Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings

Star Trek Game Lawsuit

Activision Files Breach of Contract Lawsuit Against Viacom (thanks Frans) reports a lawsuit that "Cites Viacom's Lack of Support for 'Star Trek' Movie and Television Franchise and Failure to Cooperate With Activision." Here's a portion describing the legalities involved:

In its complaint, which was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California on June 30, 2003, Activision accused Viacom of breaching its fundamental promise to continue exploiting the Star Trek franchise consistent with its practice at the time the agreement was signed in 1998. "Activision cannot successfully develop and sell Star Trek video games without the product exploitation and support promised by Viacom. A continuing pipeline of movie and television production, and related marketing, is absolutely crucial to the success of video games based on a property such as Star Trek," charged Activision in its court filings.

However, through its actions and inactions, Viacom has let the once proud Star Trek franchise stagnate and decay. Viacom has released only one "Star Trek" movie since entering into agreement with Activision and has recently informed Activision it has no current plans for further "Star Trek" films. Viacom also has allowed two "Star Trek" television series to go off the air and the remaining series suffers from weak ratings. Viacom also frustrated Activision's efforts to coordinate the development and marketing of its games with Viacom's development and marketing of its new movies and television series.

15. So let me get this straight Jul 1, 2003, 14:05 Creston
Basically, Activision's complaint boils down to this :

"Viacom needs to make more films and take horrendous losses in doing so, so that we can make more money developing publishing Star Trek Games!"

Ehm, hello Activision. Maybe the reason that Viacom is no longer making Star Trek films is because they don't want to go bankrupt. You see, if they go bankrupt, then they won't be able to do ANY Star Trek anymore. Have you geniusses marginally sentient lifeforms ever thought of that?

I know why Viacom isn't producing more Star Trek movies, however that doesn't explain their reluctance to do more television series. Otoh, Voyager never had great ratings (maybe something to do with the fact that until season 4 it sucked big time, AND the fact that it was only shown on UPN, a rather lacklustre channel at best, and then not even at prime time), and Enterprise sucks so badly I can't even begin to describe it.
I know Star Trek has never been slightly worried about consistency, but simply replacing Kirk and the ORIGINAL Enterprise with a new captain who was now the Pioneer, long before Kirk was born, with what is actually the original Enterprise was an idea so stupid I wonder if a lawyer came up with it.

And ofcourse, Babylon 5 set the bar high for science fiction shows, and even Enterprise's best episodes can't reach that.

Note to Enterprise producers : Watching a rubdown scene between Jolene Blalock and Scott Bakula every other episode isn't really why people watch Star Trek. Also, trying to create characters which are even MORE lame than Neelix and Harry Kim doesn't do well for a show which is supposed to thrive on character interaction. I still can't figure out which of the two is the chief engineer and the security chief. They might as well be clones.

Sigh. There is SO MUCH possibility in the Star Trek franchise that it makes me shake my head to see what they are doing with it. I mean, after DS9 there was SO MUCH political turmoil in the Alpha Quadrant, they could have made two new series about it.

But, to get back on topic a little, this lawsuit is absurd, and any decent judge will see that, and toss it out.


Edit : I agree with Ray on DS9. While it got off to a horrendously slow start, and the first few seasons were just making my eyes bleed to watch (I stopped during the second season, and didn't pick it up again until season 4), storywise it was by far the most interesting and well developed Star Trek out there. Adding Worf to the cast was a brilliant idea (obviously not if you're not a fan of Worf, but I've always thought he was a very interesting character), and the whole political wrangling between the Federation / Cardassians / Bajorans was great. It became even better when the Klingons started getting belligerent.
I wish I had the money to pick that series up on DVD, but it seems I'll have to be patient (and TNG comes first.)

This comment was edited on Jul 1, 14:12.
Avatar 15604
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
    Date Subject Author
  1. Jul 1, 10:33 Probably ... Silent Sorrow
  2. Jul 1, 10:49  Re: Probably ... sc4r4b
  3. Jul 1, 10:51  Re: Probably ... jomisab
  4. Jul 1, 10:55  Re: Probably ... Halsy
  5. Jul 1, 11:21 Bleh Pie4Foo
  7. Jul 1, 11:37  Re: Bleh Jaz
  6. Jul 1, 11:26 Best Quote _SE_
  8. Jul 1, 11:52 After Nemesis Vincent Murphy
  9. Jul 1, 11:59 Rule of seven? Schnapple
  10. Jul 1, 12:03 No subject Brick
  11. Jul 1, 12:06 not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan space captain
  13. Jul 1, 12:15  Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Armengar
  18. Jul 1, 14:37   Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Bronco
  19. Jul 1, 14:45    Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Creston
  20. Jul 1, 14:56     Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Bronco
  21. Jul 1, 15:03      Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Creston
  24. Jul 1, 15:36       Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Bronco
  25. Jul 1, 15:52       Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan zumpiez
  28. Jul 1, 16:44        Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Cartman
  30. Jul 1, 17:39       Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan NFNNMIDATA
  31. Jul 1, 17:59        Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Creston
  34. Jul 1, 18:14        Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Oberiko
  32. Jul 1, 18:04      Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Ray Marden
  39. Jul 1, 20:49       Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Bronco
  23. Jul 1, 15:31     Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan wasrad
  42. Jul 2, 02:44     Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan CultureShock
  14. Jul 1, 13:38  Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Ray Marden
  16. Jul 1, 14:09   Re: not a trekkie - but am a sci-fi fan Dr3ad
  12. Jul 1, 12:14 Slow start banddirector
>> 15. Jul 1, 14:05 So let me get this straight Creston
  17. Jul 1, 14:29 No subject Acleacius
  22. Jul 1, 15:08 No subject wasrad
  26. Jul 1, 16:15  Re: No subject kyleb
  27. Jul 1, 16:43   Re: No subject Scud
  29. Jul 1, 17:38 Hmmm.... The Half Elf
  33. Jul 1, 18:12 Let's get this straight Tanto Edge
  35. Jul 1, 19:11  Re: Let's get this straight Meezy
  36. Jul 1, 19:13 meh Hump
  37. Jul 1, 19:38 Trek sucks. Phayyde
  38. Jul 1, 20:10  Re: Trek sucks. KaRRiLLioN
  41. Jul 2, 01:59   Re: Trek sucks. Creston
  40. Jul 2, 00:35 Why Enterprise Sucks c r i s p y
  43. Jul 2, 09:41 Activision may have a point Silent Bob
  44. Jul 2, 11:17 The issue... Eon
  45. Jul 2, 12:03  asdf Santiago
  49. Jul 3, 02:54   Re: asdf CultureShock
  46. Jul 2, 15:44 Voyager was a great show SirAnthony
  47. Jul 2, 16:02 My views on star treck movies. SirAnthony
  48. Jul 2, 17:33  Re: My views on star treck movies. Jedi Master
  50. Jul 4, 09:16 This lawsuit is stupid G_mann
  52. Jul 5, 06:17  Re: This lawsuit is stupid Mark
  53. Jul 5, 13:55  Re: This lawsuit is stupid Xenos Overdrive
  51. Jul 5, 06:02 Enterprise... theyarecomingforyou
  54. Jul 7, 11:59 viva america rock climber
  55. Jul 7, 12:52 Nemesis is a really good Star Trek Movie Gimpyresale
  56. Jul 7, 12:57 rock climber Gimpyresale


Blue's News logo