Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerwen
What has likely happened here is that both sides were sort of testing the boundaries, and in the end neither felt confident enough to hold their ground. (Or possibly some of it was for show, anyway.) So while this dispute may have been settled, I don't see that it helps much to resolve any of the murkier questions around copyright.
|
Reading between the lines of this statement by Hilliard
http://www.prlog.org/11478976-new-de...ettlement.html it seems he thinks he won:
Quote:
|
“In the Mirkwood story, certain forces resorted unsuccessfully to lawyers to try to banish the tale. I am happy to report that this is a case of life mirroring fiction”, says Hillard.
|
If this is 'life mirroring fiction' then it seems Hilliard won this one - the lawyers in the book, as 'mirrored by life' were 'unsuccessful'. And he also notes:
Quote:
|
"A sequel, which explores the fate of Tolkien's unfinished works, is planned for publication in 2012."
|
So, more of the same next year. Don't know why you say neither side felt confident of victory - as I said, the Estate demanded the book be destroyed but in the end it is still around, &
Quote:
|
The only changes to the book are a modest font size adjustment on the front cover and a one-line disclaimer on the back cover. HIllard added, "There are no changes to the text of the book. This vindicates the right of the public to read fictional treatments of public figures,
|
When we read terms like 'unsuccessful' & 'vindicates' in this context, & that all that the Estate has gotten out of their demand that the book be destroyed because it infringed their 'ownership rights' is "a modest font size adjustment on the front cover and a one-line disclaimer on the back cover" then I can't see how its possible to claim neither side won here.