Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 54 posts

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#41

Post by MrZongle2 »

bane wrote: post #34

Some real absolutely timeless classic stories are available in the public domain right now. If I had more time, money and passion, I'd be the RMS of the public domain. In my mind it's the free-est a work can possibly be. Unencumbered by licensing or copyright (or copyleft) considerations. You like it? Use it for whatever you want in whatever way you want. One of my friends was looking for something to read, had an ol…

Excellent call on the Oz books. L. Frank Baum was quite prolific and built a whole pantheon of characters beyond those most people know from the Judy Garland movie. When I was in elementary school, I was lucky enough to inherit most of Baum's Oz books (in hardcover, bound in the late 40s and 50s) and consider them a real gem. The illustrations by John R. Neill were fantastic.

Why Hollywood continues to insist on ignoring a treasure-trove of "canon" material in favor of utter crap cobbled together by teams of screenwriters is beyond me.

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#42

Post by angersock »

rayiner wrote: post #17
mattmanser wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you don't understand why copyright was created. It's not there to give forever and ever protection. It's there to allow you to get some money before society, which made your product worth something in the first place, can incorporate it into culture where it belonged in the first place. Disney themselves love using other people stories constantly, but no-one can use theirs for extreme amounts of time because the…

That may have been why copyright was created, but over time, the justification has evolved, at least in Europe, into one based on the moral rights of the author. My personal opinion is that copyright should never expire. Think about it: you can have an indefinite government granted monopoly over land, something you didn't create, something that existed before you and will exist after you, but you have weaker protecti…

So, one thing you completely fail to take into account:

Land is a limited, scarce resource. Ideas are infinitely reproducible, mutable, and changeable.

I can copy your words and you've still got them.

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#43

Post by binarycrusader »

rayiner wrote: post #17
mattmanser wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you don't understand why copyright was created. It's not there to give forever and ever protection. It's there to allow you to get some money before society, which made your product worth something in the first place, can incorporate it into culture where it belonged in the first place. Disney themselves love using other people stories constantly, but no-one can use theirs for extreme amounts of time because the…

That may have been why copyright was created, but over time, the justification has evolved, at least in Europe, into one based on the moral rights of the author. My personal opinion is that copyright should never expire. Think about it: you can have an indefinite government granted monopoly over land, something you didn't create, something that existed before you and will exist after you, but you have weaker protecti…

I vehemently disagree with you rayiner (which is pretty rare) on this particular point.

Imagine, if you will, that a "corporation" had existed since ancient times that owned the copyrights on all of the Art, Maths, Literature and other intellectual treasures that have enriched humanity as a whole. Do you really want an immortal, gatekeeper entity that could hold back the entire progress of humanity?

Before you claim that supposition as absurd, consider that we now have at least one company that has "existed" since 705 A.D. (1,309 years ago):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_companies

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#44

Post by nkurz »

Wow, I think this new decision cleans up a number of loose ends left by the district judge. It's not especially clear in the Guardian article, but this is the Circuit Court (one layer below the Supreme Court) decision of the appeal by the Conan Doyle Estate of a District Court decision made at the end of last year.

The District Court decision by Ruben Castillo (http://freesherlock.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/klinger-orde...) went largely in favor of Klinger, saying that the pre-1923 stories were public domain. But it left a lot of uncertainty about how incidental details ("increments of expression") from the later stories were to be treated. There's a good summary of the District decision here: http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2014/01/guest-post-betsy-rosenbl...

In addition to affirming the earlier District decision (Klinger can publish without fear of being sued), this brand new Circuit decision by Richard Posner seems like it clears up a lot of the uncertainty and offers much clearer guidelines for future decisions. And it does it decisively and with considerable flair: http://freesherlock.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/klinger-7th-...

  We cannot find any basis in statute or case law for ex-   
  tending a copyright beyond its expiration. When a story 
  falls into the public domain, story elements—including 
  characters covered by the expired copyright—become fair 
  game for follow-on authors...
The decision itself is worth reading, definitely clearer and more engaging than most of the newspaper coverage.

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#45

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

rayiner wrote: post #17
mattmanser wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you don't understand why copyright was created. It's not there to give forever and ever protection. It's there to allow you to get some money before society, which made your product worth something in the first place, can incorporate it into culture where it belonged in the first place. Disney themselves love using other people stories constantly, but no-one can use theirs for extreme amounts of time because the…

That may have been why copyright was created, but over time, the justification has evolved, at least in Europe, into one based on the moral rights of the author. My personal opinion is that copyright should never expire. Think about it: you can have an indefinite government granted monopoly over land, something you didn't create, something that existed before you and will exist after you, but you have weaker protecti…

If you want to keep your creation forever, then don't tell anyone about it. Don't even write it down.

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#46

Post by Natsu »

rayiner wrote: post #17
mattmanser wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you don't understand why copyright was created. It's not there to give forever and ever protection. It's there to allow you to get some money before society, which made your product worth something in the first place, can incorporate it into culture where it belonged in the first place. Disney themselves love using other people stories constantly, but no-one can use theirs for extreme amounts of time because the…

That may have been why copyright was created, but over time, the justification has evolved, at least in Europe, into one based on the moral rights of the author. My personal opinion is that copyright should never expire. Think about it: you can have an indefinite government granted monopoly over land, something you didn't create, something that existed before you and will exist after you, but you have weaker protecti…

What if that were true? How many works that we enjoy today could not exist under that sort of copyright regime? Disney is the obvious example, but many other works are on some level derivative of previous works and would be banished from existence by such a law.

Works of art survive because they are reproduced. This is why still-existing older works are so much better, having been heavily selected already.

Given the already ridiculous difficulty in identifying copyright holders in some cases presently, creating an eternal paperwork burden is a sure way to ensure that works become legally unusable, preventing them from being reproduced and ensuring their demise.

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#47

Post by Torgo »

bane wrote: post #34

Some real absolutely timeless classic stories are available in the public domain right now. If I had more time, money and passion, I'd be the RMS of the public domain. In my mind it's the free-est a work can possibly be. Unencumbered by licensing or copyright (or copyleft) considerations. You like it? Use it for whatever you want in whatever way you want. One of my friends was looking for something to read, had an ol…

Is it possible to make new works based on Tarzan? It appears that Burroughs was a pioneer in the strategy of "trademark the characters, assign ownership to an eternal corporation."

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#48

Post by bane »

Torgo wrote: post #47
bane wrote: post #34

Some real absolutely timeless classic stories are available in the public domain right now. If I had more time, money and passion, I'd be the RMS of the public domain. In my mind it's the free-est a work can possibly be. Unencumbered by licensing or copyright (or copyleft) considerations. You like it? Use it for whatever you want in whatever way you want. One of my friends was looking for something to read, had an ol…

Is it possible to make new works based on Tarzan? It appears that Burroughs was a pioneer in the strategy of "trademark the characters, assign ownership to an eternal corporation."

I think it's complicated. But the best answer I'm aware of is that you basically can do whatever you want. But the new work is now copyrighted.

In fact: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1705952/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120855/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

And with Holmes

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1475582/?ref_=nv_sr_1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0988045/?ref_=nv_sr_2

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1515091/?ref_=nv_sr_3

It's basically like they signed a $0, non-exclusive license to use the characters as they wish in a new work.

Re: Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules

#49

Post by shmerl »

bane wrote: post #34

Some real absolutely timeless classic stories are available in the public domain right now. If I had more time, money and passion, I'd be the RMS of the public domain. In my mind it's the free-est a work can possibly be. Unencumbered by licensing or copyright (or copyleft) considerations. You like it? Use it for whatever you want in whatever way you want. One of my friends was looking for something to read, had an ol…

If you like Jack London, I'd also recommend O. Henry:

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/634

Post reply on HN