does anyone know characters such as sherlock holmes are still under copyright. if i wanted to include them in an opriginal rpg what would i have to do. interestingly, while castle falkenstein mentions such characters and uses them in its background, i can find no mention of the copyright and permission credits in the book.

I think the character becomes public domain 40 years after the death of the creator... but I cant promise you any thing on that.

Lugaru wrote: I think the character becomes public domain 40 years after the death of the creator... but I cant promise you any thing on that.

You can't copyright a character, but you could copyright the description (or picture) of the character. Characters can be trademarked, not copyrighted. I don't know anything more than that (especially about Sherlock Holmes), ask a lawyer.

Fang Langford

Actually I think it is 75 years if it is owned by an individual and 90 years if the trademark is owned by corperation. The death of the owner has something to do with it and diffrent medums have different rules. It is all very confusing.

For fictional charaters a good rule of thumb is the mickey mouse index. If the character is pre-mickey mouse it is ok, post mickey mouse it is still trademarked. Every time Mickey Mouse's tradmarkis about to expire Disney lobies congress to increase the duration of tradmark.

that's pretty much right, Eric, but it's even more insanely complicated than that... copyright is currently life + 75 years for works created by an individual and a flat 90 years for works created by a corporation, but the various copyright extensions that were passed over the decades only apply if the copyright was still in effect at the time of the extension. thus, if some author died in 1930 and his copyright lapsed in 1955 or 1980, then the Bono Act doesn't cover it and it is in the public domain.

BUT... various intellectual properties are sometimes covered under multiple copyrights. this is what happened with "It's a Wonderful Life"; the film's copyright lapsed and every television station showed the movie regularly during the holidays, making it a classic... and then someone in a corporation found out that, although the copyright on the film itself had lapsed, something else (the screenplay, I think it was) was still under copyright, so rigts were re-established and corporate media was saved.

something similar happened with the recent Romania proposal to build Dracula-land, a theme amusement park. Bram Stoker's Dracula is in the public domain, but the traditional image of Dracula we all recognize -- pale aristocrat with fangs, dressed like a maitre-d' wearing a cape -- is a trademark of Universal Studios and is derived from their film, which is still under copyright. Universal has been fighting the Romanians on the Dracula-land issue.

now, for Sherlock Holmes. I believe the original Conan Doyle stories are in the public domain, since they are on the Project Gutenberg website (although this is no guarantee...) you can probably mention Holmes or quote the books without problem. however, the traditional image of Sherlock Holmes more or less comes from the 20th Century Fox films starring Basil Rathbone, so you could receive a legal challenge from Fox if you use pictures of Holmes in a deerstalker cap even if their trademark claims are wrong.

in any case, my advice, and everyone else's here, isn't really useful, because you can't just ask some if something is still under copyright. you need to actually research the information yourself and consult a lawyer. copyright is a big scary monster these days and you can't just rely on what random people say on a web forum.

John's advice is really good (I think it was the 'wonderful' music btw), except for one thing. You have to go back, take out everywhere he said "copyright" and put in "trademark." I know you guys don't make the distinction, but in law, these are enormously different animals.

For example, the resemblance to Dracula ala Bela Lugosi is trademark Universal studios. The words "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times," was once copyrighted. It grows exceptionally complicated when you start talking images. A specific image can be copyrighted, likenesses are trademarked. Thus the complication over 'dracula land' would be a trademark problem; Romania could easily change all the images to not look like Lugosi.

When we talk copyright and trademark law we are getting into areas that are very expensive if you make a mistake (and step on the wrong toes). If you are serious about using a trademark, then be serious enough to know the difference and to talk to a lawyer. I hear that Disney went after a daycare facility that had several 'life size' stickers of Disney characters that appeared in ads for the place; they're gone now.

Always check with a lawyer first.

Fang Langford

Le Joueur wrote: I hear that Disney went after a daycare facility that had several 'life size' stickers of Disney characters that appeared in ads for the place; they're gone now.