Am sorry you’re having to go through this, but it sounds as though you have made a wise and thoughtful decision.
This whole lawsuit is upsetting. It shouldnt even be a problem. The rights ultimately belong to JKR so they should just give it to her. THE END. I agree with Leaky ’s decision. and they were very proffesional about it so I applaud them.
Leaky shouldn’t remain a partner with Steve if their ideas don’t align. Concerning the Reference Book that Steve wants to publish, Jo EXPLICITLY said ages ago that she planned to write her own reference book. If the author reserves a single privilege in handling the wrap-up of HER series, why would a true fan deny her that? Besides, Rowling’s motives for writing the book are simply for charity, not profit. Steve has, and plans to write other successful books—so why does he feel the need to fight this issue to gain more profit rather than serve the best interests of the ORIGINAL author and the series?
You made the right decision, as painful as it was to make.
I’ve heard SVA a time or two on the Pottercast and always thought that he brought a lot of intelligence and understanding to the discussions. But. Copyright law is what it is. One cannot take the work of another person and repackage it as one’s own. This is what SVA is/was trying to do. He’s done something that any of us could have done ourselves, if we wanted to sit down with the books and do it. Trying to profit from this is like taking any other book under copyright, rearranging the chapters, and trying to call it one’s original work. It’s illegal.
Morton, just wanted to say thank you for your sensible and patient postings in this and previous threads concerning RDR v WB. Please keep it going!
bud
For a while, I thought that poor SVA was being taken for a ride by RDR: he was a pawn in RDR’s game to get rich… that he had a signed agreement with RDR and that was a train he couldn’t actually get off, and RDR was the ‘villian’ here.
The quotes attributed to SVA in the article paint quite a different picture.
I’m sorry to say that I was giving SVA the benefit of the doubt, but now there is no doubt that he has some wrong-headed notions of what ‘fair use” is, and has made a career on the back of JKR’s work, but maybe got a bit too “greedy” for his own good.
As such, I support the dissolution of Leaky’s association with HPL… Leaky has always been the classiest-act in HPFandom, and this is just another case in point.
Steve is the one to blame here, Zebra, and not TLC, JKR, or WB. I support this decision by TLC and it couldn’t have been easy for them to do this, either.
Ask yourself:If Steve had just kept his work when he said “But without her permission I won’t publish it
If Steve had just remembered what he told others “I get email every so often from fans asking me to publish the Lexicon in book form, so I’ve dealt with this question before. Basically, it is illegal to sell a book like that. Jo has reserved all publishing rights to her intellectual property, which means that she’s the only one who may publish any book that is a guide or encyclopedia to her world. And since we’re fans and supporters of Jo, we wouldn’t do anything that would violate her rights, even if we could get away with it.” would he be in this pickle now? NO!!
If Steve hadn’t attempted to use the Floo Network in a profit making scheme without the knowledge of Melissa [a Floo Network webmaster] 50% of net income that is derived from ordering the Lexicon book online via clicking site links in the Floo Netwook would Steve be in this pickle now? NO!!
If Steve had written a book that fell within the letter of the copyright law and was absolutely ‘fair use’ would Steve be in this pickle now? NO!!
Don’t kid yourself and don’t try to kid others. It’s all down to Steve. He’s the one who’s in the wrong here.
@ Morton: I appreciate what you have to say on the issue and I’ve no wish to butt heads with you but I think my post is quite coherent. As the law currently stands there is no reason to allow the infringing work to go forward and insert grave instability into the status of copyright law. Laws can and do change, but as they have not yet done so, it in no way excuses Steve’s actions to date.
I’m proud of you Leaky, and sorry that you’ve had to make what must have been a very difficult decision. I stand by you. And if doing the right thing makes me or anyone on the Leaky staff a “sycophant”, then I, for one, will proudly wear that label.
(I’ve always gone by Kari in these comments before, but am now adding my middle name to distinguish between myself and the “Kari” who posted on page 4 of these comments, especially as she and I seem to have very different opinions on this issue. Not that anyone cares. I’m just sayin’.)
@GadgetDon
“Good people sometimes do things that they shouldn’t. They rely on bad advice, they don’t see the whole picture, and there are times in everyone’s lives where we add one and one and one and come up with five. The way I’ve seen both SVA and JKR behave during the lawsuit does nothing to make me think badly of either of them. It’s rough on both of them, and the best part of when this is resolved is that it will be resolved. The worst part of this is that people feel a need to choose sides, to say “I like you so I can’t like you”.”
With all due respect, and if you have read any of my (yes, I know, SO numerous) posts, you will note that I have refraigned from saying one thing or another regarding Leaky’s collective decision, I do not see how that decison is demonstrative of anything resembling making a choice between liking JKR or SVA.
All I see is a statement concerning differences of opinion and philosophical direction leading Leaky to make a decision to sever ties (though not to hang the Lexicon out to dry – they are continuing to pay for the website venue for the time being, which in itself says something about fairness and integrity, it seems to me).
Nor do I see them trying to force anyone agree with them. I understand their position, as I understand opposing positions stated with logic and thought (such as yours and many many others) and I support the right to make them. I just don’t see in Leaky’s statement anything along the lines of liking one or the other.
That, to me, is immaterial in any case, since I make my own decisions, have my own opinions, and shall continue to do so, regardless of any one statement or another.
No diatribe here, just wondering if I’m missing something that perhaps you saw, or is it merely a difference in interpretation, which is certainly to be expected.
At least in my humble opinion.
M.
Leaky, you did a brave a nobel thing. it takes a strong person (or in this case dedicated group of people) to do whay you have done. i support your efforts compleatly!!
My sympathy goes out to Leaky and AccioQuote. I hope things go smoothly with this breaking apart of the network. Big hugs for everyone.
When your stance on something that important is misaligned, let alone that they are polar opposites, its time to call it quits.
@GadgetDon
“Good people sometimes do things that they shouldn’t. They rely on bad advice, they don’t see the whole picture, and there are times in everyone’s lives where we add one and one and one and come up with five. The way I’ve seen both SVA and JKR behave during the lawsuit does nothing to make me think badly of either of them. It’s rough on both of them, and the best part of when this is resolved is that it will be resolved. The worst part of this is that people feel a need to choose sides, to say “I like you so I can’t like you”.”
With all due respect, and if you have read any of my (yes, I know, SO numerous) posts, you will note that I have refraigned from saying one thing or another regarding Leaky’s collective decision, I do not see how that decison is demonstrative of anything resembling making a choice between liking JKR or SVA.
All I see is a statement concerning differences of opinion and philosophical direction leading Leaky to make a decision to sever ties (though not to hang the Lexicon out to dry – they are continuing to pay for the website venue for the time being, which in itself says something about fairness and integrity, it seems to me).
Nor do I see them trying to force anyone agree with them. I understand their position, as I understand opposing positions stated with logic and thought (such as yours and many many others) and I support the right to make them. I just don’t see in Leaky’s statement anything along the lines of liking one or the other.
That, to me, is immaterial in any case, since I make my own decisions, have my own opinions, and shall continue to do so, regardless of any one statement or another.
No diatribe here, just wondering if I’m missing something that perhaps you saw, or is it merely a difference in interpretation, which is certainly to be expected.
At least in my humble opinion.
M.
@GadgetDon
“Good people sometimes do things that they shouldn’t. They rely on bad advice, they don’t see the whole picture, and there are times in everyone’s lives where we add one and one and one and come up with five. The way I’ve seen both SVA and JKR behave during the lawsuit does nothing to make me think badly of either of them. It’s rough on both of them, and the best part of when this is resolved is that it will be resolved. The worst part of this is that people feel a need to choose sides, to say “I like you so I can’t like you”.”
With all due respect, and if you have read any of my (yes, I know, SO numerous) posts, you will note that I have refraigned from saying one thing or another regarding Leaky’s collective decision, I do not see how that decison is demonstrative of anything resembling making a choice between liking JKR or SVA.
All I see is a statement concerning differences of opinion and philosophical direction leading Leaky to make a decision to sever ties (though not to hang the Lexicon out to dry – they are continuing to pay for the website venue for the time being, which in itself says something about fairness and integrity, it seems to me).
Nor do I see them trying to force anyone agree with them. I understand their position, as I understand opposing positions stated with logic and thought (such as yours and many many others) and I support the right to make them. I just don’t see in Leaky’s statement anything along the lines of liking one or the other.
That, to me, is immaterial in any case, since I make my own decisions, have my own opinions, and shall continue to do so, regardless of any one statement or another.
No diatribe here, just wondering if I’m missing something that perhaps you saw, or is it merely a difference in interpretation, which is certainly to be expected.
At least in my humble opinion.
M.
“It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends.”
Good for you. I don’t know Steve, but from what I’ve heard he’s a really good, decent person, and has been wonderful for the fandom so far. In this, however, he’s dead wrong. I can’t imagine how difficult it must have been for you guys to come to this decision, but it was the right one.