In the News

NY Judge Issues Restraining Order to Prevent Publication of Lexicon; JK Rowling Updates

Companion Books
Posted by: Melissa
November 09, 2007, 03:14 PM

As stated in a public document and now on JK Rowling’s Web site a judge has issued a restraining order against publication of The Harry Potter Lexicon.

This document, signed by Judge Robert Patterson in NY, denies RDR Books’ claim to delay the matter until January and grants a restraining order for JKR/WB to prevent the book from being published or licensed anywhere worldwide until February 6 2008, when the case for a preliminary injunction may be made. J.K. Rowling says in her “news” updates section, in an entry titled “Lexicon continued,” that this mean the book “cannot be completed, published or marketed until the court has had time to decide whether it would break the law if published in its present form.”

She goes on:

I take no pleasure in the fact that publication has been prevented for the present. On the contrary, I feel massively disappointed that this matter had to come to court at all. Despite repeated requests, the publishers have refused to even countenance making any changes to the book to ensure that it does not infringe my rights.

Unless their position changes, we will all return to court next year. Given my past good relations with the Lexicon fansite, I can only feel sad and disillusioned that this is where we have ended up.

Earlier today, RDR Books issued a press release that claimed that a judge “accepted an order proposed by RDR Books, agreeing to temporarily withhold publication of Steve Vander Ark’s Harry Potter Lexicon.” The release did not mention the restraining order. A motion to delay proceedings owing to RDR Books’ need to retain and familiarize a copyright lawyer with the case was denied.

RDR Books claims on its site that the delay was voluntary and perhaps even their idea, but that contradicts what has been put forth in legal documents as well as what JK Rowling has said has occurred. Also, a source has told TLC that it was Judge Patterson’s preference to restrain the case (and therefore publication) until February, not RDR’s.

The RDR statement says:

“It is our wish that Ms. Rowling join Mr. Vander Ark in his campaign for literary freedom and free expression by dropping her complaint against a book we are confident she would enjoy reading.”

Update: We have a copy of the judge’s letter (you can download it here, which will be available for download shortly. It says that the book has not been fully typeset for printing, that RDR has instructed its typesetters to cease operations, and that the book “cannot be printed and distributed to the public at this time.” The court orders that the book and all those associated with its publication cannot complete the book, typeset it, print it, distribute it, advertise it, promote it, sell it, license it, accept orders for it – not in the US or anywhere abroad. It also ordered RDR to take the book off Amazon, their own Web site, and any other means of “advertising, soliciting orders for, and distributing the book.” Also any money that RDR gets from activities related to the lawsuit shall be placed in escrow (holding, supposedly pending outcome of the suit). The order will remain until the court has ruled on JKR/WB’s filing for a preliminary injunction.

The preliminary injunction will be filed on January 7, 2008; RDR’s opposition will be due on January 22, 2008. The reply by JKR/WB is due on January 29. The preliminary injunction hearing will take place on Feb. 6, 2008 or “on such other date as the court directs.

Update 2: You can now download here JKR/WB’s lawyers’ response to RDR lawyers’ attempt to delay the case (a delay attempt that was denied by Judge Patterson after this letter was filed). The letter notes that although RDR is a small company with limited resources, “RDR faced no such obstacles in garnering significant and international attention for itself and its book. Indeed, upon information…RDR continues to trumpet its intention to publish its book.”

The letter also says “RDR has used this lawsuit as an opportunity to publicize the book and disparage my clients in the press,” and said the plaintiffs (JKR/WB) are eager for a ruling because it would only “perpetuate the cloud…and would most likely be perceived as some sort of vindication for RDR—which had been given every conceivable chance to resolve this matter amicably.”

JKR/WB also referred to the request for adjournment as 11th-hour, claiming RDR had since last week to request it, and claiming that if the schedule were delayed new facts would develop or facts would change JKR/WB’s briefs, which had been prepared for submission today.

You can download this letter here.

Update 3: WB has made a statement: “Although sad that this had to go to court, the judgement granting an order against RDR books is an important step in helping us to protect our intellectual property and at the same time, protect JK Rowling’s right to produce her own companion book to the Harry Potter series she created. Both Warner Bros. and JK Rowling are clear that this claim is a matter of infringement of copyright, not a matter of literary freedom.”

Update 4: There is another update on the Harry Potter Lexicon by Steve Vander Ark: “t’s very hard to know what to write. For one thing, everything I write these days — everything I’ve ever written or said, in fact — is being dissected and analyzed to make me sound like a fool or a liar or an arrogant jerk (as I’m sure this will be as well). People who know me and have talked with me know that this isn’t the case….To read some of what I’ve seen online, fans have decided that I am just trying to make huge amounts of money or that I have no respect for Jo. Some fans, along with WB, have speculated that I took the material they graciously allowed the Lexicon to use and slapped it into a book without permission. Some have jumped to the conclusion that I blatantly ignored demands that I not create a book from material on the Lexicon. That just isn’t who I am. I would never, never do something like that….One question that gets asked of me over and over is if I have ever met Jo or talked to her. The answer is no, I haven’t. I have always wished for that chance, but it’s never happened. There is a crazy part of me that believes that if she and I could just sit down and chat about this, we could get it all sorted out and put this miserable incident behind us….Maybe then all of us could put it behind us and just get back to enjoying Harry Potter together.”

You can read the full details of the suit here, along with JKR’s statements (or download the suit for yourself ) or read statements from TLC interviews WB and RDR here. A previous update is also here, and another one here.


The Harry Potter Lexicon is a partner site to The Leaky Cauldron. The opinions and claims argued here do not constitute The Leaky Cauldron’s opinion or claim (of which it has none).

Previous Article | Next Article Browse all Recent Companion Books News

463 Comments

NotTheHBP

RJ, jo rowling is the holder of the copyrights that the lexicon infringes upon. also, it should be noted, if you had read the news posting, RDR’s request was denied by the judge. the TRO is far diffferent from what RDR was requesting, and was enacted by the judge without counsel of the two parties.

Jo is working to protect her creation from other people repackaging and profiting from. she told steve no, and steve either went ahead with it, or was already locked in a contract with RDR he could not get out of.

Posted by NotTheHBP on November 09, 2007, 05:22 PM report to moderator
RJ

RDR’s request was denied – agreed. But they said they were willing to freeze publication in their request. (by the way, someone said in the comments that the hearing is delayed. Does anyone have info either way, about the conclusions of the hearing?)

And not all “repackaging” is illegal -there’ve been plenty of books that do that, and they’ll be plenty in the future. The lawsuit’s here to decide that.

Posted by RJ on November 09, 2007, 05:26 PM report to moderator
Keene

Wow, Rowling is really letting the money go to her head. Apparently she’s forgotten where she came from, and is now afraid of others continuing or adding to what she has decided to end. While I will always enjoy the books, my respect for Rowling dwindles almost daily.

Posted by Keene on November 09, 2007, 05:26 PM report to moderator
RJ

Hey, just because I think Jo might be wrong, doesn’t mean it’s okay to throw insults at either party. This is a legitimate lawsuit – nothing to do with money going to either side’s head.

Let’s keep this argument civil.

By the way, thanks to leaky for fostering an atmosphere of civil discussion and straight reporting.

Posted by RJ on November 09, 2007, 05:30 PM report to moderator
societas leonina

Potterverse, goodbye (just checked Leaky, The Lexicon and Rowling’s site at alexa.com).

Posted by societas leonina on November 09, 2007, 05:34 PM report to moderator
NotTheHBP

the other books that have been allowed to be published RJ were not repackaging, they were crytical analyasis and essays. the lexicon has said the book wont include the essays which make up the entirty of any form of critical analyasis that exists on the lexicon.

Also, the other books are not encylopedias that just takes the facts from the books and repackages them in lists for profit. the website was allowed to exist because it was not for profit.

and keene, just because jk rowling has finished the seventh book those not mean she looses ownership of her world. she retains the copyrights and trademarks and full owernship of the entire harry potter universe as it is her intellectual copyrighted property. if your respect for her is dwindling because she is protecting her rights and property, you might want to rethink the position she is in. this isent about money. her encylopedia she has been discussing long before the lexicon became a entity within the fandom will not finacially benifit her in any way because all royalties that would go to her are to go to charity.

this isent about greed, its about her rights being infringed upon.

Posted by NotTheHBP on November 09, 2007, 05:34 PM report to moderator
Mars

Well we will know soon enough, but based on the evidence produced so far, all of my colleagues say that this isn’t even close to the “line” (that vague area where Copyright and Fair Use overlap). There is more than enough to say that the Lexicon book took too much (especially the pictures, Lexicon should’ve gone for original illustrations or something). And the fact that is is for profit doesn’t help (Yessir, in Fair Use the more money you will gain from the book the more it hurts you).

Of course, RDR hasn’t presented evidence yet. So we reserve our rights to change our opinion. :)

Posted by Mars on November 09, 2007, 05:35 PM report to moderator
NotTheHBP

Mars, what is your opinion on the fact that RDR has not provided evidence. the only thing I see them doing to make a stab at fighting back other then claiming innocence is to claim warner brothers and jk rowling stole the timelines. technically, jk rowling owns every event in the timelines and therefore the timelines would not have existed without jk rowlings copyrighted books from which they are dirived. the timelines were great even though they were inheritenly flawed when you really looked at them in detail, which to steve’s credit, is understandable because to build them you have to make decisions on when somethhing happened when it is not easily noted in the books that the timeline is built from.

Posted by NotTheHBP on November 09, 2007, 05:39 PM report to moderator
RJ

There were books similar to encyclopedias – an “unofficial encyclopedia from a-z” and a harry potter word book, as well as many others. Steve is not just copying the books – there probably couldn’t have even been a lawsuit with that.

Steve has written – in his own words – the different times and places different spells have been used, just as one example. As another, he has discussed different pronunciations of words, looked up the full moons and calendars to fit everything in – for once and for all, this is not just cutting and pasting. (I’m still not sure if it is legal nonetheless, but I think Steve has a point.)

Posted by RJ on November 09, 2007, 05:40 PM report to moderator
James

“Wow, Rowling is really letting the money go to her head. Apparently she’s forgotten where she came from, and is now afraid of others continuing or adding to what she has decided to end.”

And it is exactly this sort of arrogance from the fans that assume Harry Potter is theirs do do with as they please is the reason why she needs to take steps to protect her work to begin with.

Posted by James on November 09, 2007, 05:41 PM report to moderator
RJ

Agreed. Don’t have this blow up into a whole internet lawsuit and curtail all the great stuff online.

Posted by RJ on November 09, 2007, 05:43 PM report to moderator
NotTheHBP

RJ, the A-Z book was very incomplete even for a book published before deathly hallows, and also was granted permission from jk rowlings camp because it actually was found to be within fair use copyright laws. also, alot of these books that are published are published because the publishers work with wb/jk rowling to ensure that they are allowable within copyright laws. the lexicon website in published book form those not conform in its current state to fair use laws. the issue is that this book is being published after jk rowling and wb first said no, and then the publisher refused to comply with wb/jk rowling, the people who have full and total ownership of harry potter, and therefore, by international copyright laws has the right to block anyone trying to profit from it if they see fit.

Posted by NotTheHBP on November 09, 2007, 05:43 PM report to moderator
Mars

ALL the “encyclopedia’s” you guys keep refering to have all been contacted by JK’s agent and where properly edited to protect her rights. Heck even one author blogged about the changes JK asked of them.

JK has been very lenient, they’ve been allowing books to be published AS LONG AS THEY ALLOW THEM TO EDIT THEM SO AS NOT TO INFRINGE THEIR RIGHTS.

The case with Steve’s book is no different. Just look at JK’s latest post:

“I take no pleasure in the fact that publication has been prevented for the present. On the contrary, I feel massively disappointed that this matter had to come to court at all. Despite repeated requests, the publishers have refused to even countenance making any changes to the book to ensure that it does not infringe my rights.”

Posted by Mars on November 09, 2007, 05:46 PM report to moderator
NotTheHBP

Exactly Mars, RDR was given repeated cease and desist letters when they refused to work with WB/JKR. This is not a matter of JK Rowling or WB over stepping their bounds. this is a case of a publisher refuseing to comply with people who control the copyright and trademarks of a book that infringes and repackages that copyrighted material…

expecially after years of jo saying she will be writing a encylopedia. RDR is idiotic for claiming that because jo has not started the encylopedia yet, that she has not legal right to it.

Posted by NotTheHBP on November 09, 2007, 05:49 PM report to moderator
Mars

NotTheHBP: Well considering that RDR is claiming that they don’t even have an IPR lawyer (and can’t afford one) and is only using a cousin of the publishing house’s owner. I have no idea how they’re gonna defend themselves.

Posted by Mars on November 09, 2007, 05:53 PM report to moderator
PotterCast Interviews Jo Rowling! Click here to Listen! Join us at LeakyCon 2009! Learn more today! The Books Everything...Half-Blood Prince...and the rest of the HP Films

Scribbulus Essay Project

Issue 25 - Dec. 2008

Scribbulus is THE place for Leaky Cauldron readers to submit their essays and opinion pieces!
See more over at Scribbulus!
Learn to knit your own 'Weasley Sweater'. Learn to brew your own 'Butterbeer'. Find out how at Leaky Crafts!
Cast spells and chat with your friends at the Chamber of Chat!

Hosted by Idologic Inc.