Talk:Ship in a Bottle (TNG episode)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is part of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |  Star Trek Portal |
Does anyone know what copyrights Dame Jean Conan Doyle thought Star Trek was violating when they used the Sherlock Holmes character in this episode?
As far as I know in the states public domain is death +50. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died in 1930 making it perfectly legal to use that character...then again, when an English noblewoman threatens a lawsuit..... User:Dowew
It is death plus 70 years in US. --201.1.188.68 03:21, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
But the law involved wouldn't be the one in the U.K. if Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is an Englishman and not else? Furthermore... In the page here discused it is stated that J.C.D. was pleased by it and accepted it... But in the page dedicated to her biography it states the exact opposite, here lies contradiction... Is there any possible synthesis for this?
I separated the last paragraph in question from the main body by moving it into a new "Notes" section, because it sounded like part of the plot synopsis.
- Loadmaster 19:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ironic Self-Reference?
One of the the last lines of dialog goes something like:
Picard: "Who knows? Our reality may be very much like theirs, and all this might just be an elaborate simulation running inside a little device sitting on someone's table."
This sounds like an intentional self-reference on the part of the writers to the fact that Star Trek itself is a fictional story playing on the television sets sitting on viewers' tables. Should this little bit of ironic self-reference be mentioned in this entry?
- Loadmaster 22:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I went ahead and added this fact under the "Notes" section. If this is a problem, someone can (of course) remove it.
- Loadmaster 19:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I removed this, as it is more likely a reference to simulated reality, or the brain in a vat thought experiment. Since I couldn't think of a good way to point that out, and also since I don't even know if it needs to be included in the article, I removed the note entirely. --66.27.115.95 01:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
How about something like this:
- One of the the last lines of dialog is: <quote goes here>. This is could be construed as a reference to simulated reality, or as an intentional ironic self-reference by the script writers.
— Loadmaster 15:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
