Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Eosin the Red" data-source="post: 2841755" data-attributes="member: 168">No, it isn't a lie. It is a misunderstanding but there isn't any subterfuge. Mongoose explained within the thread what they meant by &quot;outline&quot; and it is a satisfactory answer - it isn't a laid out five year script outline but they did INTEND to work from 3 scripts and copious notes from JMS provided by WB. I'd call that working from an outline myself. It may not be the technically correct scriptwriters version but it is an outline none-the-less.I don't think JMS calls the shot on what is or what is not canon for B5 - WB licensing already gave Mongoose permission to place &quot;Canon&quot; on their products.&nbsp; WB owns B5, not JMS. Personally, I prefer it when artists retain creative rights to their stuff but that simply isn't the case here (by my understanding).Die hard B5 fan myself but talk about a touchy fella. He is clearly in the wrong and it seems by your account he is the one that made this public (not the first time for him). Mongoose made an error in terminology in a podcast and JMS took it public rather than actually answer an email or the phone or even calling WB and telling them to &quot;fix it.&quot; On top of that he has irrefutably failed to stay on top of WB licensing current affairs and blames Mongoose for his own lack of comprehension.I fail to see where anyone could take his side as the &quot;just&quot; side but I am willing to be persuaded. I read through the whole mess of replies and back and forths. Sorting out the &quot;JMS rulz&quot; posts there didn't seem to be much that wasn't answered to my satisfaction by Mongoose. On the other hand, JMS let loose a barage of accusations that were addressed point for point by Matt. Can you specifiy where you think Mongoose is wrong and where JMS is right?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Eosin the Red, post: 2841755, member: 168"] No, it isn't a lie. It is a misunderstanding but there isn't any subterfuge. Mongoose explained within the thread what they meant by "outline" and it is a satisfactory answer - it isn't a laid out five year script outline but they did INTEND to work from 3 scripts and copious notes from JMS provided by WB. I'd call that working from an outline myself. It may not be the technically correct scriptwriters version but it is an outline none-the-less. I don't think JMS calls the shot on what is or what is not canon for B5 - WB licensing already gave Mongoose permission to place "Canon" on their products. WB owns B5, not JMS. Personally, I prefer it when artists retain creative rights to their stuff but that simply isn't the case here (by my understanding). Die hard B5 fan myself but talk about a touchy fella. He is clearly in the wrong and it seems by your account he is the one that made this public (not the first time for him). Mongoose made an error in terminology in a podcast and JMS took it public rather than actually answer an email or the phone or even calling WB and telling them to "fix it." On top of that he has irrefutably failed to stay on top of WB licensing current affairs and blames Mongoose for his own lack of comprehension. I fail to see where anyone could take his side as the "just" side but I am willing to be persuaded. I read through the whole mess of replies and back and forths. Sorting out the "JMS rulz" posts there didn't seem to be much that wasn't answered to my satisfaction by Mongoose. On the other hand, JMS let loose a barage of accusations that were addressed point for point by Matt. [I]Can you specifiy where you think Mongoose is wrong and where JMS is right?[/I] [/QUOTE]

Verification