Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Estate Sues Author, Publisher, and Filmmakers for Their Use of Sherlock Holmes Character Traits not yet in the Public Domain
In an episode almost worthy of inclusion in one of his books, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle ("Doyle"), creator of the legendary character Sherlock Holmes, has seemingly reached out from the beyond the grave to influence earthly matters. On June 23, 2020, the Conan Doyle Estate (the "estate") filed suit against Nancy Springer ("Springer")—author of a set of stories about Sherlock's younger sister, Enola Holmes—and against Springer's publisher, Penguin Random House. Also named as defendants are Legendary Pictures Productions, LLC, Netflix, Inc., PCMA Management and Productions LLC, EH Productions UK Ltd., Jack Thorne, and Harry Bradbeer, who have been involved in the production and forthcoming release and distribution of an Enola Holmes movie (all defendants collectively "Defendants").
Although most Sherlock Holmes stories have passed into the public domain along with the characters of Sherlock Holmes, Dr. John Watson, and many of their associates, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote ten additional stories between 1923 and 1927 (the "Stories" or "Copyrighted Stories"). These various Stories are either still under copyright or have passed into the public domain recently enough that the statute of limitations on suing for their infringement has not yet passed. In theory, derivative works like Springer's books are legal to the extent that they make use of characters and other elements that are in the public domain. However, the estate's Complaint claims that Springer's work (and the work of the other Defendants as a result) makes use of character traits, relationship elements, and other nuances of authorship that weren't added to the Sherlock Holmes mythos until Doyle wrote the Copyrighted Stories after World War I.
The Complaint notes that in earlier Holmes stories, Holmes is portrayed as aloof and unfeeling, and that his "heart" does not appear until the Copyrighted Stories. The Complaint also claims that the familiar friendship between Holmes and Dr. Watson that is portrayed in many adaptations of Doyle's source material is one of these newer relationship elements. In fact, the Complaint states that this idea is one of the things that adaptation-makers usually license from the estate before creating their works. According to the Complaint, in earlier stories, the relationship between these two characters is more sterile and utilitarian and their warm friendship doesn't emerge until the Copyrighted Stories. Defendants apparently had the opportunity to enter into licensing agreements with the estate, but they opted to move forward with their projects without licensing, planning instead to simply give attribution to Doyle.
The Complaint asserts that Springer's books, which center around Enola Holmes, a character whom Springer invented, make use not just of Doyle's characters like Sherlock Holmes and Watson but also of character elements from the Copyrighted Stories. The Holmes of Springer's books is seemingly the more emotional Holmes of the Copyrighted Stories, and he enjoys a friendship with Watson as he does in these later stories.
The estate attaches a trademark claim to these copyright claims as well, claiming that the Defendants have made use of Holmes-related marks in a way that will lead consumers to believe that Enola Holmes products have been endorsed by the estate.
The estate requests a jury trial and an award of attorneys' fees, extensive damages, and injunctions to prevent the Defendants from using the estate's copyrighted expressions and trademarks or helping anyone else to use them. The Defendants have not yet replied to the Complaint, but updates on this case will be provided as they become available.