Decipher and Viacom

[Balok]

I'm not a game industry professional. I can understand the theoretical reasons why a company like Viacom would insist on the right to approve (or disapprove) the work of a license holder like Decipher. What I'm kind of curious about, though is: what specific things do they look for?

- Will they deny approval to something if they know it will contradict an upcoming storyline?

- Do they only look at the product from the perspective of "does it damage our brand" (i.e. you can't publish a book that discusses how Kirk was secretly a mass murderer, because that will diminish the value of Kirk as a character). Or do they try to evaluate the "quality" (whatever they think that means) of a product?

- Do you submit a draft of some kind, and they "red line" (or whatever the editing term is) the material? Do they commonly supply explanations? Or are you expected to incorporate their changes without question?

Apologies, in advance, if I'm asking for answers that an NDA forbids you to reveal -- I'm just curious, is all

[Don Mappin]

I'll take a shot at this since I have a little insight as a freelancer and Ross might not see this thread.

Originally posted by Fesarius
I'm not a game industry professional. I can understand the theoretical reasons why a company like Viacom would insist on the right to approve (or disapprove) the work of a license holder like Decipher. What I'm kind of curious about, though is: what specific things do they look for?

- Will they deny approval to something if they know it will contradict an upcoming storyline?

Possibly, but this rarely (IMO) is an issue. Viacom is a large company and the licensing department, to my knowledge, doesn't have the next six scripts of "Enterprise" in hand, for example. On a movie with a long production timeline, this is more likely however. It’s also a matter of common sense where we don’t write an adventure where the Romulans take over the Federation. You leave everything pretty much where you found it when you began.

In most cases it's the other way around: Viacom contacts the licensees and asks for a number of products that focus on such-and-such, because Viacom knows that they want to push that property. For example, as Voyager's last season ended Viacom was asking their licensees to try to come out with Voyager-specific products to help build some momentum.

You'll start seeing this soon with "Enterprise" I'd suspect.

- Do they only look at the product from the perspective of "does it damage our brand" (i.e. you can't publish a book that discusses how Kirk was secretly a mass murderer, because that will diminish the value of Kirk as a character). Or do they try to evaluate the "quality" (whatever they think that means) of a product?

More the former than the latter. While outlines are examined and approved I don't believe that anyone at Viacom has the time to subjectively evaluate the quality of a product en masse. I mean, look at all the crappy Star Trek computer games that have come out over the years.

With that said, even after an outline has been approved the final manuscript is looked over and approved at least one more time, if not twice, and corrections/alterations must be made. On some products it's as simple as 1 or 2 things, a credit to the likes of Ross on being on the right wavelength when it comes to Star Trek.

On other occasions, such as the 11th hour yanking of Starfleet Marines in "The Price of Freedom," something that you thought was okay turned out not so much.

- Do you submit a draft of some kind, and they "red line" (or whatever the editing term is) the material? Do they commonly supply explanations? Or are you expected to incorporate their changes without question?

I haven't seen these firsthand to comment. There is a Viacom representative that the Line Developer is in regular contact with, however.

Apologies, in advance, if I'm asking for answers that an NDA forbids you to reveal -- I'm just curious, is all

Viacom doesn't make us sign NDAs -- Decipher does that. Actually, I think Viacom wouldn't mind people knowing how much they scrutinize their licensed products for accuracy. They seem to care strongly about companies making an accurate representation of Star Trek.

That's a good thing.

[RIsaacs]

>>- Will they deny approval to something if they know it will contradict an upcoming storyline? <<

With respects to Don, the answer is "yes." I knew weeks beforehand that the first appearance of the Andorians was in the first five episodes (though I didn't know in what capacity). I was asked to keep Andorian information "fuzzy."

Specifically, if something we write will contradict an upcoming episode, we get a heads up. If the Consumer Products person assigned to us even *thinks* something may contradict an upcoming episode, they contact the production office for a ruling.

>>- Do they only look at the product from the perspective of "does it damage our brand" (i.e. you can't publish a book that discusses how Kirk was secretly a mass murderer, because that will diminish the value of Kirk as a character). <<

Yes. That's one of the things they look for. Happily, I don't get flagged for that very much.

They also look for contradictions with established canon. They catch things we miss.

>>Or do they try to evaluate the "quality" (whatever they think that means) of a product?<<

They are very sensitive to the "quality" of a product. We were asked why we wanted to publish Holodeck Adventures, we explained it, and they thought it would be a quality product. Other times, like the portable personal shields in the LUG Player's Guide, they were concerned that they not unbalance the setting. And still other times, they were really, really pleased with the way we pulled something off.

>>- Do you submit a draft of some kind, and they "red line" (or whatever the editing term is) the material? Do they commonly supply explanations? Or are you expected to incorporate their changes without question? <<

What don't we submit? There are three points at which we submit materials for approval for each product. I cannot move forward to the next stage until Viacom's concerns (if any) are addressed. Just because something is approved once does not mean it's final until the final approval. There have been times where something just slipped past notice in one stage, but really jumped off the page in another (and got disapproved). Other times, they want to see how we handle something, and so approve something potentially questionable in an early stage, then ask it to be revised once they've seen it. The Starfleet Marines are a perfect example. Approved in an early draft, rejected once they saw how we handled it.

Happily, they have never, ever asked us not to publish something at all. They raise a concern, supply explanations, and have always been open to solutions. Starfleet Marines were approved once we changed the name to Rapid Response Team. That's the only change that had to be made; global search and replace for Marines. They are open to reason, and ask for explanations from us. There is give and take.

For the approvals on the Player's Guide (and the last year or so of my tenure at LUG), the only thing I've been flagged on is spelling. I get about a page of revision requests per book, and they usually do not involve matters of content, canon, or tone. Just spelling and grammar.

I love Star Trek, Paramount, and Viacom. I treat their property with respect. And I get rewarded with admiration from VCP (where do you think I got all those Star Trek toys from?).

[Don Mappin]

I stand corrected!

Thanks, Ross!

[Balok]

Wow! Thanks for the detailed answers, Don and Ross. I always enjoying learning a bit about what goes into things.