None of this harms Sherlock Holmes.  

The only thing copyright/trademark can do is prevent certain people from making money from it, and to a certain degree, from spreading it around.  It can used to stamp out GREAT stories that might use the character, even in a small way, just as easily as it can stamp out the ones that harm the “integrity” of Sherlock Holmes.

But note, keeping it out of public domain does not prevent people from, say, writing and selling an official Sherlock Holmes novel where it’s revealed that he’s a rapist.  All it means is that the current OWNERS of Sherlock Holmes have to decide that they want to do that.  And since the rights can be sold, that decision can be made, years down the line, by some corporation who thinks that they can make more money doing that, rather than doing something that upholds the “integrity” of the character.  

Giving it to everybody puts everybody on the same footing.  None of them are the originals, none of them are “official”… but anybody has the chance to do something great.  And what they write manages to penetrate the public consciousness so much that it becomes part of what everybody thinks of when they say “Sherlock Holmes”… good for them.

No good deed goes unpunished.

http://www.amazon.ca/The-Boston-395-ebook/dp/B006OFRY0O/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1361055596&sr=8-1

Does the estate of William Shakespeare owe the estate of Matteo Bandello?

Like Tynam said, Doyle’s been dead for 80 years. Unless you’re opposed to copyrights *ever* expiring, we’re just working out the details of exactly *when* that should happen.

Doyle is dead. He’s been dead for years. His estate did not create Sherlock Holmes or Watson. They no longer own the copyright to those characters. 

Thousands of years ago, some Scythians in what is now known as Ukraine invented the first pair pants. By your logic, every time someone now buys a pair of pants, they should send the relatives of those Scythians money, because hey — the Scythians invented pants. If you’re going to wear them, at least pay them for it. 

You do not “dislike” onerous copyright laws. You support them. Concern troll is concerned.

Here’s an idea: accept the fact that copyrights and patents should have limits, and the reason they have limits is because culture is a social good, not private property to be hoarded by corporations and estates.

1) This approach rules whole sections of our culture, effectively, off-limits to remix, examination, criticism and extension.  This is a Bad Thing.

2) This isn’t about paying the author for his work.  The author has been dead for more than eighty years.  This is about paying a bunch of other people, most of whom are lawyers who had no actual connection to Doyle whatsoever, for his work. 

Society benefits from this because… how?

I dislike onerous copyright laws as much as the next guy, but if your book relies so heavily on someone else’s character, well, then at least pay them for it. I’ll side with the Doyle estate on this.

Someone should write a series of books featuring every character currently under dubious copyright; The League of Extra-litigious Gentlemen.

The Doyle estate allegedly didn’t like / condone / approve of the Star Trek TNG episodes that had Data recreating Sherlock on the Holodeck.  They allegedly complained and Paramount agreed to make no further Sherlock TNG episodes.  

It was a shame, they were some of my favorite TNG episodes, and a clear example of the value of the public domain and its ability to inspire the creation of new art.