From: 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (Dark Lord of the Sith)
Subject: Re: STAR WARS vs GALACTICA vs STAR TREK
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:18:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.223930.25173@u.washington.edu>, redrum@carson.u.washington.edu (Joe Stremick) writes:
> 	Yes, you missed something.  No, Battlestar Galactica did not come
> out first.  _Star Wars_ was released on May 25, 1977.
> Battlestar Galactica was first shown in late 1978.  In fact, Lucas
> sued Universal television, charging that BG was a ripoff of Star 
> Wars.  Lucas was personally perturbed that John Dykstra, the
> man in charge of the special effects for Star Wars, jumped ship
> to work on BG.
> 
     You seem to know a few things about Battlestar Galactica and Star Wars.
According to Dale Pollock's SKYWALKING: THE LIFE AND TIMES OF GEORGE LUCAS
the following facts were laid out (page 198):

"At (Lucas') urging, Fox sued Universal for copyright infringement, an 
action unusual in Hollywood. Universal, a studio Lucas enriched by $50
million with American Graffiti, countersued Fox, claiming Star Wars was
a rip-off of its 1972 release Silent Running, which featured three small
robots named Huey, Duey and Louie....<People thought _I_ did it," Lucas
says. "I got hundreds of letters from people saying, 'I think your TV
show is terrible.' It was very upsetting.>"

also on pate 197:
    (John Dykstra) "There was no profit participation from Star Wars, so
we were really out to lunch. It was Goerge's money and George's movie,
but none of us got any points. 'Battlestar' was the first project that
came through the door that promised to pay the bills to keep my buddies
and me employed"

For another perspective, SF writer Brian Aldiss writes in TRILLION YEAR
SPREE (page 340):

"Lucasfilm and Fox brought an action for plagiarism against Universal...
Early in 1979 I was in California, advising a legal firm hired by Universal
to defend the suit (which was never brought to court). It seemed to me at
the time... that both films derived from earlier models, to wit, from stories
in the SF magazines of the forties and fifties. The films shared common
ancestors." 
 
The whole lawsuit, in my opinion, was completely unnecessary. If ignorant
parents did not know the difference between the two (Lucas' comments above)
then it is their own fault. THEY never went nuts about Star Wars like the
kids did, and as a few people have commented who loved both BG and Star Wars
, including myself, WE knew the difference. It is like DC suing Fawcett for
greating Captain Marvel, knowing full well that it was more than a rip off
of Superman. Or the producers of Stage Coach suing other Westerns for 
infringement. (By the way, if they had, there would never have been a Bonanza,
Lorne Greene or Commander Adama... nuff said).

To take just a small glimpse at the inspiration for adventure SF, please check
out the original post "STAR WARS vs GALACTICA vs STAR TREK". I will be happy
to repost it or email it if it is no longer retrievable. (I included LOTS of
things about Star Trek the fanatics, Trekkies, do not want you to know).

May the Force be With You .... Always  
-- 

John P. LaRocque
J.LaRocque@uwo.ca

"Farm chores sure could be dull, and Luke Skywalker was bored beyond belief. He
yearned for adventures out among the stars - adventures that would take him
beyond the furthest galaxies to distant and alien worlds.

"But Luke got more than he bargained for..."
                            from Star Wars the paperback (1976, first edition)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.starwars