Odd... they were supposedly different sources. One from ABC TV in the US and the other from the Star Trek Official site.
Looks like the first one just cut and paste the StarTrek.com article, but added "STUDIO CITY, CA / NEW YORK, N.Y. (CBSDFW.COM)" at the beginning of it. Cheeky buggers.
Calm that nerd rage pal. It's only on CBS All Access for people in the US. It's already been stated that it will be on TV for the rest of the world. Only question is what channel will get it.
Calm that nerd rage pal. It's only on CBS All Access for people in the US. It's already been stated that it will be on TV for the rest of the world. Only question is what channel will get it.
oh okay. well that's me fine then. will SYFY or CBS action get it? on will it revert to a terrestrial channel. I have to say I've only been a trek fan for a few years. what channel were the shows on in England during their original runs. i'm guessing some older fans will know.
I started that a few months ago. I just felt like bumping it. i'm sure we'll only end up using just the 1 thread long term.
oh okay. well that's me fine then. will SYFY or CBS action get it? on will it revert to a terrestrial channel. I have to say I've only been a trek fan for a few years. what channel were the shows on in England during their original runs. i'm guessing some older fans will know.
Not sure about TNG first run, but DS9, Voyager and Enterprise were all on Sky One.
I'm wondering if this show will end up on CBS Action, but I suppose it's also possible Sky or SyFy will get it.
Doing a Trek TV series in the 'new' universe is going to be a bit problematic I would have thought, for several reasons.
I hold out hope that this will be prime universe despite Kurtzman's involvement for a couple of reasons
1) the press release said it's "not related" to the forthcoming movie
2) CBS would have to license the 'new' universe from Paramount as they dont have any rights to it. Why would they go to the hassle and expense of doing that when they have the rights to the prime universe anyway?
Nothing stopping them doing a whole new alt universe I guess, unrelated to the movie one.
I suppose we'll find out soon enough but at this point I'd be 85% sure that it wont be set in the JJ Abrams movie universe.
2) CBS would have to license the 'new' universe from Paramount as they dont have any rights to it. Why would they go to the hassle and expense of doing that when they have the rights to the prime universe anyway?
That's not correct. CBS own the rights to Star Trek full stop. Paramount only licences the IP to make movies. There would be no issue with CBS making a series in the new universe, the prime universe, or any universe they want.
I hold out hope that this will be prime universe despite Kurtzman's involvement for a couple of reasons
1) the press release said it's "not related" to the forthcoming movie
2) CBS would have to license the 'new' universe from Paramount as they dont have any rights to it. Why would they go to the hassle and expense of doing that when they have the rights to the prime universe anyway?
Nothing stopping them doing a whole new alt universe I guess, unrelated to the movie one.
I suppose we'll find out soon enough but at this point I'd be 85% sure that it wont be set in the JJ Abrams movie universe.
That's not correct. CBS own the rights to Star Trek full stop. Paramount only license the IP to make movies. There would be no issue with CBS making a series in the new universe, the prime universe, or any universe they want.
CBS Television Studios distributes back-catalog TV series and has production rights for new Trek series
Paramount Pictures owns the Trek films
Or that's how I understood it.
You're right that the new movies did carry a "under license from CBS", but that's because CBS holds the rights to all the Star Trek characters.
So Paramount/Bad Robot licensed the characters from CBS and made a new universe. It's not clear at all if the rights to that universe are retained by Paramount or if they go to CBS. Since Paramount/Bad Robot created it, I would guess that they retain the rights to that universe, but who knows, the Trek license split seems to be really complicated.
It's not complicated. CBS own the rights to everything Trek. Paramount licences the stuff they need to make films. CBS can do what they like, when they like with Star Trek. If they wanted to open their own film division and start making Trek films, they could. If Paramount wanted to make a Star Trek film which featured no existing characters or settings, they would still have to do it under licence from CBS.
CBS owns everything under, and including, the name Star Trek.
It's not complicated. CBS own the rights to everything Trek. Paramount licences the stuff they need to make films. CBS can do what they like, when they like with Star Trek. If they wanted to open their own film division and start making Trek films, they could. If Paramount wanted to make a Star Trek film which featured no existing characters or settings, they would still have to do it under licence from CBS.
CBS owns everything under, and including, the name Star Trek.
I don't think it's that simple.
A major stumbling block: "Star Trek's" licensing and merchandising rights are spread over two media conglomerates with competing goals. The rights to the original television series from the 1960s remained with CBS after it split off from Paramount’s corporate parent Viacom in 2006, while the studio retained the rights to the film series. CBS also held onto the ability to create future “Star Trek” TV shows.
Paramount must license the “Star Trek” characters from CBS Consumer Products for film merchandising.
I don't think CBS could do Trek movies as the movie licence is still held by Paramount., even if it does have to licence the characters from CBS. As to who owns the new universe which was created by Bad Robot on behalf of Paramount I really don't know.
Certainly the CBS owned startrek.com mostly focuses on the TV series'. Movie stuff is there, including new universe stuff but the stuff they promote is mostly TV series stuff.
The UK TV bidding war for this show should be interesting. Sky 1 have had Trek for ages but they have a lot more competition now since Enterprise ended its run. I'm sure the likes of Syfy UK, Netflix and Amazon have taken note of this news.
You're not, but reaction has been mostly positive. The negative reactions are generally coming from two camps, those who hate the new movies and can't stand the thought of a new series potentially set in the new timeline, and those who are surprised that out of Kurtzman and Orci that it should be the former who got the job, as it's been very apparent from many interviews that out of the two Orci was the dedicated and enthusiastic Star Trek fan. Not sure if that in itself is an indication of the type of show it may be, i.e. less Treky to to appeal to a wider audience, time will tell. The good news is that Brannon Bragga's name is nowhere near this, the bad news is that Stephen Ira Behr's name is nowhere near this.
The reaction I've seen has been positive about getting a new series but negative about the possibility of it being in the movie timeline. It seems that generally the type of person that wants TV Trek are fans of older TV Trek and prefer the prime timeline to the alt movie timeline.
Braga wasn't all bad but he simply committed too much to Star Trek and started churning out stuff that was too similar or formulaic. Personally I'd love to see a series with Behr, Hewitt-Wolff, Ron Moore, Bryan Fuller and Manny Coto as the writing team. These are people that really get the show. Kurtzman? I can only judge his Star Trek work by the movies and I hate those movies
The UK TV bidding war for this show should be interesting. Sky 1 have had Trek for ages but they have a lot more competition now since Enterprise ended its run. I'm sure the likes of Syfy UK, Netflix and Amazon have taken note of this news.
I personally think SkyONE will get it in the UK with Channel 4 showing it a year later (since they are the only main channel interested in US TV these days). I don't see anyone else having the money for it.
As for prime vs new timeline, if they put the show far enough in the future, that wouldn't really matter. It only becomes important if they put the same in the 23rd Century, in which case they would have to directly follow the events of ether the recent movies or the original.
I personally think SkyONE will get it in the UK with Channel 4 showing it a year later (since they are the only main channel interested in US TV these days). I don't see anyone else having the money for it.
As for prime vs new timeline, if they put the show far enough in the future, that wouldn't really matter. It only becomes important if they put the same in the 23rd Century, in which case they would have to directly follow the events of ether the recent movies or the original.
If sky get it they'll put it on sky Atlantic without a doubt.
But there's other options than just sky these days, it's not 2002 any more.
Fox uk might want to bolster their programmes away from the walking dead.
Same with upstart bt....whatever that's called
I cant see C4 wanting it after Sky, second run rights are almost worthless these days, and many shows are exclusive to one channel, for what its worth I dont blame Sky for keeping a show exclusive to themselves, its business. At best it will air on Pick 5 years later, if Sky gets it.
Also Channel 4 got burnt with Enterprise, they are not making that mistake again.
Sky has to be more careful of Amazon Prime, if the new Clarkson show is successful, they may well be feeling plucky, and something like a new Star Trek, would be an excellent target for them.
CBS Television Studios distributes back-catalog TV series and has production rights for new Trek series
Paramount Pictures owns the Trek films
Or that's how I understood it.
You're right that the new movies did carry a "under license from CBS", but that's because CBS holds the rights to all the Star Trek characters.
So Paramount/Bad Robot licensed the characters from CBS and made a new universe. It's not clear at all if the rights to that universe are retained by Paramount or if they go to CBS. Since Paramount/Bad Robot created it, I would guess that they retain the rights to that universe, but who knows, the Trek license split seems to be really complicated.
CBS owns everything upto and including nemesis, toys, games, and TV rights.
Paramount owns nothing but the new trek and anything related to new trek.
Comments
Looks like the first one just cut and paste the StarTrek.com article, but added "STUDIO CITY, CA / NEW YORK, N.Y. (CBSDFW.COM)" at the beginning of it. Cheeky buggers.
forgive me if I am reading this wrong but this is only on something called CBS ALL ACCESS. and apparently its only available in the USA. SERIOUSLY WTF???
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/new-star-trek-tv-series-will-only-be-available-online-cbs-all-access-1526963
So when are us brits gonna actually get to watch this? 2018? >:(>:(>:(>:(>:(>:(
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2089891
Because that thread was just a poster's wet dream of what he'd want from a new Trek series. Check the date it was started genius.
thanks I like it when its recognised.
To annoy you obviously.
oh okay. well that's me fine then.
Not sure about TNG first run, but DS9, Voyager and Enterprise were all on Sky One.
I'm wondering if this show will end up on CBS Action, but I suppose it's also possible Sky or SyFy will get it.
I hold out hope that this will be prime universe despite Kurtzman's involvement for a couple of reasons
1) the press release said it's "not related" to the forthcoming movie
2) CBS would have to license the 'new' universe from Paramount as they dont have any rights to it. Why would they go to the hassle and expense of doing that when they have the rights to the prime universe anyway?
Nothing stopping them doing a whole new alt universe I guess, unrelated to the movie one.
I suppose we'll find out soon enough but at this point I'd be 85% sure that it wont be set in the JJ Abrams movie universe.
That's not correct. CBS own the rights to Star Trek full stop. Paramount only licences the IP to make movies. There would be no issue with CBS making a series in the new universe, the prime universe, or any universe they want.
PROBABLY a straight shootout between CBS, SKY 1 & SYFY then i'm guessing.
No lens flair
CBS Television Studios distributes back-catalog TV series and has production rights for new Trek series
Paramount Pictures owns the Trek films
Or that's how I understood it.
You're right that the new movies did carry a "under license from CBS", but that's because CBS holds the rights to all the Star Trek characters.
So Paramount/Bad Robot licensed the characters from CBS and made a new universe. It's not clear at all if the rights to that universe are retained by Paramount or if they go to CBS. Since Paramount/Bad Robot created it, I would guess that they retain the rights to that universe, but who knows, the Trek license split seems to be really complicated.
CBS owns everything under, and including, the name Star Trek.
https://www.thewrap.com/how-web-star-trek-rights-killed-jj-abrams-grand-ambitions-91766/
I don't think CBS could do Trek movies as the movie licence is still held by Paramount., even if it does have to licence the characters from CBS. As to who owns the new universe which was created by Bad Robot on behalf of Paramount I really don't know.
Certainly the CBS owned startrek.com mostly focuses on the TV series'. Movie stuff is there, including new universe stuff but the stuff they promote is mostly TV series stuff.
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/50784-idw-to-publish-new-star-trek-comic-book-series
True that Bad Robot had close involvement with that series, but the IDW agreement was with all involved parties, not just CBS.
The UK TV bidding war for this show should be interesting. Sky 1 have had Trek for ages but they have a lot more competition now since Enterprise ended its run. I'm sure the likes of Syfy UK, Netflix and Amazon have taken note of this news.
The reaction I've seen has been positive about getting a new series but negative about the possibility of it being in the movie timeline. It seems that generally the type of person that wants TV Trek are fans of older TV Trek and prefer the prime timeline to the alt movie timeline.
Braga wasn't all bad but he simply committed too much to Star Trek and started churning out stuff that was too similar or formulaic. Personally I'd love to see a series with Behr, Hewitt-Wolff, Ron Moore, Bryan Fuller and Manny Coto as the writing team. These are people that really get the show. Kurtzman? I can only judge his Star Trek work by the movies and I hate those movies
As for prime vs new timeline, if they put the show far enough in the future, that wouldn't really matter. It only becomes important if they put the same in the 23rd Century, in which case they would have to directly follow the events of ether the recent movies or the original.
If sky get it they'll put it on sky Atlantic without a doubt.
But there's other options than just sky these days, it's not 2002 any more.
Fox uk might want to bolster their programmes away from the walking dead.
Same with upstart bt....whatever that's called
Also Channel 4 got burnt with Enterprise, they are not making that mistake again.
Sky has to be more careful of Amazon Prime, if the new Clarkson show is successful, they may well be feeling plucky, and something like a new Star Trek, would be an excellent target for them.
CBS owns everything upto and including nemesis, toys, games, and TV rights.
Paramount owns nothing but the new trek and anything related to new trek.