Sherlock Holmes - CrimeSpace2024-03-29T15:05:23Zhttps://crimespace.ning.com/forum/topics/sherlock-holmes-1?feed=yes&xn_auth=no14 March 2012 10:43:
Notes o…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-14:537324:Comment:3341712012-03-14T14:23:43.481ZTim Symondshttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/TimSymonds
<p>14 March 2012 10:43:</p>
<p></p>
<h3><b>Notes on the ownership of the Sherlock Holmes stories</b></h3>
<p><a href="http://www.benedict.com/" rel="nofollow">Copyright</a> in the Sherlock Holmes stories expired in Canada in 1980.</p>
<p>The last copyright on ACD's work in the United Kingdom expired at the end of the year 2000.</p>
<p>In the United States, the only Sherlock Holmes remaining in copyright is <i>The Case Book</i>, which will enter the public domain between 2016 and 2023.…</p>
<p>14 March 2012 10:43:</p>
<p></p>
<h3><b>Notes on the ownership of the Sherlock Holmes stories</b></h3>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.benedict.com/">Copyright</a> in the Sherlock Holmes stories expired in Canada in 1980.</p>
<p>The last copyright on ACD's work in the United Kingdom expired at the end of the year 2000.</p>
<p>In the United States, the only Sherlock Holmes remaining in copyright is <i>The Case Book</i>, which will enter the public domain between 2016 and 2023. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.law.asu.edu/HomePages/Karjala/OpposingCopyrightExtension/">A legal challenge</a> that would have invalidated a 1998 extension to the length of copyright — putting Sherlock Holmes into the public domain immediately — <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,830856,00.asp">was thrown out by the Supreme Court</a> January 15, 2003.</p>
<p>The American copyrights are owned by <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.conandoyleestate.co.uk/">Conan Doyle Estate Ltd.</a> The American agent for administering them, and related rights in the Sherlock Holmes character, is Jon Lellenberg (Hazelbaker & Lellenberg, 220 East Walton Place, Chicago, Illinois 60611), <a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:JonLellenberg@gmail.com">JonLellenberg@gmail.com</a>. The British agent is Robert Kirby of United Agents (12-26 Lexington Street, London W1F 0LE), <a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:rkirby@unitedagents.co.uk">rkirby@unitedagents.co.uk</a>.</p>
<p>A <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.sherlockholmesonline.org/">web site</a> for "the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Literary Estate" represents Andrea Plunket, the former wife of Sheldon Reynolds, producer of <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.epguides.com/SherlockHolmes_1954/">the 1954 television series starring Ronald Howard as Holmes</a>. Reynolds controlled the copyrights in the 1950s. Plunket is proprietor of <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.theguesthouse.com/">a guest house</a> in Livingston Manor, New York. Her claims to rights in the Sherlock Holmes stories have been repeatedly rejected in U.S. federal court decisions (including Plunket v. Doyle, No. 99-11006, Southern District of New York, February 22, 2001; Pannonia Farms Inc. v. ReMax International and Jon Lellenberg, No. 01-1697, District of Columbia, March 21, 2005). She has also filed a claim to the name "Sherlock Holmes" as a United States <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm">trademark</a>, and that too <a rel="nofollow" href="http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=75688159">has been turned down</a>. </p>
<p>The “official website” at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://sherlockholmes.com/">www.sherlockholmes.com</a> represents the former proprietors of the Sherlock Holmes Memorabilia Company, who also own no rights to Arthur Conan Doyle works and characters. They have filed a U.S. trademark application, which has been blocked by formal Oppositions filed by the Estate and others.</p>
<p>The background of copyright and ownership issues around the writings of Arthur Conan Doyle is traced in <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/books/19sherlock.html?pagewanted=all">a story in the New York Times</a> January 18, 2010. (Also see <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100119/2318397826.shtml">this dissent</a> and <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/opinion/24sun4.html">this editorial</a>.)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>------------------------------------------------------------------</p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091223/1120407488.shtml">http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091223/1120407488.shtml</a><br/> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PublicDomainCharacter">http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PublicDomainCharacter</a><br/> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.sherlockian.net/acd/copyright.html">http://www.sherlockian.net/acd/copyright.html</a></p>
<p>The American copyrights are owned by <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.conandoyleestate.co.uk/">Conan Doyle Estate Ltd.</a> The American agent for administering them, and related rights in the Sherlock Holmes character, is <a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:jonlellenberg@gmail.com">jonlellenberg@gmail.com</a> Jon Lellenberg (Hazelbaker & Lellenberg, 220 East Walton Place, Chicago, Illinois 60611), <a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:JonLellenberg@gmail.com">JonLellenberg@gmail.com</a>. The British agent is Robert Kirby of United Agents (12-26 Lexington Street, London W1F 0LE), <a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:672@conandoyleestate.co.uk"><b>72@conandoyleestate.co.uk</b></a>.</p> Sounds like they should do a…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-09:537324:Comment:3335132012-03-09T16:50:52.090ZCammy May Hunnicutthttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/CammyMayHunnicutt
<p>Sounds like they should do a Downing Street Get-Down rap video.</p>
<p>Sounds like they should do a Downing Street Get-Down rap video.</p> Ah, now THAT makes sense. So…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-09:537324:Comment:3336262012-03-09T16:49:50.494ZCammy May Hunnicutthttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/CammyMayHunnicutt
<p>Ah, now THAT makes sense. So it's like I was suspecting, not about copyrights but trademarking of the characters and titles. Registered properties. I don't think there is any limit to how long those last: they're closer to patents than copyrights.</p>
<p>Ah, now THAT makes sense. So it's like I was suspecting, not about copyrights but trademarking of the characters and titles. Registered properties. I don't think there is any limit to how long those last: they're closer to patents than copyrights.</p> I likely have a different vie…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-09:537324:Comment:3337072012-03-09T16:48:42.180ZStuart Matthew Davishttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/StuartMatthewDavis
<p>I likely have a different view than most who have posted here, but I don't have a problem with the new movies. Holmes was a boxer, a cocaine user, he used disguises and was an all around oddball. I don't think the creative license used in the new movies are such a wild jump.</p>
<p>I likely have a different view than most who have posted here, but I don't have a problem with the new movies. Holmes was a boxer, a cocaine user, he used disguises and was an all around oddball. I don't think the creative license used in the new movies are such a wild jump.</p> I'm not a lawyer by any stret…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-09:537324:Comment:3337052012-03-09T16:42:05.578ZStuart Matthew Davishttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/StuartMatthewDavis
<p>I'm not a lawyer by any stretch of the imagination, but it is my understanding that you can reprint all of Doyle's original work, but you cannot write new stuff without permission. I ran into the same issue when I wanted to write a story with the Zorro character. You can reprint the original "Curse of Capistrano" book, but the character itself is not in the public domain.</p>
<p>I'm not a lawyer by any stretch of the imagination, but it is my understanding that you can reprint all of Doyle's original work, but you cannot write new stuff without permission. I ran into the same issue when I wanted to write a story with the Zorro character. You can reprint the original "Curse of Capistrano" book, but the character itself is not in the public domain.</p> Don't know it. Presumably th…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-09:537324:Comment:3337762012-03-09T16:31:00.492ZI. J. Parkerhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Ingpark
<p>Don't know it. Presumably the name SHERLOCK would turn me off. Does he make fun of Sherlock?</p>
<p>Don't know it. Presumably the name SHERLOCK would turn me off. Does he make fun of Sherlock?</p> I.J., even the Benedict Cumbe…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-09:537324:Comment:3337622012-03-09T05:24:44.672ZminervaKhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/minervakoenig
<p>I.J., even the Benedict Cumberbatch Sherlock? I loved it.</p>
<p>I.J., even the Benedict Cumberbatch Sherlock? I loved it.</p> A successful crime writer I g…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-08:537324:Comment:3337462012-03-08T17:52:54.917ZJ W Nelsonhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/JWNelson
<p>A successful crime writer I greatly admire once advised me, "Make your hero the smartest person in the room." I saw and respect his point, but did not entirely agree. I prefer my heroes to do a bit of barging about.</p>
<p>A successful crime writer I greatly admire once advised me, "Make your hero the smartest person in the room." I saw and respect his point, but did not entirely agree. I prefer my heroes to do a bit of barging about.</p> Add me to the list, Charles.…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-08:537324:Comment:3334882012-03-08T17:47:33.192ZJ W Nelsonhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/JWNelson
<p>Add me to the list, Charles. The steampunk gothic "Lethal Weapon" what-have-you hyper-kinetic version of Holmes left me a bit cold, despite my enjoying Downey, Jr's engaging mania. </p>
<p>Add me to the list, Charles. The steampunk gothic "Lethal Weapon" what-have-you hyper-kinetic version of Holmes left me a bit cold, despite my enjoying Downey, Jr's engaging mania. </p> Interesting.
I seem to recall…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2012-03-06:537324:Comment:3335482012-03-06T20:52:41.268ZCammy May Hunnicutthttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/CammyMayHunnicutt
<p>Interesting.</p>
<p>I seem to recall that a ghost-written sequel to "Gone With The Wind" was published just so the Mitchell heirs could continue to exercise rights over the characters and such.</p>
<p><br/>But I didn't know you could just sort of declare it was still yours.</p>
<p>Is this a matter that moves over into trademarking, rather than actual copyright?</p>
<p>Interesting.</p>
<p>I seem to recall that a ghost-written sequel to "Gone With The Wind" was published just so the Mitchell heirs could continue to exercise rights over the characters and such.</p>
<p><br/>But I didn't know you could just sort of declare it was still yours.</p>
<p>Is this a matter that moves over into trademarking, rather than actual copyright?</p>