To ramble on… It’s really worth loading at least one of the PDF files (where Melissa says “here, here, here, and here” and seeing examples of the Lexicon book.
Meanwhile, the business about the contractual stipulation about RDR being responsible for any infringement lawsuits shows that legal trouble was not unexpected.
Also, I’m confused about how the 50% take on profits from books sold on the Floo Network sites would have worked? Would that have cut into the Floo sites’ take, or would that have been between SVA and RDR, in the way they split up their profits, after giving x% to the Floo site?
Arithmancer, when you asked what the “logic of definition or etymology” quote meant, I think it is referring to the fact that the Lexicon book is merely an alphabetical listing. Obviously this is not the case for the website, since websites can make use of links, keywords, programming, etc…but I digress.
The point is that derivative works that don’t have analysis might still be allowed some copyright leniency, IF they create new cataloging techniques to make sense of large amounts of data,and then use that technique with the data (in this case, Jo’s world).
They were just pointing out various exceptions that the Lexicon book doesn’t meet.
Looking at the photocopies of the actual book, there really isn’t any evidence of outside sources other than the HP books themselves. While this book would be useful, I would rather have it come directly from the author herself. That way I’d know I’m getting my moneys worth. The extra canon wouldn’t hurt either.
Well done, Melissa!
“This timeline, like all the material on the 1,000-plus-page Harry Potter Lexicon, is the original work of Mr. Vander Ark”—Correct me if I’m wrong, but is Ark claiming copyright to his Lexicon book, and all the HP material in it, before the book has been published, while the legitimacy of his book, not to mention who the HP material belongs to, is being decided in a lawsuit? Rather presumptuous of Ark, is it not?
Personally I find the entire situation painful. One of my most favorite segments of Potter Cast is the Canon Cunundrums. It is what drew me to the podcast in the first place. I thought Mr. Vander Arks input was insightful and his decription of the literary techniques used help create a better understanding of the characters and the entire Harry Potter series. I find it troubling that so many are quick to throw so much blame on to Mr. Vander Ark alone. I believe in, and share, his passion for the Harry Potter story. I do believe he has made some mistakes in jugement. Mistakes that I believe he will regret for a long time. And yes, he may have thought that in some way ‘book’ was ok now since the series was completed. Please don’t misunderstand!! I think morally to sell a book that would compete with a publication whose proceeds was perviously announced would go entirely to charity is reprehensible. But I think as passionate outsiders in this situation we must consider that fact the Mr. Steve Vander Ark was also misled, decieved and lied to by his own publishing company, RDR. The way I see it this company is the one with the $$ in their eyes. A small company hopeing to cash in on something they thought would be an instant jackpot and imediately put them in the waters with the big publishing companys like Scholastic!! They obviously knew what they were doing was wrong or all of the secretivness and legal misdirection would not have gone on. In my view one or a combination of three things happened: -They either told Mr. Vander Ark not to get involved and he listened. -Perhaps due to his own poor jugement, he signed a contract that bound his hands and he legally gave up his rights to get involved. -Or RDR kept all of this dispicable activity from Mr. Vander Ark and he never knew what was going on until it was too late.
More likely he may never have known what was happening until it hit the press. We have no way of know what or how things were said and presented to Steve. To precipitate such a rapid contract signature and turn around publication date is suspicious to me. My bottom line is: -Mr Vander Ark’s motivation, I believe, was not as underhanded as everyone makes it out to be. He has made some bad decisions, yes. We have yet to hear his side of the story. -I believe that publication of this book would indeed have an impact on the sales of JKR Scottish book. The charities that she supports are worthy causes and I for one would rather my money go to them than any where else. -I belive RDR has created an aire of deception, shady business pratices and just plain ‘sliminess’ for their company which in my opinion has done them a great disservice. If I had a book to publish I would not be running to them right now. -JKR and WB are well with in their rights to be concerned about this book and legally have done nothing wrong. It does appear so far that they have tried numerous times to resolve this issue ‘peacefully’. Who knows how much of those attempts were share with Mr. Vander Ark.
My final thought as a big Harry Potter fan, proponant of JKR’s work, podcast listener, and Lexicon user: the entire situation makes me ache with sadness.
P.S. I make appologies for rambeling, spelling and grammer mistakes. I am nursing a VERY bad head cold my 3 1/2 year old triplets shared with me!! At least they know how to share :-)
I think SVA is throwing mud in the face of JKR & WB, nothing more or less. He’s stealing from JKR after all this time that he has pretended friendship with her, going behind her back with full knowledge of his wrongdoing. I have absolutely no pity for him. If I wrote a book and someone paraphrased it and tried to slap a copyright on it out of greed I would feel just as betrayed and confused as I’m sure JKR does.
For everyone who thinks that JKR & WB have plenty of money and they should share, where have you been? JKR does more for charities than she keeps for herself anymore, and by publishing his big fat plagerism, SVA would be stealing from the underprivileged children who would have benefitted from the sales of the Scottish Book.
And did anyone notice that the Lexicon is still listed in the fan sites on the official HP website? My respect for JKR just went up even more, that even after seeing what kind of person SVA really is, she didn’t completely turn her back on him and expunge everything about him from her life.
Oh, how I wish this ugly mess could go away. It is so unfortunate that people I admire are in dispute with each other. However, posts like these need to be made. It is good to see an impartial summary of the important details.
Thank you Melissa. You’re doing a fine job.
Also, I hope the work on YOUR book is going well. I can’t wait to read it.
hank you all for the nice words. Been a long day. To clarify:
“Also, I’m confused about how the 50% take on profits from books sold on the Floo Network sites would have worked? Would that have cut into the Floo sites’ take, or would that have been between SVA and RDR, in the way they split up their profits, after giving x% to the Floo site?”
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. Typical royalties on a paperback are 7.5%, on a hardback 12.5%. So, basically, he would be increasing his profit share with his publisher by more than four times (I would be more accurate but his other royalty numbers are smudged in the document) through the other sites. This was not mentioned to at least one Floo webmaster (me). Nothing would go to the Floo sites, only Steve and RDR.”
Re: AkhenatenII @ 10.58 – “No such timeline is contained in any of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter novels. Mr. Vander Ark published details that were found nowhere else. This timeline, like all the material on the 1,000-plus-page Harry Potter Lexicon, is the original work of Mr. Vander Ark and his elite team of academic scholars, literary critics and reference librarians. It is copyrighted 2001 through 2007 by the Harry Potter Lexicon.”
What RDR is saying is that, all the content on the Lexicon website is original and belongs to the Lexicon website, and that the timeline in particular (since that was what RDR’s complaint was about) belongs to the Lexicon website also. So they’re not really claiming anything as regards the books. It’s still a silly statement, in so far as the details are found somewhere else (the HP books!) and whether anyone but Rowling owns the HP characters, events, objects, etc. is (as we are seeing!) is highly doubtful. It sounds like RDR was sort of trying to “hit back” about the timeline issue rather than address the copyright concerns Rowling/WB had with the book.
From Melissa .
“This was not mentioned to at least one Floo webmaster (me). Nothing would go to the Floo sites, only Steve and RDR.””
Wow – and if I understand things correctly, you guys have given them their website for free. (I read that somewhere) If that is the case, then I’m speechless.
Thanks for the explanation, Melissa. I couldn’t figure out what the 50% was 50% of. Really appreciate your cool head and all the reporting!
That is indeed the case Kyle. And thanks, again, guys. I’ll edit the post so it makes that clearer.
I have been behind JKR since day 1. It’s sad to think a fellow Michigander is doing something like this. I do believe he is doing this for monetary gain. SVA cannot claim copyright on any timeline. The entire HP series is the intellectual property of JKR. It was was Melissa and the rest of the staff here, I would break off the partnership with the Lexicon. I understand they may have to wait until the final word…but after that I wouldn’t want to have my site’s name next to SVA’s.
This has nothing to do with JKR or WB being money hungry. JKR has said many times that the proceeds from her encyclopedia would go to charity. She doesn’t want sales of Steve’s encyclopedia to jeopardise the sales of her own book, and therefore, the amount of money she will raise for charity. Of course the hardcore fans will buy both, or just JKR’s book, but the casual fans probably won’t, JKR realises that, and that is why she is doing this.
The fact is, JKR owns the Potterverse and should have the right to give a green or red light to any work that uses it. Simple as that. I don’t believe there is anything wrong with selective enforcement of an authors copyright. When it was a free web-based resource, she was fine with it. Now that it’s set to become a publish book that will eat into the amount of money she can raise for charity, of course she wants to assert her copyright and block it from being published.
It will be a serious miscarriage of justice if Steve is successful in publishing his book.
Arithmancer: Etymology has to do with word/name origins, I think. (Someone correct me if I’m wrong…). I read that statement to mean that the lexicon seems to randomly choose where they discuss definitions and word origins, and does not reference any of those small pieces of information (which are clearly not SVA’s original work either).
And about the lexicon being a “repackage[ment] of [the original work]”, that is essentially what a reference book does (with permissions, etc., of course). You don’t read a reference book to read the author’s own commentary, opinions, etc.; you read it to find a fact quickly. But no one buys real reference books – they go to the library or something, so a reference book would not usually be a book sold for profit. Of course reference books can be scholarly, but they are not the original work of a scholar. For example, you could not submit a reference guide as your masters’ thesis or doctoral dissertation, however wonderful your organizational skills; it must be your own work. It is that same reasoning that makes the lexicon unpublishable for profit.