The Game Is Afoot!

[AmazonBabe]

OK, just so all you mods know, Vega and I have come together to play one of the most infamous detective duo of all history: Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson.

Now, here's my question: The names are of a story that was first published something like 50 to 75 years ago (don't know exactly). Now, there's something somewhere that states after so many years, something is then made public (aka not copyrighted anymore). So, does that mean that we can use the exact names so long as we place them into the SW universe somehow, or what?

(For example, Mickey Mouse's copywrite is coming up (50 years) and Disney's having a fit cause they don't want it to be made into public property, buit can't do much about it as there is a law stating that something can not be copyrighted over such and such a time... or something.)

Comments?

[AmazonBabe]

I found this, though it was written back in 94. Dunno if the statuses have changed.

http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1994-02/0286.html

Will do more research.


EDIT:

http://www.familymanagement.com/literacy/sherlock/copyright-index.html

http://archives.itg.uiuc.edu/avid/2002-04/msg01343.htm

[Figrin D'an]

Well, the Sherlock Holmes character (and the Dr. Watson character, IIRC) were both part of the original story series penned by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle beginning in 1887... so, given current copyright standards, it should be part of the public domain by now, with maybe a couple of exceptions.


Edit: Here's your answer:

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/nonus.html

The selection they have listed there, "The Case Book of Sherlock Holmes," as still being under copyright, is actually no longer true. It became part of the public domain on January 1st, 2003 (at least in the United States... UK/EU is likely different).


Here's a useful reference for copyright stuff in general:

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/okbooks.html#whatpd

[AmazonBabe]

So then it won't send anyone into a fizzy if I actually register (whichc I did already) the name Sherlock Holmes, and Vega register Watson?

[Ryla Relvinian]

I highly doubt it.

[Marcus Telcontar]

I think your pretty safe on this one.

[Shawn]

I would personally prefer if you used different names, if only for the sake of making it fit in better. But I don't think we'll run into any legal issues for using the original names.

[TheHolo.Net]

I would personally prefer if you used different names...

[AmazonBabe]

OK. I know some of you would prefer a diff name, but I kinda wanted to keep the originals.

[imported_Eve]

We have asked people who have registered original names to change them due to copyright laws. To be consistent, the names "Sherlock Holmes" and "Dr. Watson" would not be registerable.

[Marcus Telcontar]

But, they are in public domain now and have been for quite some time - the original copyrights expired at the max 50 years after Conan Doyle died, the names and character certainly have been.

While you can, and should ask for a change if it's copyright, I dont believe you have a leg to stand on when it's public domain. I do understand it might be a preference for original names, but .... it's not breaking a copyright and it's not somethign covered by FAQ's and explicitly disallowed.

[Figrin D'an]

As far as I know, in past cases of people registering names of characters from other sources, said characters have fallen under the restrictions of copyright law statute of limitations. These characters do not, as all of Doyle's stories about Holmes and Watson are now part of the public domain, and other authors are free to pen stories using said characters if they wish.

In the incident involving someone registering the X-Files characters Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, for example, those characters are trademarked by the FOX Corporation entertainment conglomerate, and their creator, Chris Carter. Hence, said person was restricted from using those user names.


So... if the board is going to deny use of established character names regardless of copyright standards, the FAQ would have to be amended to include such a clause.

[imported_Eve]

If there is no copyright, that's an issue. Sorry, didn't read fully before. Am a skimmer.

So, then it either needs to be allowable or not, and I guess I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be, myself.

Are you thinking peeps should vote on it? Is it even voteable?

And the FAQ is being amended, and has been in process for several weeks.

[Figrin D'an]

To my knowledge, Doyle's existing library of work can be published by any number of companies... there are numerous publishers that put out copies of his collected Sherlock Holmes' tales. It's the same thing with a lot of other classics of literature... like Shakespeare, for example. But the right to create new stories based upon the characters in his stories is no longer restricted to any given publishing company or the heirs of Doyle's estate.


Edit: Was posted before I saw your amended reply, Eve. But, it should answer your question about publishing rights.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by Eve
We have asked people who have registered original names to change them due to copyright laws. To be consistent, the names "Sherlock Holmes" and "Dr. Watson" would not be registerable. Even with it having cleared copyright, I'm still more inclined to lean towards this rather than have to explain to others who have been told to change their names due to copyright issues, and be accused of favoritism.

Consistency is king, loopholes make for problems and headaches.

[Pierce Tondry]

Even with it having cleared copyright, I'm still more inclined to lean towards this rather than have to explain to others who have been told to change their names due to copyright issues, and be accused of favoritism.

Consistency is king, loopholes make for problems and headaches.

I'm very inclined to agree with this. To what others have said, I'll add that you're not writing about the original Holmes, you're writing about a Star Wars version thereof. I, personally, would consider it a mark of respect to make a name change to go with the genre switch.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by SWFans.Net
Even with it having cleared copyright, I'm still more inclined to lean towards this rather than have to explain to others who have been told to change their names due to copyright issues, and be accused of favoritism.

Consistency is king, loopholes make for problems and headaches.


That's understandable, and for the sake of avoiding complaining denizens, is probably the better choice.

Definately a worth-while discussion, though. :)

[Navaria Tarkin]

Name change pwease IMO :) No reason to rahash everything said :D

[DarthHERA]

I am of the same opion as as what Tondry quoted.

[AmazonBabe]

Grrr. Fine. I'll concede to the masses. :grumble

Though I still stand by the right to use the names as they are legally and rightly within public domain, therefore making it legal for me to use the names with no fear of someone coming around and stomping on SWF with a lawyer malet.

Come to think of it, my excitement for playing these new characters has kinda gone to pot. :\


EDIT: Ya know, I don't see why a FAQ amendment can't be made for something like this. Other amendments seem to be made for other issues, and this isn't even a BIG issue. It's just to inform ppl it's not going to kill the boards or anyone else if they use names where the copywrite has become moot and said names or events or what have you have passed into public domain.

I know we've had an influx of newbies, but I do like to think that some of the newbies and the rest of the members here aren't idiots and can understand that.

(I'm talking figuratively... I'm not calling anyone an idiot... just wanted to make that clear.)


EDIT #2: Ya know, I guess it just boils down to this:


...and for the sake of avoiding complaining denizens...

A shame, really.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by Eve
And the FAQ is being amended, and has been in process for several weeks. For more than just the copyright issues.

Within the next few weeks or maybe a month or so the new revised FAQ will be available in its entirety from the little FAQ links at the top of the forums for ease of locating too.

[AmazonBabe]

Yeah, I know the FAQ is being worked on to make it more recent and thorough, but does that mean you'll put a blurb in there about stuff that's passed into public domain, or...?


Also, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse (it's not dead yet, is it?), but I'd still like to use the original names (mostly cause I'm possitively dry on new names that sound Sherlock Holmesish, or resemble it to some degree). I just see the names as being something special.

To me, it's not a big deal.

Now I know to some of you it is, mostly because you want something original. Well, don't be too surprised, but I wanted to get away from original and use something that's got some "meat" to it. I guess I wanted to try something new, and get out of the rut of "consistency".

Just my feelings on the matter.

[Charley]

I personally don't like the idea, but as far as being able to do it, I don't see why not.

[TheHolo.Net]

*Envisions the debates/arguments that having the loophole in the FAQ could/would probably result in*

I'm really not liking the idea of adding a loophole into the FAQ, legal or not.

[AmazonBabe]

Soooo... if I registered the name Sherlock Holmes, then you'd forbid it, delete it, and tell me to come up with something else?

(No malice, just a simple question.)


Oh, and does Jen (Vega) have access into here? She is kinda gonna be my partner in crime, and I thought she should know about this discussion as it also will affect her.

[Shawn]

As far as I'm concerned... I wouldn't delete the account, but I'd strongly encourage you to change it to something else as a courtesy to us to save us headaches later on.

[Lady Vader]

Mmmm... and the last thing I wanna do is cause headaches or rifts.

Just so you know, I have created the Sherlock Holmes account and Vega has already created the Dr. Watson account.

However, because you wish us to not use the names, I will speak with Vega and we'll create other names, but still keep the accounts "occupied" to keep others from taking it (basically locking the accounts, so to speak).

So then, how bout this:


Semloh Kcolrehs & Dr. Notaw H. Nhoj

or

Kcolrehs Holmes & Dr. Nhoj H. Watson

or

Sherlock Semloh & Dr. John H. Nostaw


Or something like that (I kinda like the first one... it's kinda like I can have my cake and eat it too, and not give anyone headaches :))


And kudos to Vega for the awesome sigs (with obvious name change required). :)

Sherlock Holmes, or rather Semloh Kcolrehs (http://casalecb.no-ip.org/swf/vega/justice/holmes/sherlock-sig1.jpg) & Dr. John H. Watson, or rather Dr. Notaw H. Nhoj (http://casalecb.no-ip.org/swf/vega/justice/watson/watson-sig1.jpg)


Oh, and can she be allowed to see this thread somehow, if she doesn't already have access?

[Shawn]

Either of those sound fine to me. I tend to like the first one, myself. :)

I can't grant her access, but I can relay everything to her.

[Lady Vader]

yeah, if there's anyway you can show her this convo, that would be good so that she knows what's been going on as this will affect her as well.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by Lady Vader
However, because you wish us to not use the names, I will speak with Vega and we'll create other names, but still keep the accounts "occupied" to keep others from taking it (basically locking the accounts, so to speak).Thank you.

And yes Vega has my permission to know the contents of this thread as well.

[Lady Vader]

:thumbup

Thanks again. :)