## Facts

- Arthur Conan Doyle wrote 4 Sherlock Holmes novels and 56 short stories between 1887 and 1927.
- At the time of suit, 46 stories and 4 novels published before 1923 were in the public domain, while 10 later stories (1923–1927) remained under U.S. copyright.
- Leslie S. Klinger edited Sherlock Holmes anthologies and sought to publish a sequel collection containing new stories inspired by the Holmes canon.
- Conan Doyle Estate, Ltd. asserted exclusive rights in the Holmes and Watson characters and demanded a paid license, including for uses drawn from public-domain works.
- The Estate threatened to interfere with the sequel’s distribution through major retailers if a license was not obtained.
- Klinger sued for a declaratory judgment that he could use material from the public-domain Holmes works without a license, while conceding he could not copy protectable expression found only in the still-copyrighted stories.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Klinger and issued the requested declaratory judgment; the Estate appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Estate’s licensing demands and threats to impede distribution created an Article III “case or controversy” sufficient for declaratory-judgment jurisdiction.
2. Whether copyright protection for the fictional characters Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson (and related story elements) remains in force in their entirety until the last copyrighted story expires, or instead expires work-by-work so that protectable elements fixed in public-domain stories are freely usable.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the declaratory judgment for Klinger.
- The court held an actual controversy existed because the Estate’s communications included a concrete threat to interfere with publication and distribution absent a license.
- The court held that all protectable expression fixed in the pre-1923 Holmes works—including character traits and story elements expressed there—was in the public domain and could be used without a license.
- The court held that only new, original expression first appearing in the ten still-copyrighted post-1922 stories remained protected until those works’ copyrights expired.
- The court rejected the Estate’s theory that “complex” characters remain wholly protected until the last story in the series enters the public domain.

## Legal Principles

- Declaratory-judgment jurisdiction exists when a defendant’s conduct creates a real and immediate dispute, including economically coercive threats to block publication or distribution.
- When a work’s copyright term expires, the work enters the public domain and may be copied and used without permission as to the expression fixed in that work.
- In a series, copyright protects only the incremental original expression introduced in later installments that remain under copyright; later works cannot remove earlier public-domain expression from free use.
- Copyright’s limited-term requirement bars doctrines that effectively extend protection for public-domain works by treating a developing character as an indivisible unit until the final installment’s copyright expires.

## Conclusion

The court held that Klinger could freely use Holmes-related material contained in the public-domain stories and novels, while reserving protection only for new expression first introduced in the ten then-copyrighted stories; the Estate’s threats created a justiciable controversy supporting declaratory relief.


Klinger v. Conan Doyle Estate, Ltd., 755 F.3d 496 (7th Cir. 2014)