# The generous Tolkien Estate



## Ithrynluin (Dec 11, 2004)

While trying to access one of the best maps of the Shire in existence, I received the following message from the site:



> Up until recently you have been able to see my map of The Shire here. But since The JRR Tolkien Estate Limited doesn't allow Lord of the Rings-fans to make their own maps of the Middle-earth world, I have been forced to remove it.
> 
> _"While I am aware that you and many other genuine fans will be disappointed in not being able to include your maps on websites, such maps are nonetheless infringements of my clients' copyright."
> -James Mitchell, Manches LLP (UK law-firm acting for The JRR Tolkien Estate Limited)_.



This has been the case with many map sites all over the internet. How wonderful of you, oh enlightened Tolkien Estate!


----------



## Arvedui (Dec 11, 2004)

I have a feeling that this policy of theirs might backfire. For Ilmen's sake, how much money is the Estate making on the copyrighted maps?


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 12, 2004)

Ithrynluin said:


> While trying to access one of the best maps of the Shire in existence, I received the following message from the site:
> 
> This has been the case with many map sites all over the internet. How wonderful of you, oh enlightened Tolkien Estate!



Methinks one needs to read "Tolkien Estate" as "Christopher Tolkien sez." Here we have a man who, for good reason, sees himself as not only the curator but the _protector_ of his father's works. If he has disowned his own child and grandchildren to keep the philistines from contaminating his father's works, then this explains the attitude. After all, he spent much of his life (in a sense giving up his own to a great extent, living in his father's shadow as he may have thought at some level) soaked in his father's works, explaining the drafts to the public (HoME). He was at least as bright and accomplished in his heyday as his father. Now however, who knows?

And the fact that the man is 80 and evidently not quite as mentally clear as he used to be (disowning family members), I think we may have to wait until his passing for this unfortunate state of affairs to start lifting. It's such a shame for him, the family, the estate and the fans.

Barley


----------



## GuardianRanger (Dec 12, 2004)

I thought I remembered that Karen Wynn-Fonstad had a website that went along with her atlas. I _thought_. I could be wrong, and I certainly can't find a link in my vast list of LOTR bookmarks. If she did, would the "estate" shut that site down as well?

(I'll have to go through my bookmarks...)


----------



## Ithrynluin (Dec 12, 2004)

GuardianRanger said:


> If she did, would the "estate" shut that site down as well?
> 
> (I'll have to go through my bookmarks...)



I would think (or rather, _hope_) not. Her work is copyrighted at least. The link to her map of Valinor still works - here, and I think others may be found too.


----------



## MichaelMartinez (Dec 12, 2004)

You folks need to understand that anyone who holds a trademark or copyright MUST take action to protect their rights. Failure to do so means that the protected mark or work becomes public domain. Christopher Tolkien does not have access to the Internet. He is not sitting in his home, frothing at the mouth over maps people have scanned and posted to the Web. His attorneys are doing what many other copyright owners are doing: complying with the terms of intellectual property rights law.


----------



## Inderjit S (Dec 12, 2004)

Nevertheless, it still is an egregeious thing to put up with.  

I still understand your point about protecting your copyrights etc. but no amount of legal pedantry makes up for depriving Tolkien fans access to the maps of Middle-Earth for what is a insignificant copyright infringement.


----------



## Ithrynluin (Dec 13, 2004)

Protecting copyrights as regards the books and such is all as it should be, but forcing _fan-made_, _non-profitable_ maps, which are clearly meant for the enjoyment of the Tolkien fandom, to be taken down under the charge of 'infringment of copyrights' is what I find rather preposterous, especially since it is these very folks, people like you and I, who have spent 'a few' doubloons on the numerous books of the professor's. If the Estate can't return that 'favour' by loosening their rigid policy a bit, then frankly, that speaks a lot of them, and not favourably.


----------



## Valandil (Dec 13, 2004)

I see what you folks are saying, but I also see the point about 'intellectual property rights'. It's too easy for those of us who do NOT own them to critique the use of those rights by the ones who hold them.

I'd guess one solution is to work to change the laws... but fairness to the (sub-  ) creator must be maintained as well. And not a simple, dismissive - 'well, they're making _enough_ on it anyway!!' (*EDIT:* JRRT makes a strong statement about that himself - in the Ballantine edition of the paperbacks, at least)

It does make me wonder though. Not to invite trouble upon myself, but are works of 'fanfiction' - which ABOUND on the internet (as well as 'fan art'), also examples of copyright infringement?   Does that meet the same standard as such fan-produced maps and so forth? Or is some other standard applied, or is there some other variable? Should all 'fanfic' come with a suitable disclaimer?

I guess we could take this further and further (even to the existence of message boards such as this one)... but somewhere, the idea of 'free speech' must take over. I know too little about copyright law to know where one right ends and the other begins.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 13, 2004)

MichaelMartinez said:


> You folks need to understand that anyone who holds a trademark or copyright MUST take action to protect their rights...



I for one understand that quite well, having been a music publisher for a decade. What you say is true. And certainly the estate must pursue the consequences and the conditions of copyright. Copyrighting the maps assuredly ensure that those maps at least, are the "genuine article" and accurate, and have that distinct "Tolkien look" to whatever extent CT has made them accurate. 

However, I think the posters here are calling into question the _spirit_ in which copyright law is used — that is, to quash any attempts by anyone else to supply maps (or anything else) at least as accurate if not more so, simply to keep Tolkien's output "pure." It is a shame that it seems not possible for sincere enthusiasts to submit their works to the estate for approval for distribution. But that's the way it is for now.

It might be interesting to get in touch with other artists — Alan Lee, John Howe, Ted Nasmith for instance — to find out something about their experiences with the estate and how the copyright structures and permissions (and non-permissions) generated by the Estate have effected them in their own cases. We need to know more before the subject can be discussed intelligently. There are obviously many people who have had to deal with this in different ways depending on what they were trying to do.

Barley


----------



## Arvegil (Dec 17, 2004)

Mr. Martinez is, unfortunately, spot on. Unlicensed copying, no matter how well-intentioned, could create an estoppel situation if allowed. The Tolkien Estate has to preserve its assets; its managers have a fiduciary obligation to do so. Look at it this way: the odd well-intentioned copy may not be the problem of and by itself, but leaving that door open could have disasterous consequences, which could actually expose the estate's managers to potential liability.


----------

