Originally posted by String
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
“Sherlock Holmes” Is Now Officially Off Copyright and Open for Business
Collapse
X
-
Even after the copyright expires, the creator still has the moral right (which is recognised legally) to be recognised as the creator, and the estate of the deceased author can prevent publications which are deemed detrimental to the original.
I was under the impression that copyright lasted the life of the author plus 70 years, so that being the case, shouldn't Sherlock Holmes have been "on the market" way back in 2000!?
Cheers,
Adam.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adam Went View PostEven after the copyright expires, the creator still has the moral right (which is recognised legally) to be recognised as the creator, and the estate of the deceased author can prevent publications which are deemed detrimental to the original.
I was under the impression that copyright lasted the life of the author plus 70 years, so that being the case, shouldn't Sherlock Holmes have been "on the market" way back in 2000!?
Cheers,
Adam.
But the US doesn't recognize any copyright prior to 1923"The Men who were not the Man who was not Jack the Ripper!"
Comment
-
Hi Magpie,
Thanks for that. Presumably since the original work was done in England, the copyright would adhere to their laws. Most (all?) of the Sherlock Holmes work would have been completed by 1923? Arthur Conan Doyle was quite literally off with the fairies by then....
Cheers,
Adam.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adam Went View PostHi Magpie,
Thanks for that. Presumably since the original work was done in England, the copyright would adhere to their laws. Most (all?) of the Sherlock Holmes work would have been completed by 1923? Arthur Conan Doyle was quite literally off with the fairies by then....
Cheers,
Adam.
As to the Sherlock thing, I'm sort of going off memory here but was sort of like the family ran across some unpublished Holmes descriptive notes that he lent to one of the writer of one of the myriad of films who then used it to introduce some of the things we associate with Holmes that actually weren't in the books. They they argued that because the movie was still under copyright, the notes that formed the bases for the depiction were also under copyright, and if the description was copyrighted then the character being described was still under copyright and if the character was copyrighted then obviously all the stories he appeared in should remain under copyright until the movies copyright expired. And after the the judge and lawyers all got them breath back after laughing so hard the judge figured they'd better have a trial and make it official."The Men who were not the Man who was not Jack the Ripper!"
Comment
-
Originally posted by admin tim View Post
Comment
Comment