Star Trek Fan film Guidelines

So thanks mostly to the efforts of the “Axanar” people, the guys who raised a million bucks to produce a “Star Trek” based film which resulted in a lawsuit, Paramount has now issued specific guidelines for anyone who wants to make a Trek fan film. And naturally fans are unhappy about it.

My response?

You guys are dámņëd lucky.

When I was producing a “Star Trek” fanzine back in the 1970s, Paramount issued a decree: No one could write “Star Trek” fanfic. It was copyright infringement, plain and simple, and not to be allowed. At one convention I attended, Paramount lawyers actually came into the dealer’s room and confiscated peoples’ fanzines from right off their tables.

The fact that they loosened up to the degree that they have should be something fan filmmakers should feel dámņëd grateful for. You want to make fan films about space adventures but you don’t like the Paramount decrees? Fine. Create your own dámņëd characters and universe and do whatever the hëll you want. You own the copyright and have the ability to tell any kind of story for however long you want. That’s my advice. Otherwise live with it.

PAD

48 comments on “Star Trek Fan film Guidelines

  1. Speaking of which, I really liked “Tigerheart”. So happy to see it’s available in the UK from Amazon:

    Any chance of seeing it adapted into a stage play or movie?

      1. The stage play of Peter Pan will be under copyright in the US until 2013.

        The book remains under copyright in the UK.

      2. Indeed. Good thing that “Tigerheart” features no mention of Peter Pan, Hook, or any James Barrie character.

        Because of copyright.

        Just saying.

        PAD

      3. The 2003/2004 Peter Pan movie was good, as was Hook (which could be considered a revisionist version of the story much as Wicked was a revision of The Wizard of Oz.) And if the recent films are so bad, then why doesn’t the British industry make some, then?

      4. Well, we’ll have to disagree on the 2003 Peter Pan, but I agree with you on Hook. The bigger problem is that all three, as I recall, did poorly at the box office (although at least in the case of Hook it did well worldwide, which you can pretty much ascribe to Robin Williams’ popularity.) Between that and the lousy reviews they garnered, it’s discouraging.

        PAD

  2. (shrug) For me, the easiest way to “live with it” is just to flush any part of my mind that continues to care about Star Trek. That may be antithetical to what Paramount ultimately wants (a healthy money-spending audience that cares about its offerings), but it’s the easiest path for me. There are lots of other IPs out there.

    1. So acting like a brat about copyright enforcement by an IP holder (even with what Peter told you and others before about copyrights in the case of H.P. Lovecraft) is how you’ll be?

      1. They don’t have to be douches about it. Work WITH fan projects. Protect your interests without chaining down people who are generally just trying to share their passion for Trek with one another.

        For that matter, LET commercial projects be made. Charge a license fee and take a percentage off the gross. No money invested by the studio, but they get paid.

        Win/win.

        What’s really going on is that (and the guidelines and the startrek.com interview with CBS’ licensing guy bear this out) that the projects were becoming too high-quality. CBS feared they would lose money because no one would want their offerings.

        HELLO?!? MCFLY?!? If Axanar (or Continues or NV, etc) is really that big and that popular, WHY ISN’T CBS AND PARAMOUNT MAKING THAT SORT OF MATERIAL THEMSELVES? Clearly there must be a market for it if it’s become big enough to be a threat.

        Oh, but CBS can’t get enough viewers to support that stuff to make a profit? Ok, then it isn’t a threat to them in the first place. If the fanfilm market is that insignificant it shouldn’t matter what they do. Let CBS make JJTRek, and Paywall Trek and let it sink or swim on it’s own merits. Let the fans make their projects and let them do likewise.

  3. I fail to understand how or why fans believe that they can use the Star Trek IP freely and with impunity. It’s not their IP! These guidelines seem fair and reasonable to me.

    Big galaxy-spanning adventures of a future Earth empire meeting alien races doesn’t seem like it’d be too hard to make up. It’s not like Paramount can copyright that idea. Make something new, people, and if you really believe that people should be able to use others’ IPs without restriction, let people do that with your ideas. When they’re making money off their new project and you want a cut, remember your temper tantrum with this whole fiasco.

    1. Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek over 40 years ago, and he’s been dead a while. It’s long overdue to go public domain

      1. Doesn’t have anything to do with Roddenberry. He sold it to Paramount/CBS. Corporations don’t die. And things don’t enter public domain for (iirc) 75 years anyway.

      2. MitchDev: I certainly have issues with the way our copyright system works, and I’m not completely unsympathetic to your opinion. However, Star Trek has been a corporate creation from the beginning in that Gene was never the only writer, the only actor, the only creative force behind the show/mythology. Why should his death be the only way to decide whether or not the show should enter public domain?
        .
        I know that if I were to create an IP like that, I’d want my estate to earn money from it for as long as it could. Unauthorized productions like Axanar can hurt the IP.
        .
        Even if TOS were to go into public domain, it hasn’t been 40 years since the creation of TNG, DS9, Voyager, etc. There are many ideas that still would be off-limits by most interpretations of copyright/trademarking.

  4. Or better yet, Star Trek’s been over a long time, time for the copyright to end and go public domain.

    The “new” Star Trek universe can make a case for its own copyright, but screw Paramount on classic Trek and next gen Trek

    1. As I recall, the law is the lifetime of the creator plus seventy years. Since Gene died about twenty years ago, the copyright is going to continue for another half century, no matter how much you may declare that it’s time for it to go into public domain.

      PAD

      1. Law was changed to make it that long, long overdue to reset back to where it started.

      2. Or, you know, use the creativity you supposedly have to make something original.
        .
        Look,as I said below, I know people who do fan films for Trek, Star Wars, Who, and others, and I think they do fine work, but I always question why they don’t do more original stuff instead. I really do get loving something with a passion and wanting to show that love for it, and I can see some logic in thinking that brand name may get more eyeballs on your work if you want to show off your talent.
        .
        But, guys, this is only going to get worse and more tightly controlled as tech makes it easier for almost anyone to make professional looking productions. It’s going to get nastier as IP lawyers look at fundraising platforms and convention circuits and see what looks like even a whiff of the appearance of making money off of the creations owned by the companies they work for even if you’re making no money at all.
        .
        If you want to show off your creativity, create something new. If you want to have fun playing in a universe, build your own. Look, it’s not like you can’t do a Trek styled story that’s not Trek. Hëll, that almost describes half the official shows. Star Trek is nothing more than basic science fiction. It’s mankind exploring space and running into things that can be really nice or really deadly. It’s not a particularly novel concept that is exclusive to the brand.
        .
        I have no understanding of people that whine about wanting to see creative new things or to make new, creative stories themselves, but do it in the form of demanding that it should be in the form of something that’s been around for decades and isn’t theirs. If you want to tell as great space sage, tell your own and tell it in your own universe with your own creations. No, it won’t have the brand name cachet of Star Trek stamped on it, but the risk of having the rug yanked out from under you and you seeing all of your work essentially erased by IP lawyers with way more money than you will be greatly reduced.

      3. I agree that the copyright law should be returned to its earlier, more reasonable time lengths. That said, the law is what it is, so there’s no use in pretending otherwise.

        What Peter said is perfectly correct. At least for the Star Trek fans, it will not be terribly hard to tell the story you want with new characters and alien races. Unless your story is “The Day I Saved the Enterprise and Got Captain Kirk to Fall in Love With Me” in which case Paramount has saved us all.

        (Full disclosure; I’ve worked on Trek and Dr Who fan films. I feel bad for the Dr Who fans if this, as is likely, spreads to other properties. REALLY hard to make a Dr Who inspired film that is not 100% copyright infringement.)

        (I also find it kind of crazy/sad that if you made a Star Trek PØRN film…you can use the names, sets, costumes, pretty much anything you want. I understand why, it’s just weird to realize that absolute contemptuous mockery of a property is protected while a loving homage is grounds for a lawsuit. But that’s the way it is and there’s no getting around it. Unless you live in Turkey, in which case you can have Captain Kirk and Spider-Man battling Zorro and Dracula on the set of Saturday Night Fever with the Soundtrack from Dune. You go right ahead with that.)

  5. On the one hand I get the desire to work with characters, ideas, and creations you love. Fanfic and the later fan film projects always reminded me of acting like a kid again. You played with your friends in the worlds that you liked from the movies, comics, and TV. It looked like fun.
    .
    But, dámņ… Some of the stuff I’ve seen recently really pushes it more than just a wee bit. Technology is getting to the point where you can create things that look almost studio production quality, and the fundraising platforms and convention circuits make it highly unbelievable that money is not being made in some way on these things by some of these people. Maybe they’re not making money, but the appearance of something can sometimes cause as many problems as the real deal.
    .
    I know people who do Trek and Who fan films, and I like their work, but even in supporting their passion I end up wondering why they’re not putting the effort into something they can own. Yeah, I get their passion for the series they love, and, yeah, I can see where maybe they might feel that a brand name will get them more attention if they’re hoping to show off their talent or skills, but I still see the potential drawbacks of having the rug yanked out from under them with stuff like this.
    .
    I’m honestly amazed they didn’t clamp down harder on the issue given the Axanar issue. The reality of the situation is that it’s going to be become easier to do what they did as time goes on, not harder. If I was doing this kind of thing, I’d take this as a good sign to start making original content now, because this may only get worse for the fanfic and fan film people.

  6. I’ve sort of wondered how sites like http://www.startrekcontinues.com/ continue to operate, especially since they don’t seem to match the new guidelines (both in length, and involving the participation of Star Trek alumni.) Maybe they have special permission.

    1. Well, aside from the fact that the announcement was just made, the fact is that Star Trek Continues listened when CBS/Paramount said “don’t do this.”

      1. According to the podcast at startrek.com with the licensing guy from CBS. Existing material (meaning “locked film” is safe. They aren’t planning massive takedowns. The websites will need tweaking.
        The new rules apply to anything not already “locked” and going forward.

    2. Long and short of it, per startrek.com.

      If it’s a “locked” (no more changes) and released project, it’s grandfathered.

      If it’s still “in production” or “in development” it has to fly by the new rules.

      Websites, etc will need tweaks to make compliant.

      1. So, basically “Star Trek Continues” will no longer continue? Because anything they do now will be de facto “sequel” to everything they’ve already done? Guess I might as well watch it now, then.

      2. That’s about the size of it. They could in theory continue but only under the new rules.

        Vic gave an interview where he expressed his extreme frustration over the entire affair. Reading between the lines, I half expect him to “close shop” like Cawley did the other day.

  7. Really, nothing has changed. All CBS did was say “Stay in the line and you won’t get sued…color outside the lines and you MIGHT get sued”. CBS gave up a big chunk of ground they didn’t need to, but the reality it that the risk now is the same as the risk before.

    1. I view it as simply another result of the digital age. Just as studios are able to enjoy a massive level of box office success thanks to social media, so too are the fans now able to express an unprecedented level of organization and creativity.

      If the studios want to thrive in this new environment, they have to learn how to navigate its challenges. No, fans don’t really have the right to use someone’s IP, but they do have the right to choose what studios or films they will support. I assume Paramount and CBS are eager to keep Trek fans as happy as possible, hence the attempt to offer these guidelines.

      1. Jake, studios are under no compulsion to do such a thing, not even for you or anybody else. Allowing fans to make movies/webseries like this can damage an IP and make it worthless so that they no longer see profit in it to do anything with it, and just shelve it or let it be moribund. Is that what you want for Star Trek?

  8. I tend to have considerable sympathy with the IP holders on this one. Is the duration of copyright too long now? Maybe. But people are living longer now. The current rules let an author and their (pardon the expression) next generation profit from their work, but not much more than that. Corporate copyright holding a problem? Yeah but generally speaking the creators who sold their copyright, or who were doing work for hire were grown-ups and knew what they were doing. And in the work for hire case, the original creators can now move to reclaim copyright after a certain time. If you create your own original stuff, and want to let other people play with your toys in your sandbox, you are free to do so. Creative Commons licensing allows you to make any of your own work exactly as freely available as you want it to be. That’s YOUR choice.

  9. Mr. David, you’re right. We’re dámņëd lucky, considering, that we now know, where we as fans are standing. You’re right, when you’re saying, that back in the day, it was plain and simple copyright infringement of writing a fanfiction.

    However – there are some points I take issue with:
    for example: if you associate a character with that 15 minute clip, you cannot use that character again in other clips, because that’d a) be a sequel and therefore violating point 1) on the list and b) you cannot go and say “hey,I invented that character, I’d like to register it.” because that’s in violation of point 9) on the list.

    And to bring that into perspective:
    It’s like you would’ve invented our favorite violet-eyed xenexian Captain for a fan-film and now couldn’t use that guy any time further. I think you might be a bit miffed about that, and rightfully so.

    Sure, you could argue, that if you want to use that specific character – no problem, just create your own universe… however creating your own universe is more than just change the terminology and names – you as an author should know, that there is more to that. ^^

    On twitter I asked you, if you would have any qualms about a fanfic-author using Captain Calhoun, and if I recall correctly, you had no problems with it, after all you yourself wrote fanfics and the only thing was, that you just didn’t want to read my elaborate afterwards.

    Which – to be honest – relieved and inspired me, because you could’ve just said “Veto” – just as Paramount / CBS is now. Okay, they’re not saying, that you can’t do fanfilms – but honestly, that list is far too restrictive.

    The fun thing is: I’m not even a video producer but a fanfic-author – however I fear, that when they start interfere now in how videos should be made, if we don’t want to get an objection from the owners of that specific IP, they’d won’t stop at fanfilms. Eventually they’ll be giving us “guidelines” how to do fanart and how to write fanfiction in order to not get a c&d-order.

    And yes, as a writer (if you want to call yourself a writer, even if it is just a fanfic) I can understand, why you want to cover your grounds and no one is as liberal as one could be – but this seems unnecessarily restrictive. By the way, no I’m not a Axanar-fanboy, I’m just concerned on the effects, this situation may have on the fanfilm and the fandom as a whole.

    My revised guidlines for fanfilms (and fanwork in general) would be: Just play nice, kids – don’t make any profit out of it, don’t sell merchandise, if you want to make money, create your own universe.

    1. “don’t make any profit out of it, don’t sell merchandise”

      Why not?

      In the ’70s, an artist acquaintance and I put together a portfolio of TREK art which we sold at conventions. Paramount was fine with this provided we put a “Property Paramount” stamp on the back of each one. They didn’t even ask for a cut.

      Yes, we got permission, but the precedent is there for non-Paramount people making money off the product.

      1. Okay, then: Don’t make any profit out of it, until you asked Paramount if they’d be fine with it, if you would make a profit out of it.

        At least you should ask, if Paramount would have any problems with that. ^^ Because if you don’t you’ll end up doing an Axanar with Axanar-Coffee and whatever the hëll was sold there. ^^

  10. More than one person in this thread asked why creators of fan fiction don’t create original works instead. This is an Either/Or assumption you’re making, as it’s very well possible that some creators do both. The reason they create fan fiction in particular is because it’s how they express their love for the property that inspired them, and because they know that such properties have a built-in fan base that will not only make it easier to find participants to help them in the production (where onscreen works are concerned), but audiences likely to want to see it. A completely original work needs to attract an audience from scratch, and is a completely different animal. Arguing that Trek’s premise is not hard to duplicate in an original work, misses this point.

    I’m also not positively impressed by Peter’s description conventions in the 1970s, since the behavior he describes on the part of those Paramount lawyers is theft, plain and simple. Copyright infringement allows parties to file lawsuits. Has any precedent ever been set that allows one person to confiscate another person’s property, simply because it contains copyright-infringing material.

    I respect the need for copyright, but I always figured that fan fiction was harmless. Someone said above, “if you really believe that people should be able to use others’ IPs without restriction, let people do that with your ideas. When they’re making money off their new project and you want a cut, remember your temper tantrum with this whole fiasco.” Again, was Star Trek: Axanar making a profit? Perhaps the Axanar guys stirred a hornet’s nest by soliciting money, but were they really profiting from that, or were they merely soliciting funds to get the production made?

    Another person said that allowing fanfic like this can damage an IP and make it worthless. How so? Can you point to an example of this happening?

  11. @ Mr David: So because they treated fans poorly in the 70s it’s ok for them to do it in the 00s (as they did) or now?

    I’ve never bought into the notion of “because thnigs sucked then they should suck now”.

    1. How about this notion then? You are not entitled to do as you please with things that are not yours. If the owner of the property comes along and says that these are the limitations and these are the rules, then those are the limitations and rules. You abide by them or you don’t bother doing a fan film.

      1. Can they legally do that? Sure. No one is saying otherwise.

        Is it the right thing to do? No. Poor treatment of the fans breeds bad will and bad publicity. This is contrary to the best interests of the studio over the long term. They may protect their legal rights only to find those rights worthless because they have enraged the fanbase to the point they stop watching altogether.

        As I’ve said in earlier posts, wouldn’t it be better for EVERYONE if the studio developed a “fanfilm” license that was much more permissive and inclusive? Happy fans are fans that pay to see your films and paywall TV series.

        Furthermore, as I’ve also pointed out there is a simple question. If the fan productions are so popular that the studio perceives them as a threat to their official offerings, why isn’t the studio ALREADY MAKING product similar to it in the first place?

      2. “Furthermore, as I’ve also pointed out there is a simple question. If the fan productions are so popular that the studio perceives them as a threat to their official offerings, why isn’t the studio ALREADY MAKING product similar to it in the first place?”
        .
        You confuse- whether by deliberate act or not -the steps to exercise legal protection of IP with popularity of fan products.
        .
        Popularity doesn’t enter into it. Here’s the simple question that enters into it for their lawyers- Are fans now making money of their bosses IP? If yes or the appearance of yes, they have to act. That’s how they protect their IP.
        .
        The Axanar people and others have been stomping that erasing that fine line that others have carefully walked for decades before them. As this gets more and more common, they have to- and did -act.
        .
        And, I’m sorry, but your claims of “popularity” are a bit skewed. We’ll take Star Trek Continues as an example since a number of people have cited it. One of their YouTube episodes, Star Trek Continues E01 “Pilgrim of Eternity”, has been up for three years. It has 1,262,613 views. Another episode, Star Trek Continues E05 “Divided We Stand”, has been up for 9 months. It has 212,198 views.
        .
        That’s huge for a fan product. That would be off the air if it were a TV program.
        .
        As I said to someone else who was talking about pìššìņg øff the fans and talking about popularity of fan productions- There’s a difference between the thousands of hardcore fans who get into these sort of productions and the millions of casual fans who know nothing about 99% of those fans but make up the bulk of the TV ratings and the ticket sales.
        .
        Don’t confuse “I like it!” with overwhelming popularity, and don’t think for a minute that the hardcore fans claiming to be so pìššëd about this are going to be the live or die factor for future official productions.

      3. I’m not “confusing” anything. I”m pointing out that the studio gains nothing but ill will by being overly aggressive in the manner they chose to interact with the fans.

        If as you state they are too few in number to sustain a commercial production, then they are no threat to any studio offering. No harm, no foul.

        Create a free or low-cost fanfilm license to dot the legal “i”-s and cross the legal “t”-s. The studio’s IP is thereby protected, fanfilm makers can get on with what they are doing, and the studio can go on with their official offerings.

        Win-Win-Win.

        Yet the studio chooses to be needlessly aggressive, confrontational, and combative. Nothing is gained by it other than ill will.

      4. “If as you state they are too few in number to sustain a commercial production, then they are no threat to any studio offering. No harm, no foul.”
        .
        And, again, you seem to be confused on the issue.
        .
        One production can be an issue with IP. This isn’t about popularity, how many people are doing the films, how many people are supporting the films, or anything else along the lines this as = popularity.
        .
        This is about IP. This is about how they cannot allow fan productions, even just one, to start generating revenue on their IP. They cannot allow fan productions, even just one, to create million dollar fundraising pages and start making “movies” filled with multiple professionals with both in front of the camera and behind the scenes connections to official Trek productions.
        .
        They likely also cannot continue to try and police all of the productions given the new tools available to fandom.
        .
        They’ve allowed fandom a lot of leeway over the years already, but fandom ain’t what it was 20 or even 10 years ago.
        .
        See here, because I ain’t typing all of this over again.
        .
        http://www.needlessthingssite.com/2016/06/the-star-trek-fan-film-guidelines-and.html
        .
        This is about protecting IP. Axanar was likely just the last straw of many over the last ten years in the eyes of lawyers and the powers that be.
        .
        The fact that they’re allowing anything to still be done should be seen as a sign that they’re being pretty decent about it. Enjoy what we had, enjoy what we can still see done by fans, and get over the sense of entitlement about someone else’s property.

      5. I don’t appreciate it when people both ignore what I said AND talk down to me at the same time.

        NO ONE is talking about denying CBS/P their IP. (SWell, Alec may be, but he’s not part of this discussion.) The question is did the studio have to be THIS harsh and restrictive when setting the boundaries? Could not a license have been promulgated that didn’t effectively knock fanfilms back down to the level of “kids with a camcorder” efforts.

        The studio may be exercising their LEGAL rights, but they are showing very poor judgment from a PR perspective by being needlessly strict. Why do they feel the need to pìšš øff their fanbase (who are also their customers) just to prove a point no one other than Alec disputes?

  12. I stipulate to the law and to Paramount being the copyright holders.

    I then laugh at the thought of them making such a fuss over their precious *Intellectual Property* given that they wanted to give it up when they were ready to cancel the original series after only two seasons. This would have been too few episodes to allow it to go to syndication. Without this, it is unlikely it would have garnered the ever growing fan support which led to its return.

    Fan support brought it back for the critical third season and then for the animated series, the movies and … yes, the new TV series.

    The same fans which the studio dismiss out of hand. I’m not making this up. Somewhere in my files I have a letter (old style, on paper and everything) where the Paramount hack explains that the studio doesn’t owe the fans anything, they don’t really matter in the scheme of things, so forth. Short, selective memory, Paramount?

    As for protecting their property, I say from what? From the likes of Abrams? I’m glad I knew to stay away from the theater for DARKNESS because, having eventually seen it on a friend’s DVD, it would have been wasted money. Don’t yet know whether I’ll be going to BEYOND. I do know I’d gladly pay to see AXANAR in the theatre.

    So, the studio want to protect TREK? Fine, get out of the way and let people who know what they are doing (note – not carte blanche for people to put out crap) get the job done – with the appropriate cut to Paramount, of course. Win-win.

  13. P.S. There are those who, in such instances, say “don’t like the law? Change it.” Easy to say, but when the existing laws are due to billion dollar corporations and their army of lawyers and lobbyists, what hope do fans have?

Comments are closed.