People ask about this, and no end of ridiculous rumors exist, including one that no license exists.

I answer this question every year, sometimes twice, and then the answers disappear into the deletions of an overloaded BBS. So I'll put this here (even though I swore I had done it before) so it can always be found.

Do understand that I'm not going to go into details for several reasons: It's not something Paramount wants "too public" and it's not a good idea for me to publish the entire document or specific details. You just don't need to know and there are those who would use it against us. We only show it to people we want to make deals with and only after they sign an NDA.

Way back in the 70s when I was at Texas Tech, I was playing Jutland while watching Star Trek reruns. In a flash, I had an SSD and weapons charts and the proportional movement system. There are lies that have circulated that other people did the inventing and I stole it. Fine, let one of "those other people" testify to that in court. No one? Of course not.

I knew from the time that JagdPanther published a game based on Tolkien that "intellectual property" was a thing. (Nobody sued us, in fact, the Tolkien people never noticed, but a friend in law school told me that was a no-no. Everybody has to learn everything and that's when I learned that.) So I knew we could never print it. But I played it with friends and they loved it. Lou Zocchi, and old friend, had published a Trek game under a license from Franz Joseph, and I asked him for a phone number. I called, long story short, he gave us a license. Years later Paramount noticed, and long story short they also gave us a license. I don't remember the date, I'm not going to look it up, but I think it was back about the time of F&E and the SFB Tactics Manual. Over the years, new owners of Paramount accepted it as real. We send Paramount a check every three months and they have a contract file number for us. They're very nice to deal with.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 10:21 am: Edit

The license was issued before there was anything beyond TOS/TAS so none of that is covered. It covers "what we had used before it was issued" so it's not all of of TOS/TAS. We can create new empires, planets, starships, species, weapons, and fiction. We cannot use the characters from the show. We cannot use the Enterprise but we can mention it only in cases where it would look stupid not to mention it, like a ship list or that story we did about ENEMY BELOW. We have a separate license for the tech manual, the old Franz Joseph license.

We cannot issue licenses to anyone else, but we can do "joint ventures" with other companies. We can put stuff we create on stores like Shapeways and DriveThru and Kindle. We have talked with Paramount about getting another license but their terms are unworkable; we'd have to give up the non-expiring license we have with no guarantee that a new license could be renewed. We don't have the manpower to get a Star Wars license, for example, we're busy with SFU.

We cannot license someone to use, for example, the Lyrans because the Lyrans are linked to the licensed material.

We could, and have, issued licenses for non-SFU games such as SIEGE OF LENINGRAD.

Joint ventures would be things like CALL TO ARMS STAR FLEET. Both companies spend money and both companies get money. We have a veto over anything said or printed or otherwise done.

We have a policy that allows thousands of third party SSDs and dozens of empires on a no money fan distribution thing. We have stopped people trying to make money using our property or Paramount property without permission.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 10:29 am: Edit

Someone always asks for the name and contact phone number of the Paramount agent who handles our contract as this would be the ultimate proof that the license is real. Yeah, I'm sure our contact would really enjoy a few dozen phone calls from people who ask questions that the contact doesn't want to answer or rant about what a jerk I am or want to get their own license just like ours. Get real. I don't have to prove anything. If we were not legit, the Paramount who has a history of taking people to court would have destroyed us decades ago.

By David Jannke (Bigslowtarget) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 12:26 pm: Edit

No details (and please delete this post if you prefer not to have my independent confirmation of your position) however:

The exact wording and continuing legitimacy of the license was reviewed and verified by an independent IP lawyer for an independent group as recently as 2020.

Star Fleet Models (I, David Jannke) would not contract for production of unlicensed material. Too much risk.

By Simon Duggan (Gamegater) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 03:44 pm: Edit

This is great info, thank you for letting us know. I was surprised about the Lyrans, but I had forgotten about the Animated Star Trek which I think was the first time we saw any. There are a few other aliens that were shown in that series as well.

Anyway, good info.. thank you.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 03:59 pm: Edit

We didnt' get the Lyrans from TAS. The Kzintis were in there.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 02:09 pm: Edit

"RPGs, novels, and comic books..."

Well, you have the RPG.

Novels just need a writer to submit to you something. You'd be editor & publisher so that probably would be a possible. Not that SPP & SVC have loads of time to edit entire novels to ensure SFU compliance. Back in the day I submitted the Doomward story and the editing was absolutely necessary. Me so sad my bright (wrong) ideas got zorked. Like SVC says, his company his rules.

Comic books. Ditto.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 04:03 pm: Edit

We have some RPGs but not modern market hard cover full color books. Without those, our RPG sales are all but dead, and it would take all our cash reserves to print ONE of that kind of book. Too risky.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 04:27 pm: Edit

Apologies if I'm mistaken on this, but I recall something to the effect that, since the on-screen Kzin/ti were originally from a non-Franchise science fiction IP, the presence of the Kzinti/s as a species in the SFU requires a specific licencing agreement that obliges them to be distinct, in both naming conventions and in biological terms, from the "original" species (with cat ears instead of bat ears, etc.).

Whereas the Kzinti ships as used in the SFU were designed "natively", much as the SFU's Gorn and Orion ships were.

-----

This was a thing during the time of the first two-and-a-half Starfleet Command PC games from Taldren, which used a "hybrid" of ADB-sourced game mechanics and (first six) Movie-era aesthetics.

The first SFC game did not include the Kzintis as a playable faction, though it did include the Lyrans.

In SFC2, rather than add the Kzintis directly, Taldren invented a wolf-like species called the Mirak, who were used in their place - and who used ships based on the SFU's Kzinti fleet.

In hindsight, had Module C6 existed at the time, one might wonder how things would have been game-wise, had Taldren gone with the Carnivon species and fleet instead...

-----

Speaking of Taldren: they made a few other changes along the way.

One of these was to create the frog-like Meskeen, to be a sixth major species of the Inter-Stellar Concordium - which was also introduced as a playable faction in SFC2.

At least one person who was first made aware of the SFU through the SFC games had to "un-learn" some of these Taldren-isms, when first getting settled in to the "proper" SFU...

By Simon Duggan (Gamegater) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 05:05 pm: Edit

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 05:38 pm: Edit

I can also confirm some of what SVC said. Way back when I was still active duty, I happen to sit on an airplane next to a lady who worked for Paramount. I mentioned SFB. The look on her face, you'd think I just fed her lemons. She said some (not all) people in her office would have loved to shut TFG / ADB down but the contract was iron clad bullet proof. She said nobody ... NOBODY ... will ever get a deal like that ever again.


Garth L. Getgen

By Simon Duggan (Gamegater) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 06:07 pm: Edit

@Garth Wow, so we need to make sure ADB and TFG survive!

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 06:30 pm: Edit

To do that .... BUT MORE SFB PRODUCTS!!!


Garth L. Getgen

By Simon Duggan (Gamegater) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 06:43 pm: Edit

@Grath, you mean BUY MORE SFB PRODUCTS? I would but there are no more currently....

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 06:50 pm: Edit

By Simon Duggan (Gamegater) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 07:33 pm: Edit

By Simon Duggan (Gamegater) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 08:39 pm: Edit

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 09:19 pm: Edit

Simon: The spike trailed off before we stopped doing them.

I know you mean well.

But let us suppose for a moment that you convince me to do a YouTube video now and then. My answer is: Instead of what? There are only so many hours I am in the office and to do anything we are not doing now means not doing something we are doing now, and according to you, what we are doing now is not enough. I am 75, I have run ADB since 1983 and TFG before that. I have kept this company and these games alive when no one else would. I gave up everything for this, children, my engineering career, my military career, my career in military intelligence, vacations, hobbies, family events. I am sick, exhausted, and my wife is demanding that I quit completely. I think I have done more than anyone could ask. Anything I am able to do now (such as get the final print CIVIL WARS product to Jean which happened today when I was so sick I had to be taken home) is more than anyone has any right to expect of me.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 09:31 pm: Edit

And this isn't the "make SVC feel bad that he doesn't do enough" topic. You can do that by email. This is the "how does the license work" topic. Stick to that. I should have just deleted your post rather than responding to it. (I did that just now. No need for that off-topic stuff to remain here for years.)

There are days when someone thanks me for decades of fun and I think maybe I could keep going a little longer. Then there are days someone who knows nothing about the company tries to tell me I am lazy or stupid or don't do the right thing or do it wrong or don't work hard enough and I think: "who needs this crap?"

And remember, there is no one who can or will take over, so the day I walk out is the end.

I do look forward to constructive criticism and business adxice by email, but "calling me out" in public (when I told you to email me that stuff) is a really bad strategy.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 - 11:33 pm: Edit

ADB, Inc. has survived when a LOT of game companies have gone the way of the Dodo.

Survival is proof that you've done things wisely.

There was another company that did a game based on Star Trek. They also did a board game of giant robot combat; something I bring up to suggest who they were without exactly saying their name...

HOWEVER, according to rumors I've heard, they weren't as formal about honoring their licenses.

They are gone.

There was also a space combat board game that was based on another Sci-Fi TV show, one from Warner Brothers. A decent game, but not up to the standards of SFB, in my opinion.

The company that did that game is gone as well.

SVC? IMO, you've been fastidious in honoring your agreements for your license and that has paid off. As a fan of your games, I wish to thank you for your wisdom in these matters.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Wednesday, August 19, 2026 - 12:00 am: Edit

Yes, there have been other games created based on TV/movie IP. Most have come and gone, following a similar pattern. They get a three to five year license and do okay/good. Just not good enough in the eyes of the IP holder. At the end of the three years (or five), when it's time to renew, the IP holder says, "well, we expected more royalties" and cancel the contract. They go find a new game company to 'do it better' to give them higher royalties. The big money never rolls in. After the second or third try, they give up on licensing their IP to anyone. Never mind that it was 'free money' to them. All they spent was a few hours of lawyer fees to draft the contracts. The game company took all the risks. Like the lady on the plane told me, nobody will ever get an ADB/SFB license deal ever again.


Garth L. Getgen

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, August 19, 2026 - 03:48 am: Edit

I might comment that a standard contract gives all copyrights to the movie company. When company A loses the contract, their replacement, say Company B, gets to use anything the previous licensee invented.

In our contract, ADB owns the copyrights to its creations. One could argue that depending on how you count it, ADB owns a significant chunk of all things Trek. But then again, our stuff is not canon. It’s not cannon either.

I might also comment that for any license but ours, the approval process can take many months and force numerous changes and rewrites. We don’t get out text approved and totally control what it says.

By Steve Stewart (Stevestewart) on Wednesday, August 19, 2026 - 07:20 am: Edit

Well, just because...

Thank you Steve Cole (and the rest of the team) for providing me entertainment since I was a teenager until now when I approach retirement. Whether it was moving every 2 years to a new posting, bringing up a family, dodging rockets in Afghanistan, or duelling with cancer, SFB (and FC) has always given something safe to think about and enjoy.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, August 19, 2026 - 12:33 pm: Edit

Paramount is incredibly foolish. ADB kept the whole Trek thing burbling along when it might have died out completely.

TOS 1966 to 1969
TAS 1973 to 1974
Star Trek (TMP) 1979
TNG 87 to 94

And there are a dizzying array of spin offs.

DS9, Voyager, rebooted, prequel...

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, August 19, 2026 - 01:59 pm: Edit

Speaking of long-running game systems with distinct licensing arrangements:

I find it useful to compare and contrast the situation here, relative to that which BattleTech has found itself in over the years.

(I posted about this over in the CL55 thread, though it's perhaps better to address it here instead.)

-----

With the end of FASA 1.0, the tabletop and video game rights to the BT IP found themselves going in two separate directions.

The tabletop rights were first acquired by WizKids, who created the Clix-based MechWarrior: Dark Age/Age of Destruction game system.

Over time, WixKids was acquired by Topps, who in turn have more recently been purchased by Fanatics.

However, none of these IP holders managed "classic" BT directly. Instead, this was first licenced to FanPro, and later on to Catalyst Game Labs.

Although, so long as MW:DA/AoD was an active project, the respective licence holders were unable to move "classic" BT past the point in the timeline where FASA 1.0 had last reached.

In recent years, and in the midst of what one could say to be a significant renaissance for the BT IP, both "classic" BattleTech and its sibling game Alpha Strike have been able to move through, and then past, the Dark Age and on to the current era of the IlClan.

-----

Meanwhile, the video game rights are currently held by Microsoft.

In cases where that company has not made active use of this IP, they have agreed to let other game studios make use of it under licence.

A good example of this is the 2018 BattleTech PC game, which was created by Harebrained Schemes.

Notably, whereas the game itself is not part of current BT canon, it did inspire CGL to produce a sourcebook set in the area of the rimward Periphery where the game's main story was set. So, in a sense, one could say that the game "dramatizes" events that historically took place in-universe.

-----

And, through some of this, there was the matter of the "Unseen".

Because of this issue, "classic" BT was left for several years with a range of prominent BattleMech designs for which they had no proper illustrations to offer.

More recently, a decision was made to retcon the affected 'Mech designs so that they never used "outside" art designs in the first place. As in, the current "Reseen" designs were drawn up in order to represent what is shown on the unit's Record Sheet in a manner "native" to the BT setting.

-----

Through all of this, the core mechanics of "classic" BT have remained largely in place - although a lot of new systems, rule tweaks, and errata items have been factored in over the years.

Indeed, even Alpha Strike itself has a heritage going back to FASA 1.0, in a roundabout manner: it is ultimately derived from the older BattleForce game system, by way of the "Quick-Strike" miniature-based spin off rules first published by CGL in 2009's BattleTech: Strategic Operations.

Which, in hindsight, is somewhat ironic. One of the reasons behind the creation of the Clix game was to give new players a faster-paced game system than that offered by "classic" BT. One might wonder how things could have gone had someone at FASA 1.0 thought of the Alpha Strike concept back then...

-----

Of course, the exact specifics vary considerably there, relative to here.

Still, much as BT has managed to endure through its own time of real-world troubles to get to the position of relative strength it finds itself in at present, so too do I hope that a viable way forward can be found for the SFU.