

Conan Doyle estate seeks US copyright of Sherlock Holmes's 'complex personality' - 001sky
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/sep/19/sherlock-holmes-us-copyright-complex-defence

======
noonespecial
Seems like that would cause a perpetual copyright paradox. If the characters
remain reserved so long as one story or more containing them remains in
copyright, the rights holders (the estate in this case) could simply authorize
themselves to keep publishing stories containing them.

Locking characters themselves away from public culture forever seems like the
exact opposite of the original notion of limited copyright. I cynically expect
them to win handily.

All you really need to know about copyright is that Mickey Mouse and The
Beetles will never enter the public domain. Extrapolate from there. Its like
predicting the future. If it happened a little faster, it'd be a fun party
trick.

~~~
derefr
At this point, I wish we could just pass a stupid special-case law granting
Disney and Apple Music whatever copyrights they currently hold in perpetuity,
so that the _rest_ of the copyright system could get back to being
useful/healthy.

~~~
quink
Force them to, after let's say 28 years of copyright, to pay an ever
increasing percentage of the revenue they earn from the characters as a tax to
keep them out of the public domain.

35-50 years of extra copyright = 30% of revenue. 50-70 years of extra
copyright = 65% of revenue. 70-100 years of extra copyright = 90% of revenue.
100+ years of extra copyright = 200% of revenue.

And so on. Just need to administer this scheme, which would be a logistical
impossibility. Yay.

~~~
beagle3
> Just need to administer this scheme, which would be a logistical
> impossibility. Yay.

Actually, ridiculously easy to administer: The enforcement you get depends on
your reporting (and tax paid). If you claim to have made $x in a given year,
you cannot sue any one individual for more than $x loss in that year.

So, if Disney properly reports - it is administered.

If Disney under reports - they let infringers off the (full) hook. If they do
a Hollywood Accounting and claim loss every year - well, then, they can't sue
any infringer for it.

The only thing giving them any standing is copyright law. Just tie it to
taxation, and all will be well.

------
gabemart
Can anyone argue with a straight face that there exists any creative person
anywhere in the world whose creative output is in any way dependent on whether
or not their estate will have the legal right to collect royalties from
derivative works 83 years after their death?

~~~
chrismcb
The folks at Disney can. Personally I believe that any copyright term that
exceeds the average human lifespan does not live up to the spirit of
"limited."

------
r0h1n
What happens if the estate licenses another writer to pen a few more Sherlock
stories (kinda like how Eric Van Lustbader is writing newer Bourne novels -
[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourne_Trilogy](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourne_Trilogy))?

In essence, wouldn't the character still continue to get more "complex" even
after the original author was long dead?

~~~
ChrisFulstow
This has happened already, a few years ago the Sherlock Holmes estate
authorised a new novel The House of Silk written by Anthony Horowitz.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_House_of_Silk](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_House_of_Silk)

~~~
r0h1n
So is this their end game? Perpetual copyrights by continuing to bring out one
new Sherlock Holmes novel before the copyright on earlier ones expire.

~~~
pessimizer
Works for the drug companies with soon-to-expire patents.

~~~
greenyoda
That's a bit different. Getting a patent on a similar new drug to replace the
old one doesn't prevent the patent on the old drug from expiring. When the
patent expires, the generic drug manufacturers can start selling the old drug
at a fraction of the cost. The new drug can only succeed if the company can
convince doctors and insurance companies that it's better enough than the old
one to justify the extra cost.

What these people are trying to do is to extend the copyright on the
_original_ characters forever.

------
gruseom
I'm surprised that Conan Doyle was publishing Sherlock Holmes stories as late
as 1927. I thought he had stopped long before that, since he hated the
character.

~~~
dagw
He didn't really hate the character as much as he was tired of him and wanted
to focus his time on writing what he considered more important works. He did
try to stop writing Holmes stories in the middle of his career, and managed
about 10 years before being forced back due to pressure from his publishers
and the public.

------
rorrr2
Can I patent Conan Doyle estate's complex douchebaggery?

~~~
codesuela
nope, it's pretty flat (like characters in TV shows)

