Advertisement

Go Jo, hope you win the case and sort this out once and for all.

Will it be manditory that Jo be at this trial?

And even Tolkien doesn’t own the concept of wizards and goblins.lol! It is the ’’story’’ that is important not the use of any type of beings that are used to tell it. They are just a vehical she happened to use,as she could have told it without the use of magic…...but it would NOT have been near as much fun.:o)

Just ask Mark Twain ,there are no new concepts but a story is still something of a personal nature and belongs to it’s author [or writer]

I have a feeling that this time next year, this case will still be going on. Oh well.

and on and on and on—hope not for Jo’s sake

i have begun to wonder that even id rdr books and steve vanderark winthe case that if the book would even sell that well with all the negative publicity

Melissa: Where exactly is this taking place?

500 Pearl Street, NY, NY, courtroom 24A.

“In fact, once Gollancz had let the author’s agents see early proofs, all was sweetness and light.”

If only RDR/SVA had done the same…

Well, Terry Pratchett… if the Lexicon book was about nameless wizards and goblins, then you would have a point. However, it is about Harry the Wizard and Griphook the Goblin (among others) so indeed, it IS copyright infringement.

Sheesh.

I’m on jury duty right now and my last jury selection date for NH is March 17th. I can’t imagine being on a jury for that complex a case. At least no DNA or forensics evidence like my last case.

Melissa, many thanks for keeping us so well informed!

I sincerely hope that Warner/JKR lose this suit. What the Lexicon did is NOT infringement—it is protected under the copyright act of 1989, as amended, under the clause pertaining to scholarly works of literary commentary.

If this suit is successful, it will affect many kinds of writing that have long been permitted—all the “unofficial” guides to TV series, compilations of movies in a particular genre with photos and plot summaries, and a host of other kinds of legitimate published non-fictionw orks will be affected. I respect Ms. Rowling, but her key argument is that publication of THIS book will prevent HER book (if and when she writes it) from selling well because “people won’t need two Harry Potter encyclopedias”.

For me, I’d buy hers, knowing the money was going to charity, even if I already owned Steve Vanderarks, which I plan to do as soon as it is published. And, yes, I did go to law school, and I do sit on the copyright committee of a national writer’s association, and I have testified before several courts and the U.S. Congress on matters of copyright infringement. I think Jo’s suit is without merit, and I’m apalled that more writers haven’t rallied to support Steve in this.

Deb, I’m not saying I know more than you about copyright law, but it seems like the argument about the Lexicon interfering with JKR’s encyclopedia is a secondary argument. I think her key argument is that the Lexicon does not constitute a scholarly work of literary commentary. I’m not passing judgment as to whether or not this is true, I’m just saying the key argument has always been that the Lexicon does not create anything new in the way of analysis or commentary.

Hi Deb

This is a Harry Potter fan site, so what you read herel will mainly be adoring fans who are on JKR’s side no matter the issue.

I also agree that the law is clear that JKR's suit is not covered by the copyright laws.  If I understand the nature of her suit, however, she is trying to claim rights under the trademark laws.  I find this very disturbing.  Even McDonalds who is very protective of their Golden Arch trademark doesn't claim that someone can't use the words "Golden Arch" or "McDonalds."  JKR seems to claim that if someone uses the word "Horcrux" in a future book about wizards that they will have infringed on her trademark rights. Since I disagree that a future author should be prohibited from expanding the use of this and other words invented by JKR in the Harry Potter series, I absolutely defend the right of someone to define the words in an  encyclopedia.  For some reason this bothers me greatly.  Maybe it is because most of the words coined by JKR had their origin from Latin which is one of the oldest written languages used by man or maybe it is because the way the locket horcrux reacted with the trio came directly from Lord of the Rings, or maybe it is because she is using her millions to sue one of her most adament fans that helped  to create these millions.

I don’t if I even know why JKR’s lawsuit offends me so much, but it does;

At last, a trial date. I tend to agree that it will be a long time before any definitive conclusion, because either way I expect appeals. But at least we will get to the point where the cases are presented for cosideration by someone (or a group of someones if there is a jury) has the responsibility to actually make a decision.

@Deb

I believe that the effects will not be as far reaching as you envision, nor as others envision if in fact RDR loses (I cannot say who will prevail either way). I believe this because there is ample evidence that such works as you think will be affected already exist for a great many different works, not just HP, and continue to be published.

Now, I think the decision in THIS case may eventually require a newer interpretation of the Fair Use principle, but the fact remains that that principle itself was the product of MANY years and MANY legal decisions that preceded it (as stated by the US Copyright Office itself on their own website). I’ve no doubt that in all of THOSE earlier cases, there was concern expressed regarding the impact of the decisions on what would follow. That is the nature of the evolution of Law based on cases as they progress and are completed. It is also the beauty of the system that Law is not permanently fixed in concrete, but is, rather, subject to interpretation. When it is perceived that it is unfair, or to rigid, or, conversely, to lax, it can be interpreted and ultimately changed for the better.

At least that’s my opinion!

M.

Deb, maybe because…. It’s morally wrong?

I don’t know why my post didn’t come out correctly, but I’m not going to retype it. All it said was that Deb was correct on the copyright laws, but if I understand JKR’s suit correctly she is trying to expand the trademark laws to apply to words invented by her. This bothers me because I think future writers should be allowed to use these words in future books. JKR ,herself, used Latin to come up with most of the words. You can’t have a trademark on words unless they are the product. JKR has a trademark on her characters, but not on the words spoken by these character.

“JKR seems to claim that if someone uses the word “Horcrux” in a future book about wizards that they will have infringed on her trademark rights.”

No, what she is objecting to is someone printing a book that is roughly 80% HER work. Not a book that simply contains the word “Horcrux.” Were that the case there are tens, maybe hundreds, of HP-related books that would be sued or pulled from shelves. Note what David Langford said – once they didn’t see infringement in his book, allwas sweetness and light. Your argument only makes sense if he never used a trademarked name once in that book…extremely unlikely.

Deb, what you need to worry about is a clamp down on all fan activities – sites, fan fiction, conferences – that would follow an RDR win. That’s not abstract. If JKR wins they would like things to go on just as they are…if the defendants win you can expect real (and legal) restrictions on fan activites across ALL fandoms. Definitely something any fan – and any author – would want to avoid.

Because we are Harry Potter fans doesn’t make us blind adherents to Jo. If she tried to, for instnace, sue MuggleNet for their predictions book last year, we’d all be against that. But she didn’t, because she knows that’s fair use.

This encyclopedia is not.

And the above poster is right, the idea that it would sell in conflict with hers is not a primary but secondary argument in this case.

I apologize for the poor typing in my previous, never my forte. Also, I’d like to add another point opposite Deb’s comment.

Your premise that JKR’s only basis for the suit is the revenue aspect is not necessarily correct, though it is certainly one basis. There are others. Also, I respect your opinion regarding the premise that RDR’s publication should be allowed because it falls under the class of “Scholarly Works of Literary Commentary”. However, that is your opinion, and may or may not be shared by the Judge (and/or jury if one is present). A lot will depend on what definition is ascribed to “scholarly” and “literary commentary”.

There are those who would argue that to qualify as scholarly, there needs to be some addition to the canon of whatever is being commented on, and/or that there needs to be original commentary that ellucidates or in some other way enhances the understanding of the original material. These people would further argue that the RDR publication does neither. Again, that is for the Judge and/or jury to decide, not me. I merely try and provide clarification when questions arise (which I have done all the way through, I think).

You may well be right that the work qualifies as scholarly if the judge agrees it fits the criteria and is not swayed by anything WB/JKR might say in opposition. Just as anything RDR might say in opposition to a Judge leaning toward an interpretation favouring WB/JKR may not have any influence. Again, the beauty of the system is that now someone will make a decision and we’ll see it, analyze it and either agree or disagree with it, as will both the Plaintiffs and the Defendants in this case.

Finally, thanks for weighing in on this in a non-belligerent way. Always refreshing!

M.

I don’t think the issue is whether someone can use the word “horcrux” or “avada kadavra” in a publication without Jo’s permission. I think its more of “you can’t say ‘this is a horcrux according to Jo’ and then package it and make a dime off of it.” However, I am not an expert on this case so I could be wrong. As others have said, I think the issue is whether or not there is literary criticism in SVA’s work (as opposed to The Magical World of Harry Potter which says ‘this is what fluffy is AND this is my interpretation as to where he comes from (Greek mythology) and why I think JKR used it). Again, this is only my opinion as to what;s going on.