Holden Caufield, a unique character in American fiction, is protected by copyright, a judge apparently ruled on Wednesday (June 17). But although she  issued a restraining order against “60 Years Later: Coming Through the Rye,” Judge Deborah Batts has not yet said the book, inspired by J.D. Salinger’s “The Catcher in the Rye,” cannot be published.

Batts’ ruling is the “first time that the Second Circuit has explicitly ruled that a single character from a single work is copyrightable,” according to PublishersWeekly.com.

I haven’t seen “60 Years Later.” But based on past experience with knock-off titles, the fact that the author has no record of literary achievement, and just plain common sense, I’d wager that the Salinger-inspired book will be a waste of a good tree. Novelists should create new characters and scenarios - not  try to ride the coattails of classics. There’s a difference between being inspired enough by a great work to create a whole new take on it and borrowing one of the most famous characters in American lit. 

But even if “60 Years Later” is worth reading, will anybody do so? “Will “Catcher” fans like a knock-off any better than the “Gone With the Wind” fans who give a thumbs down to that novel’s notorious offspring?

Salinger is suing a Swedish author Fredrik Colting for copyright infringement. Earlier Wednesday, the Associated Press reported that the New York judge said she was troubled by similarities between  “The Catcher in the Rye” and Colting’s “60 Years Later.” 

According to AP:

“Federal Judge Deborah Batts commented during a Manhattan hearing Wednesday. Salinger’s lawyer asked her to block publication of a novel called “60 Years Later” by Colting, who writes under the name John David California. The famously reclusive Salinger was not in court.”