Sherlock

[VacationGuy234]

I started reading Sherlock Holmes when I was in middle school during my special education English class. At the time, the books I read were abridged editions of what Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had written for the Strand Magazine. These stories contained just the meat and potatoes of the narratives and I became very attached to them.

I've watched many of the films and TV shows that have been done on the Sherlock character, but I've always felt they miss cast the personality of the Holmes(including the latest Hollywood production).

I was really surprised when I found the following series last year on PBS:

Masterpiece | Sherlock | PBS

The actors are incredibly good and the modern take on Holmes is just delicious(he uses modern technology with the same zeal as the original character). There will be a second series this May.

So, for any Sherlock fan this is a must see.

 

[Bottesini]

I have seen those. I prefer the original books. As a child, I spent a lot of time in the foggy London streets of the 1800's.

I just put the complete Sherlock Holmes on my Nook, and plan to revisit it this winter.

 

[Banjo]

The BBC's Sherlock is actually pretty good, I had to say. I have watched a good amount of Sherlock Holmes adaptations. However, BBC did a great job on their modern take on it.

 

[Banjo]

I have seen those. I prefer the original books. As a child, I spent a lot of time in the foggy London streets of the 1800's.

I just put the complete Sherlock Holmes on my Nook, and plan to revisit it this winter.

Did you ever watch "Young Sherlock Holmes", directed by Barry Levinson and written by Chris Columbus?

 

[Bottesini]

Did you ever watch "Young Sherlock Holmes", directed by Barry Levinson and written by Chris Columbus?

Yes. That was kind of a fun one, if I remember right. I think I was more watching with my kids than for my own interest though.

 

[VacationGuy234]

I have seen those. I prefer the original books. As a child, I spent a lot of time in the foggy London streets of the 1800's.

I just put the complete Sherlock Holmes on my Nook, and plan to revisit it this winter.

You can get the complete works free on the net I believe.

 

[Bottesini]

You can get the complete works free on the net I believe.

That's good. You can get quite a lot that are out of copyright that way.

I think I paid $1.99. I don't know if I get anything extra, but at least it was easy to find and buy!

 

[Banjo]

You can get the complete works free on the net I believe.

I'm pretty certain that all of Arthur Conan Doyle's works are now in the public domain. A while ago, I came across something I found to be interesting. Apparently, the last story, "The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes" is still protected by the copyright law in the USA. It's in the public domain in both Canada and the UK.

Copyright laws are pretty complex these days.

 

[VacationGuy234]

I'm pretty certain that all of Arthur Conan Doyle's works are now in the public domain. A while ago, I came across something I found to be interesting. Apparently, the last story, "The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes" is still protected by the copyright law in the USA. It's in the public domain in both Canada and the UK.

Copyright laws are pretty complex these days.

If this is the real estate site, here is what they say about it:

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Licensing Information

I did visit a Sherlock Museum when I was in London, but it was just a knock off as there are a bunch of them trying to make money. However, there are a number of good ones and, of course, 221b Baker St, but you have to look around.

 

[Bottesini]

If this is the real estate site, here is what they say about it:

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Licensing Information

I did visit a Sherlock Museum when I was in London, but it was just a knock off as there are a bunch of them trying to make money. However, there are a number of good ones and, of course, 221b Baker St, but you have to look around.

I went to the Sherlock Holmes museum when I was in England as a child with my parents. We also went and looked for 221b Baker St., and I was sad it was just the empty side of a building.

 

[VacationGuy234]

I went to the Sherlock Holmes museum when I was in England as a child with my parents. We also went and looked for 221b Baker St., and I was sad it was just the empty side of a building.

Yes, when I go back someday I am going to do a better job of tracking down Sherlock exhibits. I should have put more effort into it when I was there with my girlfriend 15 years ago, but she really wasn't into it, sadly.

 

[Banjo]

If this is the real estate site, here is what they say about it:

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Licensing Information

I did visit a Sherlock Museum when I was in London, but it was just a knock off as there are a bunch of them trying to make money. However, there are a number of good ones and, of course, 221b Baker St, but you have to look around.

Naturally, the people of the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle estate would you to think the works are still protected by the copyright laws. All of the works are now in the public domain in most countries including Canada and UK. The last story is still protected in the USA until 2016. However, the characters themselves may be still protected. Plots and characters are two different situations, copyright-wise.

However, it is my personal belief that everything should be put into public domain after the artist's death. In the USA, the copyright laws have been tightened and strengthened beyond anyone's imagination. Walt Disney's works would have been in the public domain decades ago, but their lawyers lobbied and wrestled the government into extending copyrights for decades to come and will continue to do so.

 

[Royale]

I gotta watch this series soon. I loved to watch the 1980s Sherlock Holmes series. I did not know that there was the new Sherlock series on BBC until yesterday.

By the way, Benedict Cumberpatch, Sherlock star, has been chosen to play a major villain in new Star Trek movie.

Exclusive: Sherlock Star Benedict Cumberbatch Cast As Star Trek Sequel Villain | TrekMovie.com

 

[AJWSmith]

I'm a big big big big fan of this modern take on Sherlock. I cannot recommend it too highly. I re-watched this series more than any other TV programme last year and it is one of those TV programmes where you pick up additional stuff from re-watching. The second series has started here in the UK last Sunday on New Year's Day & I'm eagerly waiting for the next episode in two days time which will be based on the famous 'The Hound of the Baskerville' - renamed to 'The Hounds of the Baskerville'. You have to concentrate hard to follow everything which is a refreshing change as there are very few programmes now that are willing to make their audience think in case they lose too many viewers.

They've created "real" blogs to match what happens on the TV
The blog of Dr. John. H. Watson
The Science of Deduction

 

[Banjo]

I gotta watch this series soon. I loved to watch the 1980s Sherlock Holmes series. I did not know that there was the new Sherlock series on BBC until yesterday.

By the way, Benedict Cumberpatch, Sherlock star, has been chosen to play a major villain in new Star Trek movie.

Exclusive: Sherlock Star Benedict Cumberbatch Cast As Star Trek Sequel Villain | TrekMovie.com

... and Martin Freeman is playing Bilbo Baggins in the upcoming "The Hobbit" movies. The perfect choice.

 

[VacationGuy234]

However, it is my personal belief that everything should be put into public domain after the artist's death.

I agree with this, but I do think the family of the artist should continue to get royalties for commercial use(depending on how it is used), something like a gnu license.

 

[Banjo]

I agree with this, but I do think the family of the artist should continue to get royalties for commercial use(depending on how it is used), something like a gnu license.

Does the family of William Shakespeare still get royalties?

 

[Bottesini]

Does the family of William Shakespeare still get royalties?

I thought they all died. Without the line carrying on.

 

[Banjo]

I thought they all died. Without the line carrying on.

Well, that's true. My point being, I don't see the need for family being entitled to royalties generations after the passing of an artist.

 

[VacationGuy234]

Does the family of William Shakespeare still get royalties?

No, because you redo the play instead of releasing it in it's original forum.

Your point is taken, but should we give people something for nothing?

Take the Bodies exhibit were they use the bodies of people(possibly Chinese political prisoners), and display them without skin with no consent given by the person in question. It doesn't sit right with me.

Beyond that, there is less incentive for new creation, IMO. Commercialized plagiarism? It's not like different actors are playing a part.

I could go either way with it, but I do believe living immediate family should get something(barring a will that says otherwise) if someone is going to profit from another person's work, as is, why should they get it for free?

The story itself isn't a pattern like a window frame so much as a complete product in itself, IMO. You can use the literary mechanism, but not the story. Much like software, which in it's source forum should be free, but when modified it can be sold as long as work is done on to it.

If that makes sense..