2023 Public Domain

We'll all be treated to some new Hobbit adventures in 11 years time when the 1st Edition of The Hobbit enters public domain.

Two of my favourite movies (The Lodger and Metropolis) enter PD on January 1st and I have had so many conversations with people who were planning to sell these (and other) movies through indy labels. It is really important that people understand that PD does not mean that we can use any transfers/restorations at will. The restored versions of these movies, and the many others are very much protected and cannot be used.

Mr. Underhill wrote:

We'll all be treated to some new Hobbit adventures in 11 years time when the 1st Edition of The Hobbit enters public domain.

This is going to end up in war between the various people who will no doubt try to make new movies or TV shows verses Middle-earth Enterprises.

onthetrail wrote:

Mr. Underhill wrote:

We'll all be treated to some new Hobbit adventures in 11 years time when the 1st Edition of The Hobbit enters public domain.

This is going to end up in war between the various people who will no doubt try to make new movies or TV shows verses Middle-earth Enterprises.

Yes, that will be coming in the 2030's. As Trotter pointed out to me elsewhere, characters like The Necromancer can be used, but will not be able to be called Sauron. Bilbo, Gandalf, Elrond, etc... can all be used.

Mr. Underhill wrote:

onthetrail wrote:

Mr. Underhill wrote:

We'll all be treated to some new Hobbit adventures in 11 years time when the 1st Edition of The Hobbit enters public domain.

This is going to end up in war between the various people who will no doubt try to make new movies or TV shows verses Middle-earth Enterprises.

Yes, that will be coming in the 2030's. As Trotter pointed out to me elsewhere, characters like The Necromancer can be used, but will not be able to be called Sauron. Bilbo, Gandalf, Elrond, etc... can all be used.

With regard to the names, Bilbo, etc. It is my understanding that MEE hold the trademarks to the names per the original agreement between UN, GA&U, and Tolkien, and as such cannot be used in any adaptations not licensed by MEE. Is that incorrect?

That is probably correct until they become Public Domain in 11 years time, in which case anyone can use the characters in the US, and very difficult to then enforce in other regions.

The article that I posted talks about the Conan Doyle Estate's attempts to get round this, but they failed.

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2023/#sherlockholmes

Trotter wrote:

That is probably correct until they become Public Domain in 11 years time, in which case anyone can use the characters in the US, and very difficult to then enforce in other regions.

The article that I posted talks about the Conan Doyle Estate's attempts to get round this, but they failed.

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2023/#sherlockholmes

That is a different matter though. In that case, the character plays a role in a work still in copyright when the original enters PD. The ruling says that the character is therefore in PD including the name. But the Tolkien/MEE case is different. United Artists secured the rights to individual names and MEE have spent time and money securing the Trademarks for a host of uses. Trademarks don't fall into PD like a copyright does. This is why Disney have stopped trying to keep Mickey out PD because they believe they can protect him well enough with Trademarks. I suspect MEE are going to feel the same and anyone who tries to use the names will find themselves in a battle.

onthetrail wrote:

Trotter wrote:

That is probably correct until they become Public Domain in 11 years time, in which case anyone can use the characters in the US, and very difficult to then enforce in other regions.

The article that I posted talks about the Conan Doyle Estate's attempts to get round this, but they failed.

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2023/#sherlockholmes

That is a different matter though. In that case, the character plays a role in a work still in copyright when the original enters PD. The ruling says that the character is therefore in PD including the name. But the Tolkien/MEE case is different. United Artists secured the rights to individual names and MEE have spent time and money securing the Trademarks for a host of uses. Trademarks don't fall into PD like a copyright does. This is why Disney have stopped trying to keep Mickey out PD because they believe they can protect him well enough with Trademarks. I suspect MEE are going to feel the same and anyone who tries to use the names will find themselves in a battle.

This all very interesting, will be interesting to see what happens. The Disney roadmap with Mickey Mouse is an excellent example.

Mr. Underhill wrote:

This all very interesting, will be interesting to see what happens. The Disney roadmap with Mickey Mouse is an excellent example.

I have asked a few people who have some professional interest in this subject and frankly got a different answer from each of them. Which is of course exactly the effect Disney were going for. A point where we can all do soem research and never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion. They certainly believe now that Trademarks are their get out of jail free card so it really will be interesting to see how things pan out.