#andrea plunket

[mwagneto]

okay just to clear this up since people are spreading misinfo even though the truth is way funnier. SHERLOCK HOLMES HAS BEEN IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN FOR AGES. a few stories haven't, sure, but the doyle estate doesn't give a fuck what you do with him either way. he was already gay in 1970 (private life of sh) and was a jolly & emotional guy in 1979 (murder by decree).

when you see people/articles saying the ""doyle estate"" threatened to sue people for things, such as guy ritchie for making him too gay in his 2009&2011 movies, that is NOT THE DOYLE ESTATE!!!!!! all those stories are about one single woman, Andrea Plunket. her claim to Holmes is that she married someone who owned US copyrights to some Holmes stories but the thing is. they got divorced in the NINETIES and she has Zero claims to Holmes. she's literally going insane about Holmes possibly being gay thirty years after her husband owned the rights to him, she literally never has and never will, and people have been doing whatever they wanted to Holmes for decades now. it's obviously all a play to squeeze some money out of anyone she can, the entire story is so insane i suggest you guys look it up and read about it more but tldr:

#like they literally made a movie where he fights a t-rex and both holmes and watson have been canonically gay before (separately) #literally noone cares what they do to him and even if they did they couldn't have stopped it since it's #only the stories that are copyrighted due to holmes first appearing as a character in a newspaper #it's all very complex but point is it's some rich american heiress who has 0 power and endless time #sherlock holmes #public domain #andrea plunket #doyle estate

[tanumuino]

Harry Styles - As It Was from tanumuino on Vimeo.

Director: @tanumuino Creative Director: @mollyjane_x DOP: @nikitakkkuz Choreographer: @yoann_bourgeois  Assistant Choreographer: @sagefanny Production Designer: @nightwindow Artist Stylist: @harry_lambert Label: @columbiarecords Commissioner: @bryanyounce Production Company: @underwondercontent Exec Producer: @frankborin Exec Producer: @ivannaborin UK Production Company: @a_just_fred_production  Exec Producer: @freeagentuk Producer: @bonhamcarterfd Producer: @andrew.rawson Production Manager: @Zoe.gunn Production Coordinator: @ojginn Editor: @carlosfontclose VFX: @maxcoltt @the_frender Colorist: @josephbicknell @company_3 1st Assistant Director: Andy Mannion  2nd Assistant Director: @gemmamorton31 Gaffer: @elliot_be Location Manager: Danny Bedford  Location Manager: Daniel Lansbury Spray  Runner: @louisreeves Runner: @allspeachy Runner: Tom Chesterman Artist Runner: @scoutdewynter Focus Puller: @kate_mo_ 2nd AC: @mcpb Camera Trainee: Oliver Barwell Camera Car Driver (WED): Martyn Sheasby  Camera Car Driver (THURS): Anthony Bugge DIT: Will Gardner  Key Grip: Simon Ward  Grip: Pete Nash  Crane Tech: Tim Plunket  Head Tech: Steve Hideg Video Playback: Johnjoe O’Driscoll @jjod77 Ronin Tech: Jack Coulthard-Little Ronin Tech: Drew Tate @drewtate_  Best Boy: Dak Kannan  Spark: Nick Tombs  Spark: Laurent Arnaud @sparkswars Spark: Gamba Kannan  Spark: Rob Eye Genny Op: Luis Santos  Head Rigger: Ian Thomson Rigger: Gary Grant Rigger: James Molloy Rigger: Pat Daly Rigger: Harrison Laws Rigger: Mike Lee Frost Construction Manager: Sean Wild @seanwild Construction: Chris Cooper @chriscooper__ Construction: Russel Carr  Construction: George Williamson  Construction: Andrea Sinigaglia  Art Director: @hip_charlie Prop Master: @neil.mccarrick Art Dept. @juce_luce Art Dept. Assistant: @tildaatwork Prop Transport: Zac Martin Playback Op: @simon_haggis_sound Playback Assistant: @ariannycanepa Artist Stylist: @ryanwohlgemut Artist Make Up: @lauradomini2 Artist Hair Stylist: @roxy___hair  Cast Hair & Makeup: @shamirah_makeup Cast HMU Assistant: @the_sweeney_ Cast.HMU Assistant: @gloriamakeup Cast Stylist: @robbiecanale Cast Stylist Assistant: @tess_gibson_ Cast Stylist Assistant: @a_thompson Cast Stylist Trainee: Izzy Cresswell  Client Minibus: @bus2set Minibus: @Ashfaq Mohammed  Minibus: @Franco Verducci  Minibus: @Paul Diss Medic: Nadine Rudkin  Lifeguard: Lloyd Wakefield  Dancer: @mathilde_lin Dancer: @jonnyvieco Dancer: @annaengerstrom Dancer: @beckynamgauds Dancer: @joshuajs91 Dancer: @ewebzell Dancer: @danielphuuung Dancer: @maxcookward Supporting Artist: Erin Jones  Supporting Artist: Keith Leech  Supporting Artist:  Emily Bevan  Supporting Artist:  Chidozie Obi  Supporting Artist: Larah Mudkavi  Supporting Artist:  Cordi Laurent  Supporting Artist:  Maria Tayler  Supporting Artist: Holly Johnstone  Supporting Artist:  Linda Edmonds  Supporting Artist:  Weimin Zhu  Supporting Artist:  Roopa Bhudia  Supporting Artist:  Zhaniya Aliyadin  Supporting Artist:  Milan Ogier  Supporting Artist:  Erin Mason-White  Supporting Artist:  Ahmed Alblooshi  Supporting Artist:  Sean Tizzard  Supporting Artist:  Cleopatra Southcombe  Supporting Artist:  Rachael Kayy  Supporting Artist:  Elizabeth Haran  Supporting Artist:  Luke McInroy  Supporting Artist:  Francesca Biscozzi  Supporting Artist:  Mandy (Xiodan) Wood  Supporting Artist:  Keith German  Supporting Artist:  Natacha Sleiman  Supporting Artist:  Foxy Valentine  Supporting Artist:  Neo-Rae Gardener

[inevitably-johnlocked]

Hi dearie!! I was discussing with a friend a concern about Conan Doyle's estate Andrea Plunket that 7 years ago, while talking of Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes, said that she "would withdraw permission for more films" if they should make Sherlock gay because "is not true to the spirit of the books" (...) (quotes from CinemaBlend, that reports her appearence at Letterman's). Do u know if she changed her mind, or something more about this?... Thank you as usual, you're fantastic :*

Hi Lovely!

I’ve actually answered a similar question previously here! She claimed to retain copyrights some of THE STORIES, NOT THE CHARACTER. Sherlock Holmes the character is in public domain, which is why there are so many adaptations of Sherlock Holmes.

ACD could care less what people did with Holmes: "You may marry him, murder him, or do anything you like to him.", so really, it’s a moot point.

EDIT: Just found this excellent blog post that addresses your question completely!

#steph replies #copyrights #acd canon #andrea plunket #owns dick all as far as i'm concerned #but anyway #stillframefan

[possiblyimbiassed]

“E” as in Eurus, Enola and Estate

In June this year the Conan Doyle Estate Ltd filed a lawsuit against an impending Holmes adaptation movie on Netflix (article from RadioTimes here: X). 

Sherlock, Mycroft and Enola, starring Henry Cavill, Sam Claflin and Millie Bobby Brown.

This post about it by @tendergingergirl (X) seems to have gone largely unnoticed, but I think it deserves far more attention. In fact, it got me thinking “What’s all this actually about?” and looking a few things up.

My curiosity about the doings of this Estate began in December last year, before the release of BBC Dracula in January, when an interesting discussion initiated after an excellent meta by @yeah-oh-shit (X), who had made some investigations into previous copyright and public domain issues and lawsuits, which I had never known about before. 

And now it turns out that the Conan Doyle Estate Ltd (from here on I’ll call them ‘ACD Estate’) is suing the film makers, along with Nancy Springer, author of a book series based on characters from the Holmes universe called The Enola Holmes Mysteries (2006-2010), for copyright infringement. 

But I thought most of ACD’s Sherlock Holmes stories are now in public domain, including the Illustrious Client, the Sussex Vampire and the Three Garridebs, whose copyright under US law expired last year (2019)? Well, yes, but that’s still not all of them, and according to ACD Estate “for those of the stories whose copyright terms have ended, this action is brought within the three-year limitations period for infringement.”

More under the cut.

So, the ACD Estate’s copyright, they claim, still includes the following ten stories collected in The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes:

The Creeping Man (1923)

The Illustrious Client (1924) 

The Three Garridebs (1924) 

The Sussex Vampire (1924) 

The Retired Colourman (1926) 

The Lion’s Mane (1926)

The Three Gables (1926) 

The Blanched Soldier (1926) 

Shoscombe Old Place (1927) 

The Veiled Lodger (1927)

The whole lawsuit can be downloaded as a PDF file from this news article (X), and it’s quite an interesting read.

Claims about Sherlock Holmes’ emotions

So, since this is not the first lawsuit from the ACD Estate about adaptations, what’s their beef with the film makers this time? As far as I can see from their claims, this is about Sherlock Holmes’ emotions. 

This is how the ACD Estate reads Holmes’ character development in the lawsuit: “Conan Doyle made the surprising artistic decision to have his most famous character—known around the world as a brain without a heart—develop into a character with a heart. Holmes became warmer. He became capable of friendship. He could express emotion. He began to respect women. His relationship to Watson changed from that of a master and assistant to one of genuine friendship. Watson became more than just a tool for Holmes to use. He became a partner.” 

They even quote the famous passage in The Three Garridebs (3GAR, 1924) where Watson says: “It was worth a wound—it was worth many wounds—to know the depth of loyalty and love which lay behind that cold mask.”

But all this progress, they claim, specifically happened within these ten still (allegedly) copyrighted stories, which Conan Doyle wrote after World War One, where he had the traumatic experience of losing both his son and his brother.

They claim that Holmes’ emotional development is still under their copyright (which I believe in practise means their power to decide whether to allow a film adaptation or not) and apart from the emotions issue, they also provide the following other examples of developments that are (supposedly) unique to these ten still copyrighted stories:

Holmes employs a knowledge of medicine in Watson’s absence

Holmes and Watson use modern technologies in detective work for the first time 

Watson marries a second time during his association with Holmes (BLAN)

Holmes changes into someone who has great interest in dogs

Sherlock’s “secret sister”

The Enola Holmes Mysteries got me interested, and now I’ve read the two first of six instalments in total. The series is about Sherlock’s and Mycroft’s younger sister Enola, a clever teenager whom the brothers – in particular Mycroft - want to send away to a boarding school after their mother has disappeared and abandoned her. But Enola hates the idea of being confined to a place where she will be forced to wear a corset and restricted to a certain (‘female’) behaviour at all times. She escapes to London, where she starts a secret private detective career specialising in investigations of missing persons. Enola must keep ahead of her brothers who are determined to capture and force her to conform to Victorian society’s expectations for young women. She skilfully uses different disguises, just like Sherlock, and she meets John Watson pretending to be someone else. With her cleverness she manages to outwit even Sherlock. She is good at drawing and uses her sketches in her work. She manages to communicate with her mother (and eventually also with Sherlock) by using ciphers.

All of this does seem to have certain similarities with how Eurus Holmes is described in S4, doesn’t it?

Eurus is, like Enola, the secret Holmes sister whom we never have heard of before.

In TFP Mycroft claims Eurus’ intellect was superior to both Sherlock’s and his own; she was “incandescent”.

We see little Eurus draw sketches of her family members (not very pleasant sketches when it comes to Sherlock, though).

Mycroft made sure Eurus was sent away to an isolated prison/institution (Sherrinford) at an early age.

Their parents seemed absent and not particularly interested in the whereabouts of their own daughter (they didn’t even know she was alive); they let Mycroft and ‘Uncle Rudy’ take care of things, so one could easily suspect she was abandoned.

Eurus seems to have escaped to London at her own leisure, while Mycroft thought she was incarcerated.

Eurus appears in London under three different disguises: “E” (flirting and texting with John), 

“Faith” (walking the streets of London with Sherlock) 

and John’s new therapist. 

Eurus makes riddles with codes for Sherlock to decipher (“The cipher was the song”).

So, one might wonder if the Eurus plot is – at least to some degree – inspired by Enola Holmes? On the other hand, while Eurus appears cold and calculating, Enola is compassionate and sensitive and makes mistakes because of emotional bias. Enola seems more similar to Eurus’ disguised personas than to the supposedly ‘real’ Eurus - the one who burned the family estate down and killed Victor Trevor. 

I still believe that Eurus only exists inside Sherlock’s head in BBC Sherlock, being a part of himself, but that’s for another discussion.

As for the Holmes siblings, it’s also interesting that on the ACD Estate’s website, where they have a collection of ’facts’ about ACD’s characters, they seem to have included BBC Sherlock’s Eurus as a valid sibling of Sherlock and Mycroft (scroll down to “Holmes facts” on this page: X), even though this character is nowhere to be found in canon. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this, but the only reference I can find to ”the East Wind” in ACD’s stories is in His Last Bow (LAST, 1917), where Holmes says that ”There’s an east wind coming, Watson”, and goes on to talk about a cold, bitter wind that is threatening England; most probably a reference to WWI, which was raging at the time of publication. No one with the name Eurus is ever mentioned, though. If Eurus had already been part of canon, why would Mofftiss have claimed her to be the big ”rug-pull” in TFP?

I haven’t read the final part in the Enola Holmes series (X) yet, where allegedly Enola reconciles with her brothers (Sherlock in particular) and they end up respecting her independence and skills. But according to several reviews Sherlock softens up a bit in the end. In the parts I have read, the two adult brothers appear rather conservative, patronising and sexist towards their younger sister – indeed more condescending than I think Holmes view of women actually is described in ACD’s original stories (allegedly – we never see him treat women badly in practice, do we?). At any rate, I haven’t this far been able to find a single specific plot element from the ten (supposedly) still copyrighted stories in Springer’s work.

In their lawsuit, the ACD Estate claims that “The Springer novels make extensive infringing use of Conan Doyle’s transformation of Holmes from cold and critical to warm, respectful, and kind in his relationships. Springer places Enola Holmes at the center of the novels and has Holmes initially treat her coolly, then change to respond to her with warmth and kindness.”

So what they’re doing here is the same thing they’ve done before (and lost): they’re claiming they still own some intrinsic characteristics of Sherlock Holmes, even though most of the stories are already in public domain. 

Other lawsuits

A similar lawsuit towards Miramax (X) was made in 2015 for the film Mr Holmes, which had Ian McKellen as protagonist. But it ended in settlement before the defendants had responded to the accusations, which were similar to those regarding Enola Holmes about Holmes’ emotional life, but also had to do with the details of Holmes’ life as a retired man.

So, this is not the first time the copyright owners are interfering with content in Holmes adaptations. To complicate things further there seems to be two different estates claiming copyright for Doyle’s work. In 2010 there was some reporting that another estate had threatened Guy Richie’s Sherlock Holmes movies with disapproval after Robert Downey Junior had discussed Holmes possibly being gay on a TV show (X). According to Digital Spy, Andrea Plunket, who then represented the ‘Arthur Conan Doyle Literary Estate’, said: "I hope this is just an example of Mr Downey's black sense of humour. It would be drastic, but I would withdraw permission for more films to be made if they feel that is a theme they wish to bring out in the future. I am not hostile to homosexuals, but I am to anyone who is not true to the spirit of the books."

It’s very unclear which legal rights Andrea Plunket’s family (Andrea apparently died in 2016) actually has to represent ACD’s work, though. Andrea had been married to one of the copyright owners, and her family’s money had paid for the purchase of those rights, but after her divorce Andrea seems to have lost her part in the copyright, according to @mallamun on tumblr: (X). There’s also a lot of interesting things to read about these copyright issues in an article by Mattias Bodström from 2015: (X). However, there’s still a website from ‘Arthur Conan Doyle Literary Estate’ claiming ownership of the stories: X, and they have published a detailed account of their version of the matter (X).

The current case

I have no idea what the court will think about these new accusations against Netflix et al, but to me, if this isn’t farfetched, I don’t know what is. I think a good case could be made for most of these ‘unique’ elements listed above being expressed already before the Case Book. For example, in His Last Bow (LAST, 1917) they use a car, in The Dying Detective (DYIN, 1913) Holmes manages to fool Dr Watson that he’s very sick. When Watson declares his intent to marry for the first time already in The Sign of Four (SIGN, 1890), Holmes resorts to drugs. The dogs are all over the place since day one, and Holmes seems to appreciate them very much, not least Toby in SIGN.

And don’t get me started on the contradictions in Watson’s various discussions of whether Holmes has a heart. Holmes’ actions of helping people often contradicts the image of a cold, emotionless person. The Yellow Face (YELL, 1893) ends with Holmes being deeply repentant for being over-confident in his suspicion of a woman for adultery or maybe worse offences, when she was actually only trying to protect her little daughter from society’s racism.

In the Devil’s Foot (DEVI, 1910) there’s the following conversation (my bolding): “Upon my word, Watson!” said Holmes at last with an unsteady voice, “I owe you both my thanks and an apology. It was an unjustifiable experiment even for one’s self, and doubly so for a friend. I am really very sorry.” “You know,” I answered with some emotion, for I had never seen so much of Holmes’s heart before, “that it is my greatest joy and privilege to help you.”

Why on earth would it be a “surprising artistic decision” from ACD to develop Holmes into a little more caring and openly compassionate person as he grew older? Isn’t that the very classical character development of any literary hero’s journey and also a logical personal development for many people in the real world? It’s called ‘learning’ and ‘maturing’, as far as I know. To claim this is infringement of some unique idea is frankly ridiculous.

In short: They make a very literal, textual interpretation of the Holmes character, cherry-picking the parts that suit their interests, they claim there’s a clear story arc with very separate characteristics before and after WWI, and that they own the end of it. Thus, no adaptation with a progressive story arc regarding Holmes’ character would be permitted without their consent. Since apparently BBC Sherlock have ACD’s Estate’s license for their own franchise, this just makes me wonder how much trouble Mofftiss et al had with including things like Sherlock’s and John’s hug in TLD, or his emotional breakdown with the coffin after Eurus’ experiments on him in TFP.

Possible satirical meaning and small hints

Allow me to speculate a bit about the possible implications of BBC Sherlock in relation to the Estate. In a recent excellent meta by @raggedyblue, the ACD Estate as ‘Doyle’s bank’ is discussed, regarding the significance of the banker Sebastian Wilkes in The Blind Banker (X). Many interesting ideas are presented in this meta, I really recommend a read. This topic also initiated an interesting discussion about Doyle himself mirroring John in this post by @devoursjohnlock​ (X).

In an addition to that meta @shylockgnomes brings up John’s blog post about Tilly Briggs as another possible reference to the Estate (X). I totally agree with this; some time around the release of BBC Dracula this year, and our discussions about legal issues connected to both shows, I stumbled upon this particular ‘aborted’ blog post and came to realise its possible significance. It gave me the idea to change the title of my own blog to “Tilly Briggs Ship with Johnlock on it”, since I suspect that the blog post might be a clue about legal obstacles to a certain relationship. And that title is staying, at least until we know the true story (if ever). 

Canon contains some info about Matilda Briggs is in The Sussex Vampire, one of the late ACD stories that should be in public domain by now, since the copyright supposedly expired in December 2019. But, as shown above, the Estate now claims there’s a three-year lapse when they can still sue for infringement. Here’s the quote from SUSS (my bolding): “Matilda Briggs was not the name of a young woman, Watson,” said Holmes in a reminiscent voice. “It was a ship which is associated with the giant rat of Sumatra, a story for which the world is not yet prepared.” Sumatra, by the way, was Sherlock’s preferred destination in the TST tale of the merchant who met Death in Samarra. In Sherlock’s version, according to Mycroft, the merchant survived and became a pirate... ;-) 

John’s aborted blog post (X) is titled “Tilly Briggs Cruise of Terror”, which just might be yet another little jibe at the Estate. John says that “I had to take this post down for a while as the ship's owners are launching an appeal”. According to Jacob Sowersby (a Sherlock fan on the blog) and Mike Stamford, this was “mind-blowing stuff”:

So I can’t help thinking this sounds like a hint to us about the Estate and a certain ‘ship’ which is still partly in their (legal) power and control. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if the whole show - on the meta level - is partly meant as a satirical commentary on how Holmes’ and Watson’s characters, and therefore also their relationship, have been treated the last 100+ years by their ‘owners’. A treatment where I believe the hetero norm has always ruled, and where Andrea Plunket’s quote above indicates that homophobia regarding Holmes and Watson is still tied to legal obstacles.

Charles Augustus Magnussen also talks about ownership at the beginning of HLV (thanks for the quotes, Ariane DeVere): “Of course it isn’t blackmail. This is... ownership”. And later in the episode: “It’s all about knowledge. Everything is. Knowing is owning”. In fact, quite a bit of emphasis in HLV is put on Magnussen’s ‘ownership’ of characters people: “I’m a businessman, acquiring assets. You happen to be one of them!” Apparently - as this new lawsuit shows - it’s even possible to make money out of Holmes’ emotions.

@catwillowtree also pointed out, in another additional thread to @raggedyblue​’s meta, that Eurus’ burning down Musgrave Hall – the family estate - in TFP also seems like a reference to the ACD Estate. I would add to this, saying that the bomb that didn’t go off in TEH and the “patience grenade” that did go off in TFP might have to do with the same issue. What would happen if the ‘bomb’ of Johnlock would go off before the relevant stories are legally in public domain? Most probably another lawsuit from the Estate, which might become very expensive. 

Come to think of it, in TGG Greg Lestrade mentions an estate agent, when Sherlock receives a text message and a phone call on the pink phone from Moriarty: “What the hell are we supposed to make of that? An estate agent’s photo and the bloody Greenwich pips!” Well, if the Estate agent is somehow connected to the five pips, that fandom theory of the pips representing five series in the show comes to mind... For every pip in TGG there’s a victim covered in explosives; a huge bomb threatening to go off. (The third bomb did go off in TGG, but in S3 Sherlock found the ‘off-switch’ in time). If the fifth bomb is to explode in S5, I bet it won’t be until the relevant stories are safely in public domain. 2023?

More wild speculation while I’m at it: Maybe Sherlock and Ajay’s smashing of Thatcher busts in TST also ties in metaphorically to the same topic? The Thatcher era was not easy for LGBTQ people. There are several owners in TST whose Thatcher busts need to be smashed in order for Ajay’s lost memory stick to be recovered. AGRA is referred to as Ajay’s and Mary’s “family”. The memory stick contains personal information, ‘who you really are’. Could be read as if the info of who Sherlock Holmes really is can only be released once certain obstacles are overcome...

In another interesting meta from last year by @yeah-oh-shit​ (X), they mention the secret underground station at Sumatra road in TEH, where Howard Shilcott tells Sherlock and John that “They built the platforms, even the staircases, but it all got tied up in legal disputes, so they never built the station on the surface.” So maybe S5 is basically already written? It would make sense to me if the long hiatus we’re facing right now has a far more logical reason than the excuses Mofftiss have presented in interviews - the risk of legal disputes with the copyright owners.  

Tagging some more people who might be interested: @gosherlocked​ @ebaeschnbliah​ @sarahthecoat​ @sagestreet​ @thepersianslipper​

ETA: I have corrected some details about the copyright owners in this post; thanks @devoursjohnlock​ for pointing them out!

#The Conan Doyle Estate

[devoursjohnlock]

Three Blind Bankers

I started to write a response to this thread, and it became too long, so here it is on its own.

The bank in The Blind Banker is indeed metafictionally important—as @thewatsonbeekeepers​ says, John acts as Sherlock’s “agent” in this episode, collecting money for Sherlock’s services. It’s an old custom of the Sherlockian societies to refer to Arthur Conan Doyle as Sherlock Holmes’s “literary agent”, rather than the writer of the stories (because, as we all know, John Watson actually wrote them).

Having John Watson feeling cash-poor and turning to Sherlock Holmes for help, then insisting he be paid, his physical expression of relief when he takes the cheque... all of this is very reminiscent of Arthur Conan Doyle, who was desperate for cash in his early years. The shadow of that desperation never left him, even after he started making big money from Sherlock Holmes. And the common perception is that Doyle would also turn to Sherlock Holmes only when he needed money.

Regarding the idea that the bank represents “the estate”, it’s important to remember that there is not a single Doyle estate, but two: the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Literary Estate and the Conan Doyle Estate Ltd. (which is the one linked in the previous discussion). Both have (or have had) family ties to Arthur Conan Doyle, both have separate legitimate claims to specific parts of Doyle’s legacy, and both have brought copyright lawsuits under different circumstances.

The posts that used to circulate on tumblr about Andrea Plunket and her nuisance lawsuits against various film adapters were about the Literary Estate. The nuisance lawsuit against the Enola Holmes adaptation was brought by the Conan Doyle Estate Lid. The Conan Doyle Estate Ltd. is also the group that is closely affiliated with a number of highly esteemed Sherlockians, including those who are slowly releasing previously unpublished works by Doyle, like the whaling diary Dangerous Work and A Life in Letters. This group is trying to shut down Enola Holmes. They also have a stake in presenting Doyle and Sherlock Holmes in a specific light, and they control a lot of information about both. So, paraphrasing from the previous discussion, “Have they ever read the Canon?” Oh yeah. They’ve read it, published it, interpreted it, made careers and reputations on it. But they don’t see it the way we do.

To return to Sebastian Wilkes, I’m not convinced that he represents either or both of the estates, although perhaps I am wrong. The thing is, Sebastian’s relationship to Sherlock in TBB echoes John’s: this case is costing him, in terms of money and potential embarrassment. His response is to turn to Sherlock Holmes... “How’re things, buddy?” he says. His tone is ingratiating... Can you help me out here? Could you see your way? Would you sort this for me? Could you be discreet? These are the same sentiments, from both John and Sebastian, in the same episode.

The difference is all in the attitude. Hard to imagine John saying here, “We all hated him” even if he does laugh at Sebastian’s joke. Sebastian looks down his nose at Sherlock, even as he save’s Sebastian’s livelihood... which is exactly how Doyle acted toward Sherlock Holmes within his lifetime. Doyle insisted repeatedly that Sherlock Holmes kept him from writing better things, that he only came back to the Holmes stories for money. So, there’s a lot of conflation here, I think, between Doyle, Sebastian Wilkes, and John Watson. It gives us a little glimpse at John’s imperfection and at his subterfuge. For a number of reasons, I think it is unlikely that Doyle really hated Sherlock Holmes, but publicly, he insisted that he did.

So, I think Sebastian Wilkes is specifically a mirror for both Doyle and John (or simply for John via Doyle) in this episode. The bank itself mirrors Doyle’s legacy, as @raggedyblue​ suggested. And perhaps the fact that it is a bank means that it represents what people stand to gain from it. That is the business of the estates, and also of everyone who produces content related to Sherlock Holmes, including filmmakers, publishers, pastiche writers, old-school Sherlockians... and even us.

However, the name of the bank, Shad Sanderson, suggests to me that Mofftiss aren’t aiming at so broad an interpretation. Etymologically, Sanderson is the same name as Anderson, who we recognize as an obvious John mirror. And I strongly suspect that Shad is taken from Shad Thames, an old London street near Tower Bridge; the name of this street is a corruption of “St John’s”.

So, this is John’s bank—of stories, really—presided over by a portrait of Doyle, and Sherlock Holmes enters at the invitation of a sneering John mirror to solve a case there. There is much in this episode that we couldn’t have recognized when we first saw it in S1, but that becomes clearer in hindsight.

#Sherlock #TBB #Sebastian Wilks #Shad Sanderson #ACD #John Watson #I tried REALLY hard to work in Sebastian's houdstooth tie #I decided to spare you #the estates

[tiger-moran]

I just found this postscript in the back of this issue of Baker Street Miscellanea that’s, er, not exactly being complimentary about Andrea Plunket (or Andrea Reynolds as she was then).

“the following quote (attributed to her recently by Women’s Wear Daily) seems to us to be highly suggestive: 

“...owning the rights to Arthur Conan Doyle’s work is ‘like owning an oil well.’”

#LOL #not that the ACD estate or whatever they call themselves #are any better #apparently Andrea Plunket died last year #they were probably not exactly upset by that news

[thejohnhwatson]

Re: the Conan Doyle's Estate Will Not Allow A Gay Sherlock Holmes article, that refers to Andrea Plunket who didn't actually own the copyright and only had a tenuous claim to it via her ex husband Sheldon Reynolds (maker of the 1950s Holmes TV series) purchasing some rights. She seems to have just wanted to cash in by claiming she owned it all and she died last year anyway. It's the Conan Doyle Estate Ltd (nothing to do with Plunket) who own the US copyright to some of the later stories.

Thank God

[magnificentcupcakeobservation]

http://bbcsherlockftw.tumblr.com/post/20652956659/the-case-of-andrea-plunket-and-the-sherlock-holmes

“not giving a fuck what you do with my characters” - (Arthur Conan Dyle)

Don’t compute..

[sothisisntbeingusednow]

i do not like andrea plunket. go away.

#andrea plunket

[mommabearclarke]

For people who are hesitant to talk to me because they are afraid to annoy me:

People like Andrea Plunket annoy me

People like Tony Abbott annoy me

Anon haters annoy me

Homophobes who try to force their phobia on others annoy me

George Zimmerman annoys me

STEVEN MOFFAT AND THE BBC ANNOY ME

So as long as you are not any of these things, I think you're in the safe zone. xD

#stfu Lily #you don't annoy me #trust me #andrea plunket #tony abbott #anon haters #george zimmerman #steven moffat #the bbc

[always1895-blog]

Friday Sherlock Links Compendium (September 14 - September 20, 2013)

Daily Mail led off with a headline that has probably caused the total mental collapse of hundreds of BBC Sherlock fans, leaving thousands more contemplating what it would take to hire an airgun toting hitman: "U.S. threat to kill off BBC's Sherlock: Hungarian-born socialite threatens legal action claiming she owns Arthur Conan Doyle character" - say what?! As apocalyptically insane this headline sounds, there's probably really nothing to worry about. Longtime Sherlockians are probably familiar with the Andrea Plunket saga and her various claims to copyright of the Sherlock Holmes characters/stories based on having once been married to TV producer Sheldon Reynolds - who created the Ron Howard Sherlock Holmes (1954-1955) series as well as a quasi-remake Sherlock Holmes & Doctor Watson (1979-1980) with Geoffrey Whitehead as Holmes - from which she supposedly acquired the copyright in a 1990's divorce settlement. If this is your first time hearing about Plunket's claims on the Sherlock Holmes properties (in one form or another) and want to learn more, you are in for a transcontinental soap operatic treat that involves attempted murder, squandered fortunes, a Swiss tax haven, a Georgian 'princess' and a bed & breakfast in upstate NY. A 2010 article in the NYT "For the Heirs to Holmes, a Tangled Web" did a good job summarizing the history of ACD's literary properties, mentioning all the major players since 1930. Next check out "The Case of Andrea Plunket and the Sherlock Holmes Copyrights" for a closer look at Ms Plunket and then see Chris Redmond's "Notes on the Ownership of the Sherlock Holmes Stories" for a variety of relevant links. Note of clarification: Andrea Plunket's company The Arthur Conan Doyle Literary Estate is not the same entity as the Conan Doyle Estate Ltd., the company currently involved in Klinger v Conan Doyle Estate (cf. Free Sherlock!). Read the Conan Doyle Estate's view on Plunket here. On a final note, you can find Ms Plunket on Facebook.

[Opening title for Sheldon Reynolds' Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson from 1980. The only place on Earth I've been able to find copies to watch is on, ironically, YouTube -  though the quality is almost unwatchable due to having been recorded from TV to VHS and then ripped to a video file.]

Sherlock Holmes Exhibition a "unique and interactive experience showcases areas of forensic science that enabled Sherlock Holmes to solve crimes, as well as the historic underpinnings of author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s rich and vibrant stories" opens at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI) this October 2013. Exhibits include Dr. Conan Doyle’s Study, the Science & History behind Sherlock Holmes's methods, a recreation of Sherlock Holmes' sitting room at 221B Baker Street and an exhibit dedicated to Sherlockiana and Culture in all it's manifestations. For the latest news and updates regarding what is sure to be one of the greatest popular Sherlock Holmes events in decades make sure to follow @SherlockExhibit on Twitter and The International Exhibition of Sherlock Holmes on Facebook. Speaking of news, on September 18th their Facebook and Twitter excitedly announced "The first artifact crate from the UK arrived at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI) today!" 

[Click for a PDF of the International Exhibition of Sherlock Holmes Press Release.]

The Norwood Builder put together a post that is a stunning example of why being a Sherlockian is one off greatest intellectual 'lifestyle choices' one can make. In "Sherlock Holmes’ clients - Or: The demography of Canon" readers are treated to an amazing undertaking where we find the Norwood Builder "trying to get a bird’s eye view of Sherlock Holmes’ canonical clients, with a particular regard to their demographic representativeness - or lack of it." When a prospective client marches down Baker Street, zeros in on '221B', gains admittance from Mrs Hudson (or a boy in buttons) and ascends the seventeen steps leading to the sitting room of Mr Sherlock Holmes, it's important to remember that said client does not simply materialize out of thin-air but possesses a rich biography. As (fanatical) readers of the Canon, we have a strong sense that these biographies are varied and drawn from all strata of society: for every Wilhelm Gottsreich Sigismond von Ormstein there is a Shinwell 'Porky' Johnson; with every missing Lady Frances Carfax there is a Mrs Amberley whose fate for better or worse must be discovered; for each wrongly accused Thaddeus Sholto there is a John Horner or even a Flora Millar whose name must be cleared. But does the assumption that Holmes' clients came from all walks of life hold true? To answer this question, Holmes' Canonical clients are broken down by Type, Gender and Status and the results will surprise you! The Norwood Builder's blog is no stranger to the application of statistical analysis to elements in the Canon: click here to see all his posts tagged with "statistics."

["...and then he entered himself–so large, so pompous, and so dignified that he was the very embodiment of self-possession and solidity. And yet his first action, when the door had closed behind him, was to stagger against the table, whence he slipped down upon the floor, and there was that majestic figure prostrate and insensible upon our bearskin hearthrug." (PRIO)]

I Hear of Sherlock Everywhere reports on Mr Jerry Margolin's, BSI ("Hilton Cubitt") latest Sherlockian objets d'art acquisition, the original artwork for a piece titled Sherlock Joker, the Crown Prince of Crime Detection (insert combination of the Joker's infamous "Hahahah..." maniacal laughter with Holmes' measured comments on Early English Charters) which was the original art used for one of two cards depicting Batman's arch nemesis the Joker in the guise of the Great Detective for Batman Master Series, a 1996 card set released by Fleer. Where as Margolin's piece depicts a somewhat calm Joker hamming it up in deerstalker and calabash but revealing a glimpse of his true insanity via the magnifying glass, the second Sherlock Joker image shows Arkham Asylum's number one resident patient at the apex of total madness revealed by the now shattered magnifying glass. There is a long history of Sherlock Holmes appearing alongside Gotham's Caped Crusader, but the most recognizable is from the cover of the 50th anniversary of Detective Comics, Issue #572 (March 1987), where we see Batman and Holmes paging through the 1937 Detective Comics issue where 'The Batman' first appeared. One of the stories contains an amusing panel sequence where we see Batman and Sherlock Holmes (at 135!) discussing his secret to good health: "A proper diet, a certain distillation of royal jelly developed in my beekeeping days, and the rarified atmosphere of Tibet, where I keep my primary residence..." Batman then attempts to light Holmes' pipe only to be told "Thank you, for I'm afraid the pipe is purely for show these days." 

["Holy Sherlock Holmes!" Congratulations Jerry on Sherlock Joker, one of two Joker as Sherlock Holmes renderings, by artist Carl Critchlow, originally commissioned by Fleer as part of the Batman Master Series set.]

Lyndsay Faye, as announced last week, appeared at The Mysterious Bookshop in NYC for the launch of her latest novel, the sequel to the excellent The Gods of Gotham, Seven For a Secret  - and it was a 'Wilde time.' Not surprisingly there was a strong Sherlockian presence on hand to support Ms Faye as she discussed the world of Timothy and Val Wilde as well as the time period in which they lived. Most interestingly was her discussion of the various reactions she's received regarding the moral outlook and attitudes of the characters, in particular the criticism (by some) that Timothy Wilde's views on blacks, gays and religion are overly 'modern'. For further proof that Ms Faye's literary star is rising, read her interview in last Sunday's LA Review of Books  "Sherlockian Girl Goes Wilde" (Ha! Get it?)

[Photo by Erin Malone - the Mysterious Bookshop makes for the perfect environment to reflect on New York in the 1840s.]

Baker Street Babes, in their first NC-17-rated podcast, released Episode 44: "Sherlock Holmes After Dark Pt I" wherein "Babes Curly, Liz, & Lyndsay talk dirty with Les Klinger, Sketchlock, reapersun, and Madlori in this first of two episodes about doing the dirty in Sherlockiana. This is the first of a two parter episode. In the first part we cover Victorian Pornography, how Les started collecting Sherlockian porn, his recommendations, and then why women like slash." My guess is that Part II will be an hour long analysis/discussion of the Granada scene from "The Master Blackmailer" wherein Jeremy Brett is filmed canoodling with Agatha, Milverton's housemaid, in what has to be the single most awkward (sexual) moment in the history of Sherlockian anything in any medium ever. The Babes of course aren't the first Sherlockians to delve into the sexual underpinnings of the Canon. Mr Chris Redmond wrote a book titled In Bed With Sherlock Holmes: Sexual Elements in Arthur Conan Doyle's Stories of the Great Detective which not only analyses sexual elements in the Canon, but also looks at the non-Sherlockian fiction, letters, essays and speeches of ACD as well as aspects from his personal life. Finally, for a good time, check out I Hear of Sherlock Everywhere's "Top 10 Most Suggestive Lines from the Sherlock Holmes Stories." For example, #8: "I remember nothing until I found myself lying on my bed trembling all over. Then I thought of you, Mr. Holmes." (COPP)

[The above image is everyone's favorite 'suggestive' Canonical illustration, though it actually depicts Holmes and Watson relaxing at the Turkish baths, but I'm never quite sure if that makes the picture more or less suggestive: " I had asked him whether anything was stirring, and for answer he had shot his long, thin, nervous arm out of the sheets which enveloped him and had drawn an envelope from the inside pocket of the coat which hung beside him." (ILLU)]

The Hollywood Reporter in "Conan Doyle Estate: Denying Sherlock Holmes Copyright Gives Him 'Multiple Personalities'" reports on the latest development in the Klinger vs Conan Doyle Estate lawsuit. In response to Klinger's lawsuit arguing that the major story elements of the Sherlock Holmes stories are fair game, ie. the free use of Canonical characters such as Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson, irregardless of the fact that a few of the final stories have yet to enter the public domain. "The Doyle estate makes the case for a special breed of "complex literary characters" (unlike alleged "flat" television ones like Amos 'n' Andy) who develop their personalities, not always as expected, presumably making them more real. The defendant says, "Sherlock Holmes is such character, having all of the complex background and maturing emotions, thoughts, relationships and actions that characterize human development over time."" Put simply, the Estate makes the claim that Sherlock Holmes is the sum of all sixty stories and since not all sixty stories are in the public domain, Sherlock Holmes can't be freely used since 'part of him' is still protected. An interesting argument for sure, but will it stand up in a court of law? On a related note, read Alistair Duncan's views on the Free Sherlock case here.

Friends of the Soldier Named Murray a Sherlock Holmes Society based out of The Terrance on Mountain Creek, an assisted living facility in Chattanooga, TN., was recently made an Official Scion of the Baker Street Irregulars. Consisting of about 16-18 "active members attending each meeting...the study group meets monthly and discusses a different Sherlock Holmes short story....Any person who is a resident in an Assisted Living Facility and would like  to form a Sherlock Holmes Society may contact the “Friends of the Soldier Named Murray” by email request to Jody Baker for tips, forms and other organizational assistance." Sherlockians truly are everywhere!

Sidgwicks uncovered another wonderful illustration from a non-English source, this time in an Italian translation of The Sign of Four by Ugo Matania for “Il segno dei quattro”, Il Romanzo Per Tutti (Vol. 4, No. 5), 1948. Earlier this month, Sidgwicks posted a scan from a German edition of The Hound of the Baskervilles: Richard Gutschmidt for Der Hund von Baskerville, Stuttgart: Robert Lutz, 1907. I've seen a few illustrations from German and Italian translations over the years and they've all been rather stunning. Perhaps one day someone will publish a collection of non-English edition illustrations of the Canon. 

["He began to play some low, dreamy, melodious air,"]

#Andrea Plunket #Sherlock Holmes Exhibition #The demography of Canon #Sherlock Joker #Lyndsay Faye #Baker Street Babes #Conan Doyle Estate #Friends of the Soldier Named Murray #Il Romanzo Per Tutti

[inevitably-johnlocked]

Hi! I saw the ask u answered earlier about Andrea p., & I looked it up and apparently she died earlier this year. Do u know what that means for the rights? I was thinking it means the rights become public domain, but I don't really know

(referencing this post)

Yeah I saw that when I was researching. I’m not sure how that works. I would imagine next-of-kin, but I’m not an expert on copyrights, just on shit I shouldn’t use for my job and how to use loopholes, LOL.

#steph replies #copyrights #andrea plunket #acd canon #raesthetsaand

[unanymous4u]

The Real Sherlock Holmes Copyrights

Someone Posted: The Case of Andrea Plunket and the Sherlock Holmes Copyrights, by mallamum.

Be on the character Sherlock's case, for once!--and rooting, versus a Moriarti: Andrea Plunket bought the rights after which people thought her husband splitting left her initially only with half after and all after spouse departed to the "other life". Yet--the rights belonged to her mother a non-US citizen which meant the US's rule that even those who bought rights had for 0 dollars to give away, back those rights--a curse?--did not apply to her mom. If her mom transfered those rights to her, then she is entitled to those. Of course, someone else tried to rob her (in 1996?) of those (rights that would come to her by her mom) by forging a believed "transfer" of rights--she was not aware of said transfer for a while. Would the one in charge of administering the rights do that? Now, the one who at first said Conan Doyle should win instead changed the mind upon seeing the intent come up--CD company was not content that there not being an agreed-upon district to try her to or her nobly withdrawing the case--they charged her for any fees and later went into her personal life, charging her for hiding money that could be used to pay the fee. Start your research. Be the detective, figure the Truth out.

#andrea plunket

[inevitably-johnlocked]

The Conan Doyle estate have been very clear that they do not wish to see Holmes and Watson in a homosexual relationship? They have sued companies before for the misrepresentation of Sherlock Holmes stories. Do you think this could be the cause of the lack of Johnlock and perhaps why Moffatiss deny Johnlock so vehemently?

Hi Nonny!

I’ve covered this very topic numerous times under my copyrights tag, in these posts here:

Copyrights

Three Garridebs and S4

Copyright and S4 // Clarification on the Post

Andrea Plunket and the Copyrights

ACD Estate Restrictions: S5 in 2020?

Clarification on the Copyrights

What is the True Copyright Expiration

As far as I know, the Holmes stories with the exception of… 6 of them I think?… are in public domain, until they all expire I THINK in 2024 (though there are active efforts to skirt around the copyrights, it seems). Regardless, ACD didn’t give a rat’s ass what people did with Holmes. Honestly, I understand what the estate is trying to do, but Doyle, if he intended to make Holmes queer, I doubt very much he would have told his family for fear of suffering the same fate as his friend Oscar Wilde.

That said, it’s been speculated that S4 is the way it is because Mofftiss HAD to make a 4th season because BBC wanted one, and because they currently can’t tell the stories that they want (the 6 still under copyrights), mainly Three Garridebs (the story Mofftiss quoted as a favourite on the regular up until recently) and planted the seeds for 3G in S4 (a lot of what John’s POV theory rides on for S4) and decided to instead prove that the show makes no sense without the Johnlock dynamic.

But again, that’s the Tinhat Steph talking. 

I’ve done a post recently covering some “ACD intended Johnlock” stuff, so you can read more here.

#steph replies #copyrights #acd canon #acd #steph's tinfoil hat

[inevitably-johnlocked]

Hi Steph can you link me to some TJLC analysis of Doyle's Sherlock Holmes ?

Anonymous said to inevitably-johnlocked: Can you give me some good sources on how to convert the nonbelievers to the cause. Victorian and BBC

Anonymous said to inevitably-johnlocked: I need some resources to convert the masses to the good way of johnlock. Please help. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!!

Well, this seems to be a popular topic! I got the first ask and took my time answering it, and then these second two came in over the last two days, so rather than repeat links, I’m going to just put them all in one post!

So Nonny #2 and 3, for BBC Sherlock, I’ve actually done a LOT of posts about this already (obviously) so I’ll direct you to the following posts about it:

The Origins of #TJLC

Sherlock and John’s romance arc in BBC Sherlock

The Unabridged Dictionary of Johnlock Tropes: 157 Romantic Tropes in The Gayest Show on Television (MUST READ!)

The Subtext of Drinks in BBC Sherlock

Here’s My S4 Masterpost: Johnlock and TJLC masterpost. All of those links are essentially “JOHNLOCK IS REAL, HERE’S WHY”.

Actually, just go to the entire S4 Masterpost page. It’s hours and hours of reading! :D

This post here I made after S4 with links to various TJLC posts I made on this site Pre-S4, plus a few Tin-Hatting posts.

Here’s another “masterpost” of links

And Another, which contain “definitive” links to meta

And because I think it’s still relevant, even if S4 isn’t, I have a TJLC Beginner’s Guide, which went around quite a lot pre-S4 to help introduce new people to the fandom. Please note that a lot of the links may be broken due to people leaving the fandom. Updates to the list can be found on my blog’s header bar (you have to go directly to my blog) under “new to TJLC / Johnlock?”. The most recent one is here.

And because the link is broken on the Guide, here’s “TJLC for the Uninitiated” on Archive.org

As for Canon ACD, here’s some good reading material!

The “It Wasn’t Canon” Argument

“John Watson and Sherlock Holmes Were Never Married in the Book!!!”

“OH MY GOD DO YOU NOT REALIZE THAT JOHN IS FUCKING MARRIED TO A WOMAN IN THE BOOK?!?!??!” (classic must-read)

The Gayest ACD Story?

ACD’s Intentions (links to other posts regarding Johnlock in ACD canon)

ACD and Subtext

How Does ACD’s Canon End?

A Discussion About Doyle’s Time

“Bachelors” in Doyle’s Time

Was Mary Added to Cover Doyle’s Ass?

The Sherlock Special: ACD, The Black Diaries, and 1895

ACD’s Sexuality

Conan Doyle’s Circle of Queer Friends

The Stark Munro Letters and TJLC

IT’S NEVER 1895…

Copyrights 

Three Garridebs and S4

Copyright and S4 // Clarification on the Post

Andrea Plunket and the Copyrights

ACD Estate Restrictions: S5 in 2020?

Clarification on the Copyrights

What is the True Copyright Expiration 

ACD vs BBC Canon

Pinpricks: Moftiss, Doyle and Coded Messages

TAB and the “Conan Doyle Syndrome”

David Welsborough (in T6T) as ACD

Things You Need to Know About John Watson

“You never heard me talk of Victor Trevor?”

Hope those help you all, Nonnies! Feel free to add others I may have missed.

#steph replies #acd canon #tjlc #johnlock #acd vs bbc canon #masterpost #Anonymous #masterlists