I had no idea about the Floo Network situation. That threw me quite a bit. I’ve stayed on the fence thus far, but…really? Profiting from books sold through the Floo Network, and no one on the Floo Network knew?
Yikes. : (
I can’t really say anything that hasn’t already been said, but I just also wanted to thank Melissa for pouring over all of this and breaking it down for us. Don’t know what we’d do without ya! :)
Even if Jo wouldn’t give the money from the Scottish Book to charity, I dont understand why people suddenly think, she’s greedy. Fans want to read her book, so she writes it. fans buy it. Her work – her money. It’s her creation, why should Steve or RDR have any right to repack and sell it?
And I really dont know what to say to this: “It means that whenever a link from Leaky or any other Floo site results in a sale of a Lexicon book, Steve would get 50% royalties. [...] This was not mentioned to at least one Floo webmaster (me). Nothing would go to the Floo sites, only Steve and RDR.”
I can’t believe it… I really don’t understand how Steve thought/thinks that everything would just work out perfectly well. First he tries to publish this book against Jo’s explicit wishes and then he’s …(trying to think of a nice word) deceiving the people in the fandom that are his friends and most likely to catch him after this whole disaster. That’s so stupid. How could he think people wouldn’t find out?
Melissa, thanks again for keeping us updated and all the work involved.
Shame on SVA! He’s just bitter because he couldn’t get a job with JKR on her future works. A grown man should know better. I used to enjoy the HP-Lexicon very much. Between books I would look up topics from time to time to keep myself entertained until the next release. I haven’t been to his site since this whole thing came out in the news. His pettiness ruined the experience of his site for me and I will not bother with it again.
My real worry in this case is that it will come up with a legal definition of scholarly work —something that might effect any of you who decide to go to [post]graduate school. For at least a century, creating concordances has been considered scholarly. A concordance is simple a list of all the words in a book or series, such as Shakespeare or the bible, in alphabetical order -- no definitions, plot summaries, just a list. Before computers this was hard, hard work. It was a tool for other scholars, and it was highly valued.
Whether SVA/RDR should win this case in terms of their underhandedness is not my point: if Jo Rowling, who is not a scholar, and her lawyers who are also not scholars, and this chap from Exeter College who is clearly not much of an historian of scholarship, are allowed to determine what is valuable in terms of scholarly work, the world has gone to hell in a jell-propelled handcart.
You know, what I find interesting is that at some point, Steve had to say, “let me have my attorney look over this before we proceed.” So, from my perspective, Steve did NOT do this and trusted what RDR proposed. Or if he did have his attorney look over the legalities of publishing a book like this, they did not do a very throrough job of giving him advice. I just can’t imagaine that an attorney, whose job it is look out for the legal best interests of their clients, did not think there would be any potential problems publishing this book.
Apparently, both sides are interepreting intellectual property and copyright differently, which is why there is this lawsuit. Do we know how it is that Steve and RDR came together? Who sought whom out?
Steve just doesn’t look good here. He looks like he knowingly proceeded with something he had previously acknowledged was wrong. It’s a ‘do as I say, not as I do’ situation, Someone else posted (can’t recall who right now) that perhaps RDR had Steve under contract and he has to go along with what they say. If that’s the case, Steve has not gotten good legal advice. If it’s not, Steve has not made good decisions and has fallen into a deep hole. I know if it were me I would bow out of this ASAP.
I am not a lawyer, or a judge,...so I will have to wait and see what the outcome will be. Would I buy a copy of the Lexicon?, ...yes. Would I but J.K.R.’s encyclopedia?...yes. The Lexicon would have been out for sale by now….J.K.R. has said her’s would take about 10 years to do. I don’t see how one would interfere with sales of the other, as they would be sold with so much time passing between the two. I wonder, in 10+ years if we will be standing in line for J.K.R.’s encyclopedia..? I don’t have an answer to that. J.K.R. has hinted that “maybe” she isn’t done with the Wizarding World….maybe there will be other books. All of this is speculation… Some may ask why I would buy a copy of the Lexicon, when it’s online for free. Even though I hate to admit it,...all the Harry Potter online sites will be gone in time, and the chance to have the Lexicon, in print, to share with grandchildren would be priceless. It is sad that things have deterrated to the point where only a court can untangle the legal knots.
“He is SO busted!
I don’t understand why they don’t point out that any of us could re-create his work using the HP Books if we wanted to dedicate our time to it…thus, it can’t possibly belong to him. There is absolutely no original thought, just a re-ordering of information that is useful to us fans to help understand the books when needed.
What a shame. It makes me sad.
Posted by buggub on January 16, 2008 @ 08:28 PM “
Just to comment on this first post, you are correct that anybody could have recreated the work with considerable effort and dedication. But from a copyright perspective, it really DOES matter who publishes first.
There have been cases where 2 authors have counter-sued for copyright infringement. The final determination was that, because both sides reached the same conclusions essentially independantly and apparently simultaneously, they were granted joint copyright. However, I have heard of no such case outside of research papers (just because I haven’t heard doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened, of course!).
On the other hand, where there has been a clear time disparity, i.e. one publishes significantly ahead of the other, the first out of the gate gets copyright. This is because publication is taken as an indication of completion of the intellectual property. It is generally accepted that if you got it out first, it is because you formulated the concept/ideas/conclusions first, and created the report first.
Of course, in THIS case, JKR’s work was published first, and copyrighted first, so this isn’t really an issue.
By the way, as soon as anyone writes a piece of work, or creates a piece of art, copyright is automatic, as long as authorship is clear (at least in canada, and, I believe this is true for WTO signatories). Registration of copyright is not a requirement for claiming copyright. However, registration IS a means of asserting such claim on a wide basis, makes the copyright “official” and establishes time frames.
But the reality is that even when a document is considered at least partially in the public domain, such as a newspaper article (I mean it is published and anyone can purchase it), it is technically an infringement if it is used without permission. The summary “Part 2” noted that, but also pointed out that in such cases (and they gave the example of the teacher, which I mentioned in one of my posts yesterday on Part 1), it constitutes “fair use”. However if a teacher excerpted an entire newspaper for teaching purposes, the situation might be different. The pointis, regardless of the circumstance, requesting permission should be the first common sense thing one does. In EVERY instance that my company uses others’ copyrighted material, we ask permission, regardless of the “public” nature or not. In all but ONE case, the copyright holder grants us permission with no fee, or a reasonable licence fee, as long as we appropriately reference the source. The one case simply said no, which they do for ALL similar requests. Needless to say, we did not incorporate their material, but referenced them as the place to et that material. This benefitted both parties.
Sorry for another long drawn out post – just my style I guess.
M.
This whole thing is a tragedy that didn’t need to happen. But it did.Yes, Chelle. Bitterness and pettiness. I have never read the Lexicon. I have never been to any of the Floo Network sites, except for Mugglenet. (I’m not sure if that is part of the Floo Network.) I do know that this is a “wakeup call” for everyone. A sad commentary. But needed. You cannot profit, from someone elses hard work, and expect it to go unnoticed. You cannot expect that there will be no repercussions or consequences, from your actions. SVA: You have caused an irreparable damage to yourself as well as potential damage to other FanSites. RDR: you should be ashamed of yourself. Bad advice and ill-gotten gains…or potentially ill-gotten gains. We learned, in High School, about Plaigerism. It is illegal. Yes, it is. Unfortunately, for SVA, that will cost him. The REALLY sad thing is that he, himself, mentioned Plaigerism. For his own work. Now, many people will “not bother with it (the Lexicon) again.” You, my friend, have lost. Your self respect and the respect of others. Again, I echo the sentiments of many others: Shame on you!
Also, I anctiously await your answer to this…..
SVA is begining to sound more and more like a loon.
what exactly can they write about in 1,100 pages? that’s nearly the length of lord of the rings!
“….J.K.R. has said her’s would take about 10 years to do. “
If you go and read the transcript for the Jo interview where they are talking about “The Scottish Book”, Jo didn’t actually say it was going to take ten years, John did. Jo then went on to say what her ideal layout for the book would be and then John repeated about people being willing to wait ten years for that. At no time did Jo suggest it would take that long, all she said following John’s comments was that she wanted to be able to take the time to do the Scottish Book properly, and not be rushed into print because her hand has been forced.
I think all Jo is looking for right now is a bit of a break and then the time to do her book properly – I would be VERY surprised if it took anything more than five years at the absolute outside limit.
Gillyweed, check out Pottercast #130, Dec.17th, 2007…....in being questioned, and hopeing that the encyclopedia would be written as soon as JKR would be comfortable writing it….JKR responds with ” Yeah. But would it be okay if that’s 10 years?”....she is in no hurry to get it done.
As a writer, I know how it would break my heart to have someone “steal” my work for their own benefit. It would not be about the money at all, but that’s the way lawyers & the law must operate. Financial harm can be empirically proved, but mental/emotional distress is much harder, which is why so much of the focus is on the money.
Just consider if HP had come from your heart and mind – how would you feel if someone was abusing it in this way? Really, it’s like having some bully beating up your child! Making profit from your hard work and commitment? Never mind talent! SVA should have put all of his time and energy into his own work of fiction if he wanted to have full rights to its use.