Granted that seeing the letters for research purposes is not the same as 
publication, how does that translate to Miller's having a perfect right 
to see them? Does that mean that anyone who presents him- or herself as 
an Eliot researcher has a right to see them? Just wondering what the 
criteria are.

On 2/17/2018 3:50 PM, Rickard A. Parker wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:37:59 +0000, David Boyd <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> There is surely though a distinction between literary executors' control
>> over the 'publication' of copyright material and the letters being allowed
>> to be seen for research etc purposes, which isn't in law 'publication'
>>
>> Athough the copyright of Eliot's letters to Emily may indeed rest with the
>> Eliot Estate, they were / are the property of the recipient and the
>> recipient can allow anyone they like to see them.
>>
>> So long as researchers merely report upon the contents and paraphrase the
>> exact words used, they do not 'publish' them, even though they publish a
>> book that  reveals the contents of the letters this way
> It's amazing what money, influence and threat of legal action can do though.
>
> Miller had every right to see the Verdenal letters that Valerie Eliot had but he
> didn't get to see them. There is even a note in the files about Miller being
> turned down.
>
> If I were working for the Eliot estate I would be proposing various deals that
> could be made between the estate and Princeton.
>
> Regards,
>     Rick Parker
>