Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes...

[Lalwendë]

I think basic copyright runs up to 50 years after the author's death, which means that it will not run out for many years to come. Also, with trusteeships, the copyright is owned by shared owners, which can further complicate matters. Tolkien's copyright will have passed to his children, and presumably thence to his grandchildren, so this will be why a trusteeship is held.

[Boromir88]

In my personal opinion I say you don't touch it. Leave it the way it is. There are mistakes in every book or novel. I would think sometimes correcting what seems to be an apparent mistake could actually make more mistakes or discrepencies .

[Bêthberry]

posted by davem:

CT mentions that Tolkien was reluctant to make certain changes in the storyline of some of the early draft versions because 'Chris liked' the events in them.

Can you give us some more detail about this comment from CT, davem? Are you referring to something he said in this new edition or to comments elsewhere?

And, could you elaborate on what things JRRT wanted to change but decided not to because of CT's opinion? How old would CT have been at this time?

[Mithalwen]

I am merely daughter and sister of lawyers ( despite early ambitions, when it came to the crunch I had neither the application or grades!), so I am quite ready to be corrected by the qualified. Given the Tolkien family situation, it is unsurprising that the literary estate was put in a trust (let aside tax planning reasons - it is the weekend and I don't want to remind myself that I am a bean-counter!). With four children, two of whom 'have issue', it would be impossible to divide up the published works fairly - imagine one getting LOTR while another got say Mr Bliss!. However CT would have copyright over his own editing work on the Silmarillion, UT and HoME. In 1995 the UK adopted the standard EU copyright period of 70 years so that takes us to 2041 for JRRT. Of course, CT is still alive so his copyright will outlast most of us... but how the time lapse affects access to the works is beyond my scope. While all of Tolkiens's descendants would benefit from JRRT's trust, it may be that CT's will pass to his alone. The situation is further complicated, no doubt, by Christopher's son, Adam being translator to French of HoME, by which he possibly acquires some rights in his own right .... lots of billable hours in that I should think .... wish I hadn't crashed my A-Levels now ... being a lawyer for the Tolkien estate might have been my dream job.... lol

I seem to recall that the actual Manuscripts were sold to Marquette for tax reasons but possession of the documents doesn't confer copyright - if you write a letter, the copyright remains with you while the letter obviously doesn't!


http://www.intellectual-property.gov.../question1.htm

[The Saucepan Man]

Well, I'm not an intellectual property lawyer, but ...

The references to copyright in the various editions simply denote ownership of the rights in the work. Copyright is an asset and can be transferred just like any other asset. Since Tolkien, as the writer of LotR would automatically have been the original owner of copyright in it, he must have transferred it to his publishers. Whether it has now been transeferred by them to his estate, or whether the estate simply owns the copyright in the 50th Anniversary edition, I do not know.

In any event, I would doubt that copyright could be renewed simply by publishing an amended version of a work as this would effectively allow the right to be preserved indefinately (and therefore enable copyright owners to get round the applicable law). Perhaps copyright in the new version exists independently of copyright in the original, or perhaps it simply lasts as long as copyright in the original. The latter would produce a less complex situation but, then again, lawyers and lawmakers have never been known for eschewing complexity.

I am sure that someone who specialises in this field would be able to explain better than I. Athough I could always do some research into it (for a suitable fee, of course ).

[Mithalwen]

http://www.marquette.edu/library/col...s/tolkien.html
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/mag...the_gold_ring/


These may be of interest.

I imagine there would have to be changes significant enough to class it as a differernt work to extend the copyright? I don't imagine the changes outlined above would be enough.

[The Saucepan Man]

OK, I have done a little bit of research into this.

UK copyright law confers rights both in the original literary work (which last for 70 years after the author's death) and in published editions of literary works (which last for 25 years after the publication of the edition). These rights exist independently. Anyone wishing to publish an edition of a literary work (or adapt it in any way) will require permission from the owner of the rights in that work. With the publication of the edition, separate rights will arise but they will only apply to protect the format in which the work is published and not the work itself, which remains protected by the original copyright.

So, I would guess that Tolkien (or rather his estate) remains the owner of the rights in the original work, Lord of the Rings, and that it will continue to own those rights until 70 years following his death (unless they are, or have been, transferred - the film and merchandising rights have already been transferred). The rights in the various editions (ie their typographical arrangement) belong to the publishers and are separately protected. This protection lasts for 25 years following their publication. The differing refences to copyright in the different editions referred to above must therefore refer only to copyright in those editions.

One further complication. It is only the economic rights in the original work (essentially the rights to prevent or authorise copying, lending, adaptation etc and to receive royalties for authorised use) which can be tranferred. The moral rights (the rights to be identified as author of a work and to object to derogatory treatment of it) remain with the author and pass to his or her heirs on death.

I hope that this answers some questions.

Now, as for my fee ...

Although one question remains (unfortunately, the central one here). Does altering a few words in the text and thereby altering the meaning in some respects create a new "original work"? Hmm, perhaps some further research is on order ...