Image by wikipedia

The case of the disputed Sherlock Holmes copyright is hereby closed after the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left intact a ruling that said 50 works featuring the famed fictional detective are in the public domain.

The high court’s justices, which like the eccentric detective get to decide which cases to tackle, declined to hear an appeal filed by the estate of author Arthur Conan Doyle, who died in 1930.

The estate had wanted writer Leslie Klinger to pay a $5,000 license fee before a volume of new stories based on the Holmes character, famed for his genius IQ, deerstalker hat and cocaine habit, could be published.

Forwarding the News

Thoughtful, balanced reporting from the Forward and around the web, bringing you updated news and analysis each day.

Terms(Required)

I agree to the Forward's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Email(Required)

The court’s action means that the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling from June in Klinger’s favor is the final word in the case. The appeals court held that the 50 Sherlock Holmes works published before 1923 are in the public domain as copyright protections have expired.

The works depict the brilliant Victorian-era detective and include references to his sidekick Dr. Watson, his arch-enemy Professor Moriarty, 221B Baker Street, and even Holmes’ cocaine use.

The appeals court said only Conan Doyle’s last 10 Holmes works, which were published between 1923 and 1927 and have copyrights expiring after 95 years, deserved protection.

Klinger is the editor of “The New Annotated Sherlock Holmes” and other Holmes books. He had paid the estate a licensing fee for a prior work but sued after refusing to pay another fee for a compendium of new Holmes stories that he and co-editor Laurie King were editing, “In the Company of Sherlock Holmes.”

Their publisher, Pegasus Books, refused to publish the work after the Conan Doyle estate threatened to stop sales by Amazon.com Inc and Barnes & Noble Inc unless it received another fee.

The case is Conan Doyle Estate v. Klinger, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 14-316.

The Forward is free to read, but it isn’t free to produce

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward.

Now more than ever, American Jews need independent news they can trust, with reporting driven by truth, not ideology. We serve you, not any ideological agenda.

At a time when other newsrooms are closing or cutting back, the Forward has removed its paywall and invested additional resources to report on the ground from Israel and around the U.S. on the impact of the war, rising antisemitism and polarized discourse.

Readers like you make it all possible. Support our work by becoming a Forward Member and connect with our journalism and your community.

This is a great time to support independent Jewish journalism you rely on. Make a gift today!

—  Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

Support our mission to tell the Jewish story fully and fairly.

$90 $180

$360

Other amount