![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neadodsHolmesians on my Facebook are recommending the NYTimes article Suit Says Sherlock Belongs to the Ages
In part, it's what I already knew: that the Doyle estate is demanding a cut of anything with the Holmes name on it, or threatening to block publication of of anything that doesn't play along on the basis that the last 10 stories are still in copyright, and thus EVERYTHING Holmes is still covered -- if not by the copyright, then by the trademark on the name. Over Gally weekend, one of the heaviest hitters in Holmes publishing, Les Klinger, sued them on the basis that the copyright covers only those last 10 stories, so STFU about anything that doesn't directly reference them.
What I did not know, and what the article clearly explains, is how this lawsuit is also part of the BSI ripping itself apart over the whole old guard/new blood division -- with Klinger, the BSI, and many pastiche authors on the "free Holmes" side and the old guard being represented by the disaffected ex-BSI-er who serves as the estate lawyer and Shreffler, the guy who wrote the anti-new-fan article previously discussed and disseminated it at a meeting for other disaffected BSIers. (The article links to the blog - I won't - but I'll pass on the line Mr. Lellenberg [the estate lawyer] predicted that Mr. Shreffler’s “calm, civil, and analytical” arguments would outlast the “fevered reactions broadcast in tweets and rants.” )
Yeah, and I've got a bridge to sell you. Dude, if nothing else, the new fans are going to outlast the old elite on account of AGE! Not that there's much logic going on with anyone who can call that rampant blort of sexist bigotry "calm" or "civil" much less "analytical." That was nothing but the impassioned whine of the former SMOF watching the new kids be welcomed onto his lawn.
I'm going to need a BSIpolitics tag soon.
Edited to add: I like Brad's take on this: http://sherlockpeoria.blogspot.com/2013/03/cry-havoc-and-loose-hound-of-moor.html how dealing with the elitists used to be just part of the deal and now it's newsworthy. Fair warning, there's a gratuitous dig at Elementary in with the discussion of BSI politics. He's very right about one thing... This year is a wild ride for the Holmesians, and it's only March.
In part, it's what I already knew: that the Doyle estate is demanding a cut of anything with the Holmes name on it, or threatening to block publication of of anything that doesn't play along on the basis that the last 10 stories are still in copyright, and thus EVERYTHING Holmes is still covered -- if not by the copyright, then by the trademark on the name. Over Gally weekend, one of the heaviest hitters in Holmes publishing, Les Klinger, sued them on the basis that the copyright covers only those last 10 stories, so STFU about anything that doesn't directly reference them.
What I did not know, and what the article clearly explains, is how this lawsuit is also part of the BSI ripping itself apart over the whole old guard/new blood division -- with Klinger, the BSI, and many pastiche authors on the "free Holmes" side and the old guard being represented by the disaffected ex-BSI-er who serves as the estate lawyer and Shreffler, the guy who wrote the anti-new-fan article previously discussed and disseminated it at a meeting for other disaffected BSIers. (The article links to the blog - I won't - but I'll pass on the line Mr. Lellenberg [the estate lawyer] predicted that Mr. Shreffler’s “calm, civil, and analytical” arguments would outlast the “fevered reactions broadcast in tweets and rants.” )
Yeah, and I've got a bridge to sell you. Dude, if nothing else, the new fans are going to outlast the old elite on account of AGE! Not that there's much logic going on with anyone who can call that rampant blort of sexist bigotry "calm" or "civil" much less "analytical." That was nothing but the impassioned whine of the former SMOF watching the new kids be welcomed onto his lawn.
I'm going to need a BSIpolitics tag soon.
Edited to add: I like Brad's take on this: http://sherlockpeoria.blogspot.com/2013/03/cry-havoc-and-loose-hound-of-moor.html how dealing with the elitists used to be just part of the deal and now it's newsworthy. Fair warning, there's a gratuitous dig at Elementary in with the discussion of BSI politics. He's very right about one thing... This year is a wild ride for the Holmesians, and it's only March.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 02:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 03:44 am (UTC)I was active in Sherlockian fandom some years back, and the only real comparable issue then was admitting women to the BSI, which was finally begun in 1991 after at least one key Old Boy died. Lellenberg and Shreffler were prominent then, but there wasn't such taking of sides, though Shreffler at least was among those harrumphing about letting girls into the treehouse.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 04:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 05:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 10:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 04:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 10:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 05:32 am (UTC)It should be for the creator of a work to say whether they want their relatives or lawyers to profit from their work after their death - and if so, for how long.
Off to adjust my will.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-07 05:58 pm (UTC)Republicans.
Just saying they have a lot in common....
no subject
Date: 2013-03-08 01:09 am (UTC)