The FIRST 1920s Hardy Boys books are crossing that line, but later books — including the 1950s rewrites boomer kids grew up with — still have to run out the clock.
Also, it’s the specific BOOKS that have entered the public domain. Characters can be registered as trademarks, and most of the commercially viable ones are (note all the little TM symbols in ads and such). Simon & Schuster owns the trademark on the Hardy Boys, so as I understand it Billy Dare will be obliged to work with Joe and Frank as specifically portrayed in one of the late 1920s titles. Note how the horror movie Winnie the Pooh is distorted enough to arguably be based on illustrations from the public domain book and not the 1960s Disney designs.
As for Sherlock Holmes, the last of the original stories has finally aged out of protection and I don’t believe anybody holds a valid trademark, so you can go wild so long as you don’t infringe on still-protected adaptations. You can unleash a horrible AI pastiche of Doyle’s stories, but you can’t commercially publish your “Sherlock” slash fiction.
Huh – Sherlock Holmes has been a major character in the Mary Russell series since 1994. First as Russell’s mentor and friend (The Beekeeper’s Apprentice), and later on as her husband! Think somebody oughtta tell Laurie R. King?
And, yeah, parodies have been around forever. I remember reading, and laughing at, Robert L. Fish’s “Schlock Homes” short stories back in the 1970s.
Early in its run, the National Lampoon did a parody Hardy Boys story “Chums in the Dark”, where the 1920s brothers naively encounter the vices of the early ‘70s. The NL didn’t worry much about copyrights, and around the same time caught flak for a brutal parody “Archie” comic.
Holmes: “I have no copyright protection! Lord help me! This god-awful Will Ferrell movie shall be my doom! …However, this Miyazaki-directed anime is not bad at all, despite turning me into a canine. And being portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch certainly takes the edge off (sniffffff)”
salakfarm Premium Member almost 2 years ago
Next year, Mickey Mouse breaks out of Disney jail.
Panufo almost 2 years ago
I’d follow this strip indefinitely just for this trope.
fritzoid Premium Member almost 2 years ago
Not just Hercule Poirot, but Miss Marple as well…
jmarkoff2 almost 2 years ago
Aren’t Hardy and Poirot trademarked?
ItsPat almost 2 years ago
Somehow I think Leslie McFarlane would have loved the opportunity to write this!
JudasPeckerwood almost 2 years ago
My money’s on the wombat.
Donald Benson Premium Member almost 2 years ago
The FIRST 1920s Hardy Boys books are crossing that line, but later books — including the 1950s rewrites boomer kids grew up with — still have to run out the clock.
Also, it’s the specific BOOKS that have entered the public domain. Characters can be registered as trademarks, and most of the commercially viable ones are (note all the little TM symbols in ads and such). Simon & Schuster owns the trademark on the Hardy Boys, so as I understand it Billy Dare will be obliged to work with Joe and Frank as specifically portrayed in one of the late 1920s titles. Note how the horror movie Winnie the Pooh is distorted enough to arguably be based on illustrations from the public domain book and not the 1960s Disney designs.
As for Sherlock Holmes, the last of the original stories has finally aged out of protection and I don’t believe anybody holds a valid trademark, so you can go wild so long as you don’t infringe on still-protected adaptations. You can unleash a horrible AI pastiche of Doyle’s stories, but you can’t commercially publish your “Sherlock” slash fiction.
TheWildSow almost 2 years ago
Huh – Sherlock Holmes has been a major character in the Mary Russell series since 1994. First as Russell’s mentor and friend (The Beekeeper’s Apprentice), and later on as her husband! Think somebody oughtta tell Laurie R. King?
And, yeah, parodies have been around forever. I remember reading, and laughing at, Robert L. Fish’s “Schlock Homes” short stories back in the 1970s.
Vince M almost 2 years ago
Early in its run, the National Lampoon did a parody Hardy Boys story “Chums in the Dark”, where the 1920s brothers naively encounter the vices of the early ‘70s. The NL didn’t worry much about copyrights, and around the same time caught flak for a brutal parody “Archie” comic.
GaryCooper almost 2 years ago
The Hardy Boys are whiners.
TheWildSow almost 2 years ago
Need to wait another 3 years (2026) for Nancy Drew to show up! Meantime….er,….Sausage Party!
bxclent Premium Member almost 2 years ago
was a Hardy Boys reader in grade school in the 60’s
NeedaChuckle Premium Member almost 2 years ago
Shouldn’t Poirot’s shirt say “Qui ont pété”
Bill Löhr Premium Member almost 2 years ago
Sacrebleu!
larryculley almost 2 years ago
Now that’s funny, R.B.!
gigagrouch almost 2 years ago
Mein Beutelmaus ist verstopft!
Packratjohn Premium Member almost 2 years ago
I’m waiting for Cadfael to join them.
Another Take almost 2 years ago
The National Lampoon did a Hardy Boys spoof in the 70’s called Chums In The Dark. It clearly made an impression on me.
comixbomix almost 2 years ago
Fascinating chapter number
ROSTERM3 almost 2 years ago
They continued a comic from 2003 into 2023?
coop2003 Premium Member almost 2 years ago
thanks, RB. I’m learning so much.
jpozenel almost 2 years ago
A double Dare week!
Funny_Ha_Ha almost 2 years ago
Anyone interested in Some Betty Boop nudes?
AndrewSihler almost 2 years ago
Hunh, the Hardy Boys are aesthetes. Precious in other ways, too, I’d bet. There’s been talk. Well, hop to it, lads, you’re only young once.
Monster Hesh almost 2 years ago
Holmes: “I have no copyright protection! Lord help me! This god-awful Will Ferrell movie shall be my doom! …However, this Miyazaki-directed anime is not bad at all, despite turning me into a canine. And being portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch certainly takes the edge off (sniffffff)”