Sherlock Holmes Is in the Public Domain, American Judge Rules

[The Straight Story]

In the more than 125 years since he first appeared, Sherlock Holmes has popped up everywhere from fan fiction set in outer space to screen adaptations like CBS’s “Elementary,” set in contemporary Manhattan. But now, following a legal ruling, the deerstalker-wearing detective is headed to another destination: the public domain.

A federal judge has issued a declarative judgment stating that Holmes, Watson, 221B Baker Street, the dastardly Professor Moriarty and other elements included in the 50 Holmes works that Arthur Conan Doyle published before Jan. 1, 1923, are no longer covered by United States copyright law, and can therefore be freely used by others without paying any licensing fee to the writer’s estate.

The ruling came in response to a civil complaint filed in February by Leslie S. Klinger, the editor of the three-volume, nearly 3,000-page “New Annotated Sherlock Holmes” and a number of other Holmes-related books. The complaint stemmed from “In the Company of Sherlock Holmes,” a collection of new Holmes stories written by different authors and edited by Mr. Klinger and Laurie R. King, herself the author of a mystery series featuring Mary Russell, Holmes’s wife.

Mr. Klinger and Ms. King had paid a $5,000 licensing fee for a previous Holmes-inspired collection. But in the complaint, Mr. Klinger said that the publisher of “In the Company of Sherlock Holmes,” Pegasus Books, had declined to go forward after receiving a letter from the Conan Doyle Estate Ltd., a business entity organized in Britain, suggesting that the estate would prevent the new book from being sold by Amazon, Barnes & Noble and “similar retailers” unless it received another fee.

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/27/sherlock-holmes-is-in-the-public-domain-american-judge-rules/?_r=1&

[jberryhill]

1. That does it

I was going to write the best novel of all time. But if my great grandchildren aren't going to get paid, then forget it.

[edbermac]

2. "Quick, Watson! The needle!"

[NaturalHigh]

3. I still don't really understand the public domain thing.

Isn't there some way to protect the copyright even after a considerable period of time?

[Codeine]

8. What would be the justification for copyright extending longer than the life of the author?

I'm far more pro-copyright than most of DU, but even I can't understand why something as old as these works would ever be considered anything but public domain.

[NaturalHigh]

10. I'm not sure what the justification would be.

I just thought there was some sort of process for it. Like I said, I really don't understand exactly how it works.

[csziggy]

12. How long do you think a copyright should last?

Many think that the current US copyright law extends the copyright far too long. Changes made in the 1970s extended it 70 years past the death of the author and allow for extensions to 67 more years once that has run.

§302·
Duration of copyright:
Works created on or after January 1, 1978
4(a) In General. —Copyright in a work created on or after January 1, 1978, subsists from its creation and, except as provided by the following subsections, endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the author’s death.
(b) Joint Works. —In the case of a joint work prepared by two or more authors who did not work for hire, the copyright endures for a term consisting of the life of the last surviving author and 70 years after such last surviving author’s death.
(c) Anonymous Works, Pseudonymous Works, and Works Made for Hire. —
In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first.
(page 133)
More: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.pdf

Created and published, or registered before 1978:

This is governed by statutory section 17 USC 304. Under the law in effect before 1978, copyright was secured either on the date a work was published or on the date of registration if the work was registered in unpublished form. In either case, the copyright endured for a first term of 28 years from the date it was secured. During the last (28th) year of the first term, the copyright was eligible for a second renewal term of an additional 28 years. If no application was filed for renewal, the work would enter the public domain after the initial 28 year term.

The current copyright law has extended the renewal term from 28 to 67 years for copyrights that existed as of January 1, 1978, making these works eligible for a total term of protection of 95 years. There is no longer a need to make the renewal filing in order to extend the original 28-year copyright term to the full 95 years. However, some benefits accrue to making a renewal registration during the 28th year of the original term.

In other words, if a work was published between 1923 to 1963, the copyright owner was required to have applied for a renewal term with the Copyright office. If they did not, the copyright expired and the work entered into the public domain. If they did apply for renewal, these works will have a 95 year copyright term and hence will enter into the public domain no sooner that 2018 (95 years from 1923). If the work was published between 1964 to 1977, there is no need to file for a renewal, and these works will automatically have a 95 year term.
http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/duration.html#old

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died in 1930 - originally his copyright would have run out in 1958 - or 28 years after the last publishing date (1923 +28 = 1951). If the heirs did not apply for renewal, it ran out 28 years later - or in 1979 - rather than 95 years after the last publishing date of 1923 (2018).

Under the 1978 laws, Sherlock Holmes stories would have been protected for 70 years and could have been extended for another 67 years: 1923 +70 = 2003 +67 = 2070.

Protecting copyright for multiple generations after publication is far too restrictive in my opinion. How long should the non-creative heirs be able to benefit? How many generations of non-creative heirs get to retain control?

[NaturalHigh]

13. I don't know.

I wasn't arguing that it should last longer. I just said that I thought there was some sort of process to extend it. Not an argument for or against the copyright laws. I just don't know a lot about them, and I don't think many other people do either.

Fortunately, there is a response downthread that explains it somewhat.

[TransitJohn]

16. The real question is how long does Disney get to exclusively have Mickey?

The copyright extensions have a lot to do with large corporate profits, I think.

[hobbit709]

4. Why should copyrights last longer than patents?

[The Straight Story]

5. From what the copyright office says:

How Long Does Copyright Protection Last?


How long does a copyright last?

The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. For works first published prior to 1978, the term will vary depending on several factors. To determine the length of copyright protection for a particular work, consult chapter 3 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the United States Code). More information on the term of copyright can be found in Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright, and Circular 1, Copyright Basics.

Do I have to renew my copyright?

No. Works created on or after January 1, 1978, are not subject to renewal registration. As to works published or registered prior to January 1, 1978, renewal registration is optional after 28 years but does provide certain legal advantages. For information on how to file a renewal application as well as the legal benefit for doing so, see Circular 15, Renewal of Copyright, and Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright.

[hobbit709]

6. Like I said. Why?

Especially in the case of the music business where the companies screwed the performers out of the copyright and continue to make money long after the performer is dead.

[The Straight Story]

7. Ah, my bad - the main reason I have seen before is

that things which someone has patented are more likely to serve the public more than something written (widgets vs books) so freeing it up more quickly is advantageous.

Not to mention the written word is so much more varied and easier to create (and more unlimited) than patents.

[Chathamization]

9. Look up "Mickey Mouse Protection Act"

Though that only answers "why," which you probably know, not "why should" (they shouldn't).

[rock]

11. "Look Homes, the rabbit's 10 inches long!"

"Nonsense Watney, the game's a foot!"

(The best I can remember from a Robert L Fish pastiche.)

[CatholicEdHead]

14. I would expect the clock has a long ways to go on the recent movies

and Elementary. Sherlock is produced by the BBC so it is governed by UK Copyright laws. Otherwise the Robert Downey Jr movies and Elementary has to run out their 75yr clock before the movies and TV Shows can be in the public domain.

[mucifer]

15. I thought all the Sherlock Holmes books were public domain. They have them for

free at archive.org . They are supposed to only have public domain things there.