Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Mini Article – Volume 24, Issue 1
Share on Social
The Fellowship of Fandom
By Kristyn Webb
Demetrious Polychron was a big fan of The Lord of the Rings books by author J.R.R. Tolkien, which describe the world of Middle Earth where Hobbits, Elves, Dwarves, Wizards, and other creatures engage in an epic battle of good and evil involving a ring with magical powers. The books were first published in 1954 by HarperCollins and have sold over 150 million copies. Tolkien passed away in 1973 and his estate administers the rights in a number of Tolkien’s works.
During Tolkien’s life, and after his death, various rights have been acquired by companies such as Warner Bros (which made motion picture adaptations of The Lord of the Rings in the early 2000’s), Embracer Group (which bought motion picture, merchandising, theme parks, and other rights in 2022), and Amazon (which acquired rights to make the Rings of Power series that aired in 2022).
In 2017, Polychron reached out to the Tolkien Estate to request its blessing (and license) for Polychron to continue drafting a seven-book sequel series to The Lord of the Rings. The Tolkien Estate did not respond. Polychron hired an attorney, who contacted the Tolkien Estate on his behalf again in 2019, requesting a license to use the necessary intellectual property rights to publish the first of the series titled The Fellowship of the King. The request was denied, as the Tolkien Estate believed it contravened the wishes of the now-deceased author that any sequels to The Lord of the Rings should ever be made.
In 2022, Polychron went ahead and self-published the book anyway. Around the same time, Amazon’s Rings of Power (a prequel to The Lord of the Rings) series began airing. Then, Polychron sued Amazon for copyright infringement, claiming that the Rings of Power were based on his book, and the Tolkien Estate sued Polychron alleging that his book was an unauthorized derivative work that infringed its copyrights in The Lord of the Rings.
Polychron lost both cases. The court concluded that Polychron’s book was indeed an unauthorized derivative work, and thus, because The Followship of the King itself was infringing the Tolkien Estate’s rights, it could not be the basis for an infringement suit against Amazon. Polychron was ordered to destroy all copies of his book and pay attorneys’ fees to the Tolkien Estate and Amazon (around $134,000).
Often, copyright owners decline to bring legal action against fan fiction writers because suing one’s own fan base tends to be bad for business. However, when fans try to commercialize their works, or attempt enforce their rights against third-party licensors, the results for fan fiction writers are like being cast into the fires of Mount Doom. It may be wise for fan fiction writers to not meddle in the affairs of certain copyright owners, “for they are subtle and quick to anger.”
Kristyn Webb is the Group Leader of Fishman Stewart’s Copyright Practice Group, and holds a Master’s Degree in Copyright Law from King’s College London.
Published January 12th, 2024
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
Comerica Park becomes Fifth Third Park in 2027. Here’s how stadium naming rights work as IP licensing and what Fifth Third gains beyond fan approval.
As any trademark lawyer will tell clients considering a rebrand, the adoption of any new trademark involves risk. A search can identify potentially conflicting trademarks that could pose problems for use and/or registration of a new trademark.
Why would the United States grant inventors exclusive rights to their creations while simultaneously seeking to promote competition and innovation? The answer lies in the Patent Act of 1790, which established a framework that still shapes patent law today.
Before a brand makes headlines for the right reasons, it helps to make sure someone else doesn’t already own the name. A recent dispute involving Tesla offers a timely reminder that a great brand name can become an expensive problem.
One second became a surprisingly complicated piece of technology, intellectual property and sports governance in the 2026 collegiate season opening game.
With the end of Hot Dog Season quickly approaching, now is a good time to reflect on the innovative new growth that made this season what it is today.
The Ninth Circuit just reversed course on Jack Daniel's dilution claim against the 'Bad Spaniels' dog toy, vacating the injunction and ruling that parody humor alone doesn't prove reputational harm. Here's what the decision means for brand owners pursuing tarnishment claims.
The trading card industry is booming again - and what makes this moment different is not who holds the cards, literally and figuratively, but how the trading card space is rapidly evolving.
Imagine paying millions of dollars for the naming rights to a stadium—only to have your brand hidden behind a giant white tarp. That’s exactly what happened to Levi Strauss during the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
As we celebrate our nation’s birthday on July 4th, many communities are replacing or supplementing traditional fireworks with drone-based light shows - which prompts the question of intellectual property protection.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
