View Poll Results: Do you want Star Trek: Enterprise back?

Voters
7. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes (Please sign the petition)

    4 57.14%
  • No (If you want, please explain why)

    1 14.29%
  • Maybe (If you want, please explain why)

    1 14.29%
  • Other (If you want, please explain why)

    1 14.29%
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 87
  1. #21
    Colonel P-90_177's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Traveling through Time and Space
    Posts
    7,289

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    Not if they want to respect the works that helped keep fan interest in Star Trek going. Particularly the work of these authors.

    But sure, hey, isn't that what's all the rage these days? Nothing that came before you is worthy of respect.
    I mean the book came out when Star Trek was at it's height... Fairly sure fan interest would be more less exactly the same with or without it. If anything a new series called Federation would probably help the author out given how people might actually mistake the name of the book for something to do with a new show.

    There are also a number of books with the sub-title Strange New Worlds which are collections of short stories but I doubt the new Pike series will have any impact on those.

    That being said Federation is not a great name for a series for other reasons. It sounds a bit dry. Doesn't really stand out like other show titles. Star Trek: Endeavour on the other hand would be a great name for a post Enterprise 22nd Century show. Endeavour was the fifth and final space shuttle that was built and would fit with the naming conventions of Enterprise and Columbia. It could easily be NX-05, being the first ship built under the Federation. Endeavour can also refer to the Federation itself as the grand experiment it was.
    Please do me a huge favour and help me be with the love of my life.

  2. #22
    Major Annoyed's Avatar
    Member Since
    Dec 2014
    Location
    The People's Republic of New York
    Posts
    2,986

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by P-90_177 View Post
    I mean the book came out when Star Trek was at it's height... Fairly sure fan interest would be more less exactly the same with or without it. If anything a new series called Federation would probably help the author out given how people might actually mistake the name of the book for something to do with a new show.
    As you pointed out, the plot of "Federation" is not what is being proposed. it's a different story.

    If they want to make the existing "Federation" into a series, built on the the book, that's fine.

    But to just steal a title 'cause they want it? Sorry, that's rude, and disrespectful to the original work.
    "It may seem pointless but small talk is a vital dating skill. It helps to establish a rapport with your companion."
    - Starship Voyager's Holographic Doctor
    "Perhaps there's something to be said for assimilation after all."
    - Former Borg Seven of Nine

  3. #23
    Colonel P-90_177's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Traveling through Time and Space
    Posts
    7,289

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    As you pointed out, the plot of "Federation" is not what is being proposed. it's a different story.

    If they want to make the existing "Federation" into a series, built on the the book, that's fine.

    But to just steal a title 'cause they want it? Sorry, that's rude, and disrespectful to the original work.
    If the book was a wholly original work I'd agree. But as it carries the Star Trek name and is part of the merchandising of the franchise, something that the writer would have been aware of when they agree to write for them, then the title is fair game. I mean if it was a recent story I might feel differently. But this is a book that came out years ago and is almost certainly not even still in print. The titles for these stories are often not even created by the authors themselves. They get commissioned by the publisher to write a story with that title, so that isn't even theirs to begin with. Looking through the list of various Star Trek novels that have been released over the years that are a good fair few that are original works but with names like Blaze of Glory, Q Squared, Twilight, Rules of Engagement. Titles which all funnily enough are also titles of Star Trek episodes but are original novels. In some cases they were released before the episodes, in some cases after. There's one book that is called Enterprise, which came out two years before the show. I severely doubt however any of those writers feel disrespected that the titles were later part of the show. What I would find more disrespectful is the case of the Writer of Star Trek Year One, who started work and released the first in what was meant to be a series of novels depicting the rise of the Federation in the 22nd Century, only to have his work ditched because Berman was doing his own 22nd Century show, which of course was Enterprise. Now that is disrespectful... As it ended up, Year One came out the same year as season one of Enterprise as I recall.

    Writers generally don't care about titles unless it is particularly clever or is something that can be easily trademarked. If you look through a library catalogue you'll find no end of books that have very similar names if not exactly the same and in some cases it can be easy to confuse them if you don't know exactly what author you're going for. That's just the nature of literature. THere's only so many word combinations when you're limited to only a few words for a title. Providing there is sufficient space in time between them coming out, no one is going to get offended or bothered all that much. In this case as well, the writers of the novel we're talking about are Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens who not only wrote 20 Star Trek books in their careers, they also were writers on Enterprise... I can promise you, if someone named a show Federation, they would not care a jot.
    Please do me a huge favour and help me be with the love of my life.

  4. #24
    First Lieutenant Raj_2006's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    872

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    Not if they want to respect the works that helped keep fan interest in Star Trek going. Particularly the work of these authors.

    But sure, hey, isn't that what's all the rage these days? Nothing that came before you is worthy of respect.
    They can still use the name and respect the author. It is not like they are the only ones to think of the name Star Trek: Federation. Names get reused by authors, TV series and movies alot.

    There was a series in there works called Star Trek: Federation, which was almost pitched after Star Trek: Enterprise's cancelation, https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki...ek:_Federation .
    Last edited by Raj_2006; June 19th, 2020 at 09:33 AM.


  5. #25
    Major Annoyed's Avatar
    Member Since
    Dec 2014
    Location
    The People's Republic of New York
    Posts
    2,986

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by P-90_177 View Post
    If the book was a wholly original work I'd agree. But as it carries the Star Trek name and is part of the merchandising of the franchise, something that the writer would have been aware of when they agree to write for them, then the title is fair game. I mean if it was a recent story I might feel differently. But this is a book that came out years ago and is almost certainly not even still in print. The titles for these stories are often not even created by the authors themselves. They get commissioned by the publisher to write a story with that title, so that isn't even theirs to begin with. Looking through the list of various Star Trek novels that have been released over the years that are a good fair few that are original works but with names like Blaze of Glory, Q Squared, Twilight, Rules of Engagement. Titles which all funnily enough are also titles of Star Trek episodes but are original novels. In some cases they were released before the episodes, in some cases after. There's one book that is called Enterprise, which came out two years before the show. I severely doubt however any of those writers feel disrespected that the titles were later part of the show. What I would find more disrespectful is the case of the Writer of Star Trek Year One, who started work and released the first in what was meant to be a series of novels depicting the rise of the Federation in the 22nd Century, only to have his work ditched because Berman was doing his own 22nd Century show, which of course was Enterprise. Now that is disrespectful... As it ended up, Year One came out the same year as season one of Enterprise as I recall.

    Writers generally don't care about titles unless it is particularly clever or is something that can be easily trademarked. If you look through a library catalogue you'll find no end of books that have very similar names if not exactly the same and in some cases it can be easy to confuse them if you don't know exactly what author you're going for. That's just the nature of literature. THere's only so many word combinations when you're limited to only a few words for a title. Providing there is sufficient space in time between them coming out, no one is going to get offended or bothered all that much. In this case as well, the writers of the novel we're talking about are Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens who not only wrote 20 Star Trek books in their careers, they also were writers on Enterprise... I can promise you, if someone named a show Federation, they would not care a jot.
    The bolded section displays the attitude that I mentioned; youngsters don't give a rat's arse about earlier author's work. What the hell difference does it make when the book was published? It is still a very good work by two very well respected Trek authors.

    Someone wants to do a piece on how the federation was formed? Great, go for it. But the name "Federation" has already been taken, they should have enough respect for the franchise to come up with their own title for it. It's just too damned bad that the title they want has already been used. Also, if, as you say, Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens wouldn't care if their work's title was stolen, then the new authors shouldn't have a problem coming up with a virgin title.
    "It may seem pointless but small talk is a vital dating skill. It helps to establish a rapport with your companion."
    - Starship Voyager's Holographic Doctor
    "Perhaps there's something to be said for assimilation after all."
    - Former Borg Seven of Nine

  6. #26
    Colonel P-90_177's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Traveling through Time and Space
    Posts
    7,289

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    The bolded section displays the attitude that I mentioned; youngsters don't give a rat's arse about earlier author's work. What the hell difference does it make when the book was published? It is still a very good work by two very well respected Trek authors.

    Someone wants to do a piece on how the federation was formed? Great, go for it. But the name "Federation" has already been taken, they should have enough respect for the franchise to come up with their own title for it. It's just too damned bad that the title they want has already been used. Also, if, as you say, Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens wouldn't care if their work's title was stolen, then the new authors shouldn't have a problem coming up with a virgin title.
    You appear to be getting vicariously upset over an issue that is not actually an issue in the first place on a subject that is generally considered to be un-important in the first place. Unless a title is trademarked which is usually only done at the point it becomes a show, movie, or occasionally a successful series of books then it entirely does not matter. It isn't disrespectful. It just isn't. It's at most tacky.

    Let me go with an actual real example. The upcoming Trek animated series "Lower Decks" is named such because that phrase became fairly common place after a TNG episode of the same where the episode was centred around a set of unimportant junior officers. It became a catch phrase for shows with episodes with similar premises, including SG-1's "The Other Guys" and Babylon 5's "A View from the Gallery", both of which have been described as Lower Decks style episodes... Yet do you hear anyone complaining that the show ripped off an old episode title?

    As a writer the title is usually the thing that annoys the crap out of you. Sometimes if you're lucky something jumps out at you. Something that is obvious and catchy and will stand out in a book store shelf. Otherwise you tend to find that a lot of book titles are literally selected by committee at the publishers. So an author, most of the time, will have very little attachment to a title over the actual substance of a book.
    The reason why I know in this case the writers won't have any attachment to it is because Titles of Star Trek novels will almost always have been selected before the book is written. The publishers would likely sit down with a representative from CBS, or Paramount as it would have been back in the day, and worked out what titles they'd like to see on the shelves, what they feel would work, what kind of stories they want to see, and then when they have a very, very basic outline of what they want a book to be, they will commission writers to do it.So in the this case it would have been a commission for a book called Star Trek Federation that is a crossover between TOS and TNG and expands the mythos of how the Federation was built. This being Star Trek and none of the books being canon then they likely were not given much in the way of limitations outside of not contradicting what had already been seen in the shows. Since the book came out even before First Contact then they would have had a pretty broad remit. But ultimately the title is not theirs and never was. And believe me, as a hard lefty who believes that artists should be treated with far more respect than they get and should have their work respected, I would be well on board with being outraged if it seemed like their work was being infringed or disrespected, but this would not be one of those times. I mean there was a whole series of Trek novels called Section 31 back in the day, and we are almost certainly going to get a show called that considering the number of trademarks CBS has for that title now.
    Please do me a huge favour and help me be with the love of my life.

  7. #27
    Captain Xaeden's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,363

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    The bolded section displays the attitude that I mentioned; youngsters don't give a rat's arse about earlier author's work. What the hell difference does it make when the book was published? It is still a very good work by two very well respected Trek authors.
    What he was referring to is not a generational issue, it's an industry convention that has been around since before any of us were born. As book titles are not protected by copyright law, it's long been very common for authors/publishers to reuse existing titles (although some titles may be trademarked as P-90_177 noted). What differentiates them, in those cases, is usually the author name. For example, A. S. Byatt wrote a book called "Possession" in 1990. In 2011, the title was also used for a true crime novel, which we'd typically refer to as Ann Rule's "Possession" if we wanted to distinguish it from Byatt's book either in conversation or marketing. Publishers may avoid this in a few instances. One being if the book title an author wants was also used for a recently published book. The reason is that this would create more market confusion than reusing a title of an older book, especially if the older book in question is out of print. For similar reasons, publishers may also suggest changing a title if it was previously used by a particularly famous text. It depends on the situation/publisher and having the new book be in a different genre helps.

    This also applies to movies/TV titles, but it started in the book industry, and it's more common there since a far greater number of books get published per year than movies or TV shows. In these latter cases, the standard is to use years to distinguish films and/or TV programs. For example, if you want to talk about the film based on a 1961 British spy TV show, you would say "The Avengers" (1998) to ensure people know you're not talking about Marvel's "The Avengers" (2012).

    The problem is that you're saying it's disrespectful to the "Federation" authors to do something that they know is very common in their industry, and in which they have engaged in themselves. In looking over Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens' books, many of their titles are fairly generic and have been used to title something before because of course they have. This may seem unusual to you, but it becomes very normal if you prepare yourself to enter the writing, publishing, or entertainment industry.

    Also, keep in mind that they were contracted to write Star Trek books under the understanding that they're ceding the rights to their published ideas to a corporation. If they can't handle that their titles or ideas may be reused to benefit the franchise at a later point, they should never have agreed to write Star Trek books.

    This is my field. I'm very familiar with navigating rights issues over contract work, and I've worked with many writers as an editor. P-90_177 is quite correct when he tells you this a non-issue for experienced writers. What's far more likely to make a writer upset is when a publisher rejects a title because it's the same or similar to another title. In many cases, it seems arbitrary to an author because titles are reused so often and what one publisher won't want to replicate, another publisher would have no problem with. It's also mostly marketing related, which means an author has to go back to the drawing board on a title they may have become attached to because of something that is a secondary concern for most of them.

  8. #28
    Staff Sergeant
    Member Since
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    91

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Raj_2006 View Post
    There was a series in there works called Star Trek: Federation, which was pitched after Star Trek: Enterprise's cancelation, https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki...ek:_Federation .
    That article uses this as a source: The True Story Behind The Bryan Singer “Pitch” of ‘Star Trek: Federation’

    Pretty interesting. It's based on the actual proposal, which was never submitted to Paramount. Supposed to be a follow up article with excerpts. Strange how Discovery would also use theme of the Federation in decline 13 years later.

  9. #29
    Major Annoyed's Avatar
    Member Since
    Dec 2014
    Location
    The People's Republic of New York
    Posts
    2,986

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    How hard would it be for the author of a new work to use a new title? "Star Trek: Origin of the Federation" would be good for the proposed new show if I understand it right.

    No, I'm sorry, but I consider re-use of an existing title to be disrespectful to the original work.
    "It may seem pointless but small talk is a vital dating skill. It helps to establish a rapport with your companion."
    - Starship Voyager's Holographic Doctor
    "Perhaps there's something to be said for assimilation after all."
    - Former Borg Seven of Nine

  10. #30
    Captain Xaeden's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,363

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    No, I'm sorry, but I consider re-use of an existing title to be disrespectful to the original work.
    Frankly, it doesn't matter what you consider disrespectful as you're not the one whose title is (hypothetically) being re-used. Unless the actual authors come out with a blog post (or whatever) saying they feel disrespected, you're just someone going around saying that you're offended on behalf of other people at something you don't know they would be upset over (and were told they likely would be fine with as most people actually in the industry feel differently about it than you).

    Also, how exactly do you disrespect someone by doing something that that person agreed you could do in exchange for money? Again, Judith and Garfield signed a contract, ceding the rights to anything they created for Star Trek. When someone is starting out in the business, they may get into this type of contractual situation because they badly want to break in without knowing the full ramifications of what they were agreeing to. Judith and Garfield, however, were established authors before they started writing for Trek and they've continued with the franchise for decades. Working authors know how to separate ideas that they're giving up the rights to and ideas that they want to keep for themselves. If they choose to do the former, they have no right to be angry if a company does something with their work that they agreed could be done.*

    I was in a situation once where there was a written agreement stipulating that I would retain the rights to my creative content beforehand. Later, the person was weaselly and tried (unsuccessfully) to pressure me into signing over those rights. That was disrespectful and extremely hurtful as I put a lot of ideas into that content that I felt a strong connection to and thus wanted to retain control of. In other cases, I've given up the rights to my work in exchange for money, and guess what? I know what the situation is going in, so I don't give them my best ideas, and I don't get attached to the material. As a result, I am fine with them doing whatever they please with what I create for them. If I wasn't, I wouldn't have signed their contract in the first place.

    *This is assuming it was their title and not one assigned to their book, as P-90_177 correctly noted happens in a lot of cases like this.
    Last edited by Xaeden; June 20th, 2020 at 08:52 PM.

  11. #31
    First Lieutenant Raj_2006's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    872

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    I read this article after posting my message. It is an interesting article. Also I changed my previous post, so it is accurate now.

    They could still use the logo and have the ST: Federation series start from the founding of the Federation and tell the story of the early years of the Federation.


  12. #32
    Colonel mad_gater's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    7,091

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    How hard would it be for the author of a new work to use a new title? "Star Trek: Origin of the Federation" would be good for the proposed new show if I understand it right.

    No, I'm sorry, but I consider re-use of an existing title to be disrespectful to the original work.
    too bad James Doohan passed away....a series or mini-series entitled "Nuts, Bolts, and the Origins of the UFP" narrated in his "Scotty" persona would've been a big hit I think

  13. #33
    First Lieutenant Raj_2006's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    872

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Here are the episodes they where thinking of doing for Star Trek: Enterprise, https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki...prise_episodes , half way down the page is the Proposed fifth season episodes.


  14. #34
    Colonel mad_gater's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    7,091

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    At the very least I wouldn't mind seeing a "what if" scenario play out where what if Shran's (or in the 2060's more likely Shran's dad's) ship was the one closest for First Contact...I like to think that things might've played out mostly the same although the humans wouldn't've been going in nearly as blind as they were when it was the Vulcans "guiding" them...and perhaps might've made a better first impression on the Klingons and as a result might've perhaps been able to cultivate them as allies when war broke out with the Romulans

  15. #35
    Captain Xaeden's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,363

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by mad_gater View Post
    and perhaps might've made a better first impression on the Klingons and as a result might've perhaps been able to cultivate them as allies when war broke out with the Romulans
    Alternatively, there may not have been any (or the same kind of) future interference in such a timeline, so first contact with the Klingons may have come much later. Spock indicated that initial contact with the Klingons happened when they encountered one another near where Deep Space Station K7 (from "Troubles with Tribbles") was located. In Enterprise, however, Earth first encountered the Klingons because one was running from the Suliban, who were working with the future to change the timeline, and subsequent encounters with the Klingons arguably occurred largely as a result of that incident. After all, it caused the Enterprise to set off on its mission early, so, for example, it likely wouldn't have been in the right place and time to encounter the Klingon ship that was stranded by a gas giant later in the first season.

  16. #36
    First Lieutenant Raj_2006's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    872

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by mad_gater View Post
    At the very least I wouldn't mind seeing a "what if" scenario play out where what if Shran's (or in the 2060's more likely Shran's dad's) ship was the one closest for First Contact...I like to think that things might've played out mostly the same although the humans wouldn't've been going in nearly as blind as they were when it was the Vulcans "guiding" them...and perhaps might've made a better first impression on the Klingons and as a result might've perhaps been able to cultivate them as allies when war broke out with the Romulans
    This would be a fascinating episode to watch. Would things have progressed mostly the same way with the Vulcans, or faster with the Andorians? Also, would United Earth be good or bad? I liked this.

    All the more reason to sign the petition, it is free, share it and see if we can get Star Trek: Enterprise back, either as a live action series again or animation series.

    If I know there was a campaign back in 2005 to bring back Star Trek: Enterprise and TrekUnited managed to raise $32 million of donations, I would have helped out back then.


  17. #37
    First Lieutenant Raj_2006's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    872

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Xaeden View Post
    Alternatively, there may not have been any (or the same kind of) future interference in such a timeline, so first contact with the Klingons may have come much later. Spock indicated that initial contact with the Klingons happened when they encountered one another near where Deep Space Station K7 (from "Troubles with Tribbles") was located. In Enterprise, however, Earth first encountered the Klingons because one was running from the Suliban, who were working with the future to change the timeline, and subsequent encounters with the Klingons arguably occurred largely as a result of that incident. After all, it caused the Enterprise to set off on its mission early, so, for example, it likely wouldn't have been in the right place and time to encounter the Klingon ship that was stranded by a gas giant later in the first season.
    I have not seen the episode Troubles and Tribbles in a long time. It could be possible that when the USS Enterprise in TOS encountered the Klingons near Deep Space Station K7, it might have been a long time since someone from pre-Federation or Federation saw them. So Untied Earth-Starfleet meets them in Broken Bow episode, plus a few encounters, Enterprise vs Duras' ship. Then some time has passed, Federation is formed, more time has passed then the USS Enterprise encounters the Klingons.


  18. #38
    Captain Xaeden's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,363

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Here's an exact quote:

    SPOCK: Under dispute between the two parties since initial contact. The battle of Donatu V was fought near here twenty three solar years ago. Inconclusive.
    KIRK: Analysis of disputed area?
    SPOCK: Undeveloped. Sherman's Planet is claimed by both sides, our Federation and the Klingon Empire. We do have the better claim.
    Spock clearly said "initial contact," and it's Spock, so I don't think it's a matter of his language being imprecise. Some people do rationalize this by saying it refers to initial contact between the Federation and Klingons, but clearly first contact in Enterprise was a product of time travel, so unless that Klingon's arrival on Earth was another case of Star Trek's randomized instances of the predestination paradox, that clearly didn't happen in the original timeline. Maybe they originally met some other way in the non-Temporal Cold War affected 10 year gap between the start of Enterprise and the foundation of the Federation, though, and maybe Spock wouldn't count that as the "initial" point of contact.

    It's also TOS, and many little lines like that have been discarded by future writers, so I don't know. All I can say for sure is that the original intention was that first contact happened near Deep Space Station K7, not during "The Trouble of Tribbles," but 20+ years prior (they fought a battle 20 years before the episode, but it wasn't said if first contact immediately preceded it), and that Enterprise used time travel to put a Klingon on Earth in "Broken Bow."

  19. #39
    Major Annoyed's Avatar
    Member Since
    Dec 2014
    Location
    The People's Republic of New York
    Posts
    2,986

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Pardon the obvious, but wasn't the treaty which said that whoever could develop Sherman's planet a consequence of the Organians imposing a treaty upon the two sides in "Errand of Mercy" ?
    "It may seem pointless but small talk is a vital dating skill. It helps to establish a rapport with your companion."
    - Starship Voyager's Holographic Doctor
    "Perhaps there's something to be said for assimilation after all."
    - Former Borg Seven of Nine

  20. #40
    Captain Xaeden's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,363

    Default Re: Bringing back and continuing Star Trek: Enterprise

    Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
    Pardon the obvious, but wasn't the treaty which said that whoever could develop Sherman's planet a consequence of the Organians imposing a treaty upon the two sides in "Errand of Mercy" ?
    For the most part. The Organians told the Klingons and Federation they would not allow a war and asked them to leave. This appears to have led to the two sides agreeing to said treaty off-screen as it was first referenced in "The Trouble of Tribbles."

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Question about Star Trek Enterprise on DVD
    By planet_tv in forum Star Trek
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: July 6th, 2018, 05:01 PM
  2. Star Trek: Enterprise
    By Aerilon in forum Star Trek
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: June 27th, 2008, 10:09 AM
  3. The Problem with Star Trek: Enterprise
    By Stargate Agent in forum Star Trek
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: April 21st, 2005, 01:41 AM
  4. Star Trek: Win Enterprise DVDs
    By morjana in forum Star Trek
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 14th, 2005, 11:01 PM
  5. Star Trek: Enterprise Season 4
    By Taonas in forum Star Trek
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: October 10th, 2004, 12:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •