Quote:
Originally Posted by Mänwe
Therein lies the point of my earlier question; that the law can entertain these cases, personally, annoys/worries me more. And yes, CT might just open a 'Pandora's box' of future litigation.
|
I think the courts have little choice - if someone brings an action before them which
may be valid they have to deal with it. I suspect CT/the Estate care little for the bigger implications of their action. They seem to be driven by a feeling of possessiveness re JRRT - someone is daring to tresspass on their 'land' use their 'stuff' & they're lashing out. Add to that their statement in their action that they somehow worry that this book might be taken for a work by Tolkien himself & they may lose money as a result - or somesuch nonsense & any capacity or willingness to step back & ask whether this is a wise move is lost.
Suffice to say that if their desired interpretation of the law was in place already then CT would already have broken it himself by publishing the Notion Club Papers in HoM-e 9 which he himself acknowledges depicts the Inlkings in all but name. Tolkien uses his friends as characters in his story, but Hillard is not allowed to use Tolkien in
his story. Surely if the Estate 'own' the character & person of JRRT then the estate of Lewis, Williams & Barfield own
their characters/persons? It would be nicely ironic if the decision went the Estate's way & the first person dragged before the courts for impingement was CT himself - & if the next book that had to be destroyed was Sauron Defeated...