Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionLast revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
which_kobayashi_maru [2016/04/08 10:42] – Carlos Pedraza | which_kobayashi_maru [2016/07/05 22:14] – [Real World Victory] grammar fix Carlos Pedraza | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{:: | {{:: | ||
{{TOC}} | {{TOC}} | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | </ | ||
====== Which Kobayashi Maru? ====== | ====== Which Kobayashi Maru? ====== | ||
- | < | + | //A popular blog post by an Axanar supporter portrays the lawsuit as a no-win scenario for Paramount Pictures (not CBS, the other plaintiff), while// **AxaMonitor**//' |
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP box> | ||
{{ : | {{ : | ||
<wrap lo>By [[user> | <wrap lo>By [[user> | ||
Line 11: | Line 16: | ||
**AXANAR SUPPORTER** Reece Watkins published a piece that's gotten some play this week, "Will Paramount’s Lawsuit Become the Studio’s Own Kobayashi Maru?", | **AXANAR SUPPORTER** Reece Watkins published a piece that's gotten some play this week, "Will Paramount’s Lawsuit Become the Studio’s Own Kobayashi Maru?", | ||
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP right round todo 60%> | ||
+ | <wrap lo>< | ||
+ | </ | ||
===== All About Paramount (Not CBS) ===== | ===== All About Paramount (Not CBS) ===== | ||
- | In Watkins' | + | In [[https:// |
The analysis in Watkins' | The analysis in Watkins' | ||
* The assumption that Paramount has the most at stake in this case. His post largely ignores CBS' stake. While Paramount holds the movie rights for Star Trek, CBS holds the TV rights and — importantly — the licensing rights that have filled corporate coffers for 50 years. | * The assumption that Paramount has the most at stake in this case. His post largely ignores CBS' stake. While Paramount holds the movie rights for Star Trek, CBS holds the TV rights and — importantly — the licensing rights that have filled corporate coffers for 50 years. | ||
- | * That the case threatens to become a legal quagmire. It's so early in the case that there' | + | * That the case threatens to become a legal quagmire. It's so early in the case that there' |
+ | <WRAP right box 50%> | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | </ | ||
===== Straw Man Arguments ===== | ===== Straw Man Arguments ===== | ||
Line 52: | Line 64: | ||
For Paramount (don't forget CBS, Reece!), protecting their billion-dollar Star Trek property is worth that outlay. Axanar' | For Paramount (don't forget CBS, Reece!), protecting their billion-dollar Star Trek property is worth that outlay. Axanar' | ||
- | This is all, of course, in a world at which Axanar is not at its center. But let's travel back to that world of fantasy to consider Watkins' | + | This is all, of course, in a world in which Axanar is not at its center. But let's travel back to that world of fantasy to consider Watkins' |
==== Paramount' | ==== Paramount' | ||
Line 62: | Line 74: | ||
> Due to the vagaries of many company mergers and splits since the original show first aired in 1966, Paramount only holds the theatrical/ | > Due to the vagaries of many company mergers and splits since the original show first aired in 1966, Paramount only holds the theatrical/ | ||
- | It is fair for Axanar' | + | It is fair for Axanar' |
But there' | But there' | ||
Line 87: | Line 99: | ||
Do I assert whether anything inappropriate or illegal is behind any of these questions? No, I do not. I simply have no evidence other than what I have been able to produce on AxaMonitor. But they are legitimate questions, and they deserve answers, either to the public or to the friendly lawyers from Loeb. | Do I assert whether anything inappropriate or illegal is behind any of these questions? No, I do not. I simply have no evidence other than what I have been able to produce on AxaMonitor. But they are legitimate questions, and they deserve answers, either to the public or to the friendly lawyers from Loeb. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [{{ :: | ||
==== ' | ==== ' | ||
Line 93: | Line 107: | ||
> That’s not all Paramount has to worry about. … There is still a huge amount of money at risk for the film studio, namely in the form of the upcoming “Star Trek Beyond” film. With a budget well into nine figures, the slightest whiff of bad publicity could easily reduce the opening weekend box office for their summer blockbuster by more than they could hope to be awarded in damages, even if Axanar Productions did have millions to pay out. | > That’s not all Paramount has to worry about. … There is still a huge amount of money at risk for the film studio, namely in the form of the upcoming “Star Trek Beyond” film. With a budget well into nine figures, the slightest whiff of bad publicity could easily reduce the opening weekend box office for their summer blockbuster by more than they could hope to be awarded in damages, even if Axanar Productions did have millions to pay out. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP right box 50%> | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | </ | ||
=== Bad Publicity === | === Bad Publicity === | ||
Line 106: | Line 124: | ||
=== Media Narrative === | === Media Narrative === | ||
- | In this world, the real world, most people don't give a hoot about a fan film accused of wholesale copyright infringement, | + | In this world, the real world, most people don't give a hoot about a fan film accused of wholesale copyright infringement, |
Most of the audience Paramount hopes to attract to //Star Trek Beyond// have no interest in a story about nerds arguing about whether you can get sued for saying // | Most of the audience Paramount hopes to attract to //Star Trek Beyond// have no interest in a story about nerds arguing about whether you can get sued for saying // | ||
- | The purported silliness of that controversy is just as likely an interpretation of //Beyond// director Justin Lin's now-famous yet ambiguous tweet ("This is ridiculous! Trek belongs to the fans!") which Watkins would have you believe can only be construed as unequivocal support for Axanar. | + | The purported silliness of that controversy is just as likely an interpretation of //Beyond// director Justin Lin's now-famous yet ambiguous tweet ("This is ridiculous! I support the fans! Trek belongs to all of us!") which Watkins would have you believe can only be construed as unequivocal support for Axanar. In his lack of specificity, |
=== 'The Fans' === | === 'The Fans' === | ||
Line 119: | Line 137: | ||
Assuming every single one boycotts //Beyond//, that won't make even a dent in the audience numbers. //Star Trek Beyond// will rise or fall on its own merits, not the imaginary market power of a fringe group of fans, many of whom never liked the rebooted Trek anyway. | Assuming every single one boycotts //Beyond//, that won't make even a dent in the audience numbers. //Star Trek Beyond// will rise or fall on its own merits, not the imaginary market power of a fringe group of fans, many of whom never liked the rebooted Trek anyway. | ||
- | |||
==== ' | ==== ' | ||
Line 130: | Line 147: | ||
> There is a way out for them — by dropping the case now and letting Axanar proceed with their blessing, they can go from bully to savior with the stroke of a pen. By working with Axanar, the story goes from “Studio Bullies Fan Film” to “Paramount blazes new media trail with landmark deal.” That can only help the box office for Star Trek Beyond, and when a CBS approved Axanar hits the retail channel, Paramount could stand to make millions of dollars-the only way it can possibly make any money at all off the whole fiasco. That’s the studio’s only hope to solve its own Kobayashi Maru — stop the test now, before they sink their own ship. | > There is a way out for them — by dropping the case now and letting Axanar proceed with their blessing, they can go from bully to savior with the stroke of a pen. By working with Axanar, the story goes from “Studio Bullies Fan Film” to “Paramount blazes new media trail with landmark deal.” That can only help the box office for Star Trek Beyond, and when a CBS approved Axanar hits the retail channel, Paramount could stand to make millions of dollars-the only way it can possibly make any money at all off the whole fiasco. That’s the studio’s only hope to solve its own Kobayashi Maru — stop the test now, before they sink their own ship. | ||
- | Never mind Watkins presents no real facts to support the media narrative he is certain will provide the leverage that forces | + | Never mind Watkins presents no real facts to support the media narrative he is certain will force Paramount (not CBS … well, maybe CBS a little bit) to reward copyright infringers who used the studios' |
- | Except maybe Axanar is more like Orion raiders taking refuge in the Badlands. And Watkins should remember that the Kobayashi Maru is not a test you pass by " | + | Except maybe Axanar is more like Orion raiders taking refuge in the Badlands. And Watkins should remember that the Kobayashi Maru is not a test you pass through victory. It is a test of character. And the character being tested here is of a producer who got fans to part with their money by describing his project as a "fully professional independent Star Trek production," |
The character being tested is the one that when suddenly faced with a lawsuit about his singular misuse of intellectual property he does not own began calling his production just a fan film like all the others, and kicked out anyone who dared to question the party line in its Facebook groups, often maligning their character, swearing at them and calling them names. | The character being tested is the one that when suddenly faced with a lawsuit about his singular misuse of intellectual property he does not own began calling his production just a fan film like all the others, and kicked out anyone who dared to question the party line in its Facebook groups, often maligning their character, swearing at them and calling them names. | ||
- | That's the Kobayashi Maru test Alec Peters and Axanar | + | That's the Kobayashi Maru test Alec Peters and Axanar |
+ | |||
+ | ---- | ||
+ | **Keywords** {{tag> |