post a question regarding Paramount/CBS having IP rights he and his goons blocked me from the main Axanar site. He says it is a dozen “haters” which is complete BS. He is not a nice guy and is a dishonest man.

How odd. The comment chain shows the root comment from Spaceman Spiff was posted “Today [April 30th] 2:03 pm” but the replies from Prodigal Son, and Ahmed are date “April 29, 2016”.

Does this mean an “edit” function has been added?

While Spiff is all-powerful in the battle against evil cosmic forces, he does not control time or how censor-prone fan sites operate.