- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,922
- Reaction score
- 3,044
- Location
- MD
- Website
- gorokandwulf.blogspot.com
Len Deighton (yes, the writer) is fighting Ian Fleming's family in a plagiarism scandal. But it goes further than plagiarism, with accusations of censorship:
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/len-deighton-launches-attack-on-ian-flemings-heirs-834026.html
Last year, a small press was coming out with a book called "The Battle for Bond" about a plagiarism trial involving the novel "Thunderball." (Did you know there had been a plagiarism trial? I sure didn't.) But the Fleming estate got the book stopped and forced the publisher to pulp the book. According to the article, the book contained court documents, so the family ordered the editions pulped by claiming those court documents infringes on their copyright. (That's a new one on me!) The author pointed out that they were public documents -- but was still forced to destroy the book. Deighton says "How Ian Fleming would have hated to know that this book had been censored ... As a gentleman he would have felt that harassing a fellow author to be the ultimate demonstration of bad taste."
The plagiarism trial came about like this. Fleming and two screenwriters worked together on a James Bond screenplay. He ended up using their ideas in "Thunderball." As a result, they sued and won the film rights to the novel. Because of that, the Bond films have been treated as a separate legal entity than the films, and Fleming's family has no copyright control over the films.
So what do you think? Did the family go too far in stopping the publication of the book? Can publishing a legal document be copyright infringment, and if so, how and in what cases?
Also, am I the only one who never knew about this case?
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/len-deighton-launches-attack-on-ian-flemings-heirs-834026.html
Last year, a small press was coming out with a book called "The Battle for Bond" about a plagiarism trial involving the novel "Thunderball." (Did you know there had been a plagiarism trial? I sure didn't.) But the Fleming estate got the book stopped and forced the publisher to pulp the book. According to the article, the book contained court documents, so the family ordered the editions pulped by claiming those court documents infringes on their copyright. (That's a new one on me!) The author pointed out that they were public documents -- but was still forced to destroy the book. Deighton says "How Ian Fleming would have hated to know that this book had been censored ... As a gentleman he would have felt that harassing a fellow author to be the ultimate demonstration of bad taste."
The plagiarism trial came about like this. Fleming and two screenwriters worked together on a James Bond screenplay. He ended up using their ideas in "Thunderball." As a result, they sued and won the film rights to the novel. Because of that, the Bond films have been treated as a separate legal entity than the films, and Fleming's family has no copyright control over the films.
So what do you think? Did the family go too far in stopping the publication of the book? Can publishing a legal document be copyright infringment, and if so, how and in what cases?
Also, am I the only one who never knew about this case?