@ Ashley
I will try again..must be past my bedtime. I just read through a bunch of the Justia documents..no life I guess. When you read JKR/Warner Bros statements and RDR’s it looks as if RDR just flat out lies in their documents. And it is interesting SVA seems to be out of the legal loop and appears to be quite smug about all activity – he may perhaps make some money should the book be sold and is using the media and fan attention to promote future writings. And I would be interested to see if anyone had an answer to Shelli’s question asking if SVA could be named in the lawsuit as one of the “Does”. RDR of course wants to print and make money, and I think the Stanford Group has jumped in for their own agenda to make changes to existing laws regarding copyright and is volunteering and using RDR to achieve this. The defending group each seem to have their own very individual agendas. Interesting situation.
About Steve possibly being named as one of the “does”: This was asked in the leakylounge as well. I think the conclusion was that for that type of thing there is usually a time limit in which to name someone as a “doe” and chances are that in this case the time is up. But it could very well not be. So, no one knows for sure. No one could really agree and some of them are people who actually have some sort of degree to do with law.
“I can’t believe that these people are supposed to be professionals. No, scratch that, I can’t believe that these people are supposed to be adults. No, scratch that, I can’t believe that these people are supposed to be people.
I… I just… I’m speechless.”
Posted by Ashley on March 28, 2008 @ 11:03 PM
You make me laugh. lol. They’re lawyers! Not people! (no offense to any sane lawyers).
its not that they are lawyers that makes them bad people, its that they are not public lawyers. a public lawyer has no choice who they represent. public lawyers have the legal responciblity to ensure that their client, wether guilty or innocent (though in a criminal case, the law states innocent until proven guilty) they have to ensure their client gets a fair trial, and that the opposing side gives their client a fair trial. having lawyers is as much to defend a client against unfair tactics as it is to defend their clients interest. thats what objections are for, and trust me, having served on a criminal trial jury in the last few days, you get alot of objections from both sides.
however, private lawyers are a whole nother breed. my uncle is a public defender, because his moral compass says a fair trial is whats important. private lawyers can choose to represent a client or not. this is why we have so many morally bankrupted hollywood lawyers. they do it for promiences and recognition. look at gloria allred, i dont know her personally, so i cant say if she is a bad person, but she is a spotlight seeker. her celebrity comes by taking on high profile clients that get national attention. those types of lawyers are the lawyers who give lawyers a bad name. the stanford law fair use project only are thinking about themselves. they latch onto clients who can get them the spotlight, and given that RDR is being sued by jk rowling, they get a huge spotlight.
however, fundemntally, the fair use project is in the wrong. they want to destory copyright laws and take the rights away from people who actually work and create, to give to people who copy and paste and claim it as their own work.
as to steve, steve is likely not one of the doe’s, because he has been indemified by his vanity press (RDR Books is not a publisher in the sense of legitamatte publishing practices)
@ mollywobbles23
LOL. Nice one! However, while I’m not normally inclined to defend lawyers ;), I found the quote on RDR’s website, so I’m assuming it was made by publishers rather than lawyers. Still, the lack of professionalism is astounding.
What really had me feeling gobsmacked about that comment by RDR wasn’t so much the “they’re just being mean and trying to scare us” sentiment (though I certainly found that tacky), but the absurd implication that the WB chose to file on Halloween, the ZOMG SCARIEST DAY OF THE YEAR, in a deliberate attempt to spook them. You know, Halloween, MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Granted, RDR didn’t come right out and say it in those words (even they must have realized how spectacularly stupid it would have sounded), but the message they were trying to send comes through loud and clear, nonetheless. On that one page (here’s the link, btw, in case anyone cares: http://www.rdrbooks.com/lexicon_info.html), they mentioned three different times that the suit was filed on Halloween (as opposed to just saying October 31, like, you know, a grown-up would do). Their meaning is impossible to miss.
Really, how old are these people?
If Rowling wins the lawsuit it will give her COMPANY exclusive power to do whatever they wish concerning copyrights. That means wizard rock concerts, fan-based sites, even podcasts could all come under their control or eliminated based on copyright issue.
There are hundreds of fan-based reference guides for other genres (Star Wars, LOTR, etc.) and they are allowed to make their money, why? Because the real makers realize that they are going to make money any how. No matter what book JK puts out, it will make money hands down. She has become an image to many now. ‘OMG JK has a new book… I must buy it.”
I think the person who is not understanding things is JK and I support Steve 100%.
:waves at Anthony:
Welcome! Do tell us, in what capacity do you work for RDR? How many aliases do you have here at Leaky?
And also, do please pull up a chair and tell us why you lot aren’t creative enough to come up with different writing patterns and styles for these comments other than: (A) overly-verbose attorney (but always COMPLETELY unconnected with this case, of course!), spouting unsound legal rhetoric, which others immediately call you out on, (B) righteously indignant fandomer who insists that the sky is falling and the fandom’s gonna die and it’s David vs. Voldemort and why are they picking on the little guy and won’t someone PLEASE think of the children!, or© angry and grammatically-challenged young fan who types in incomplete sentences and entirely in lower case, who thinks the staff at Leaky is just a bunch of big mean JKR suckups who stabbed their friend in the back?
I mean, really. You’re just not even trying.
:waves at other lurking RDR people:
Well, just in case Anthony isn’t part of the vast RDR conspiracy:
Anthony, Jo already has that power. RDR has admitted the book is infringing. The Stanford lawyers want to change the fair use law and that’s why they took this case. Not because they think the Lexibook falls within fair use and should be published, but because it violates it completely and they want to make a court precedent for it.
Wizard rock falls under fair use, as some have already mentioned. It adds something completely new to the information from the books.
Jo has always allowed fan fiction, with a few hurdles at the beginning to establish her power (which, I reiterate, she already has).
So, if RDR, wins she loses that power. Why? Because she was kind and allowed the fansites, fanfiction, and music. So, what will she do to make sure it doesn’t happen again? Tell those sites to close shop. What will other authors and creators do? Probably the same so it doesn’t happen to them. If RDR wins, it will hurt the fandom, not help it. Steve doesn’t even seem to care anymore. I know, I asked him (see the comments in the Feb. 27th “What’s New” entry). He’s messed up fandom and he doesn’t even care! He’s “moving on.” Is that really a side you want to be on?
@Anthony. Interesting post because it is wrong on 4 counts. Usually 1 or 2 suffice, so well done for exceeding all previous posts: 1. JKR is not WB and no JKR is not a COMPANY. 2. No, winning the case will not give JKR exclusive rights over anything but her own copyright. 3. No, wizardrock, fansites, podcasts will not be controlled or eliminated should JKR win. The opposite might be true if SVA/RDR win as JKR/WB and all other copyright owners will be less tolerant of copyright infringement than they are at present. 4. No, reference guides, however many hundreds there are, are not allowed to infringe copyright, and, when they do so, do not go unchallenged. And, as an after-thought, no, Steve, astonishingly, does not understand. Or, perhaps more accurately, Steve, for the moment, chooses not to understand the consequences of his attempt at scattergun copyright infringement. But, it is probable that his understanding will be more fully revealed during the upcoming court case. That, in itself, will be worth the blanket press coverage, which, who knows, is possibly what SVA/RDR intended in the first place?
@ Monica,
You made me laugh so hard I spit my juice at the monitor. Thanks for that!
@ Mollywobbles23 and Rotfan07,
You both have the patience of a saint!
I’m becoming extremely tired of reading the comments left by people who are only repeating what SVA says. I think his comments are making people, the ones who do not know or bother to read what is being posted about the law, panic. They are on his side because they think the fandom will end or become more restricted if JKR/WB win. As everyone else has said:
- JKR ALREADY has the right/power to shut the sites down
- JKR will not gain any new power if she wins
Please go back through the 33 pages already posted and read what’s been said about copyright laws by those who know. If that’s too much, do your own research. It doesn’t help anyone to be misinformed. I understand there is loyalty to SVA and that’s fine, but don’t let loyalty cloud your judgment.
Thank you!
Sorry, I had to vent. It’s Monday morning and I still wish it was Sunday.
@ Anthony
“If Rowling wins the lawsuit it will give her COMPANY exclusive power to do whatever they wish concerning copyrights. That means wizard rock concerts, fan-based sites, even podcasts could all come under their control or eliminated based on copyright issue.”
As has been pointed out many times, JKR ALREADY as the right under Copyright Law to do anything she wants regarding her copyrighted material. If WB/JKR wins the case, that will NOT change.
As far as the other reference guides you mention, you must understand that there are essentially 3 kinds.
The first is the reference guide that uses the original material as a basis for discussion and analysis of that material. Because that type of guide adds new ideas and analyses, it is allowed under the Doctrine of Fair Use, even without getting permission from the original Copyright holder.
The second type is the reference guide that is a list of the original material, ordered in some way, either chronologically (i.e. by time) or alphabetically, or some combination, or in some cases by the original material … for example a guide that deals with a series of books in order of the appearance of the books. In the case of the Harry Potter series, ordering the list by book appearance is essentially chronological anyway, since the books deal with a year at Hogwarts each, in chronological order. For something like this, permission is needed, unless it can be shown to meet Fair Use (THIS case is of this type of guide, and the lawsuit SHOULD have to do with whether the Lexicon meets Fair Use principles or not .. if it does, RDR wins, if it doesn’t WB/JKR wins). This is the type of guide where lawsuits arise most often, I would say, because there is some question as to the compliance with Fair Use.
The 3rd type is where the book in question is authorized or otherwise is permitted by the original Copyright holder. This is, essentially, therefore, where there is permission (which is the Copytright holder’s right to grant, or not).
You should note that in some of the cases like this, the material is already considered to be in the Public Domain and permission, therefore, is not required. You should also be aware that some of these kinds of guides (of all 3 types above) have been pulled from the shelves or otherwise banned BECAUSE there was no permission and because they also did not meet the Fair Use guides.
NONE of these types of case is simple, and one cannot predict the outcome. If statistics are consulted, the majority of cases of the second type are won by the original Copyright holder. I know of no cases that arise where there is permission , i.e. the third type of case described above (hard pressed to think of how the case could be launched, except that something MORE or OTHER than what was permitted actually appeared). However, my not knowing of such a case doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, and if anyone knows, I would be interested in hearing about it here.
As always, all of the above is my humble opinion.
M.
Hi Heidy.. seems we were both responding at the same time, but, as usual, mine was so long that you got yours in first! Good one!
M.
@ Heidy
“Thank you for that perspective. It’s nice to hear from the writers/artists in the fandom.
Indulge me in a bit of speculation into the future. I would like to know if your views have changed as to what you would allow fans to do with your works, even if the law is not changed?”
Sorry for the delay in responding to this, but I didn’t want to let it go unanswered.
First, thanks for including me amongst the “writers” It is true that I’ve a few published articles, but they are all of the academic/research variety (what! you mean you couldn’t tell from my didactic, sometimes arrogant and ALWAYS lengthy prose???), so they don’t qualify amongst the “popular” type of writer I think you meant.
Notwithstanding that, I would like to respond. I KNOW none of you are suprised by THAT! Just remember, I’m OLD, and you are required to respect the old and listen to what they have to say. However, being a kind-hearted old curmudgeon, I waive the requirement for you all to sit with appropriate reverence, slack-jawed, hanging on my every word as if it was a golden nugget, without which your existence would be diminished!!! No need for that at all! A simple “Yes, Your Omnipotence” will do!)
Now, extracting my tongue from my cheek and letting it flap back on its rollers, let me carry on with the actual response!
I have to say that I would not be any different in my view of fandom regardless of the outcome of this case. I have always believed in the value that fans bring to a creation .. heck, without fans (even critical ones) the creation has little point, although there is much to be said for creating for oneself. But in my experience, creators do so in the hope that OTHERS will see, and like, the creation.
Having said that I have also always believed in the law, and upholding it. Therefore, I would be careful that people are not illegally profiting from my work by using it without permission. Using my work without permission would always be a concern to me, even if not for profit, though I would be inclined to learn for myself the allowable circumstances (i.e. Fair Use).
And still, I would not hesitate to participate to the extent possible in the endeavours of fans, because I would want to encourage their creativity. Who can say whether from the ranks of the many talented and dedicated Potter fans another JKR will come, creating works that delight and engage and entertain. Who can say whether BECAUSE of JKR’s encouragement such a fan has the drive to go on, and because of her example that fan has the will to persevere despite hardships and difficult times. Who am I to inhibit that. And please note, I use JKR as an example but there are others who do the very same thing, and I applaud them all.
To be sure, the difficulty I have with some of the posters here is that they assume that JKR is NOT such an example, and that, at least by extrapolation, other creators also are selfish. You know, maybe I am naive, but I believe that most people are kind-hearted and willing to share and help and encourage where and when they can. But I think (I certainly HOPE) I’m not wrong about this.
Now, what would I do if somebody DID try to steal my work, or otherwise use it without permission? I would do exactly what WB/JKR are doing, because there is a principle involved as well as the law itself. And win or lose I would still want to encourage the fans. The only difference would be how I do it. If it became clear that I would have to aggressively protect my work, I wouldn’t hesitate to do so. And yet I would still encourage the fans. I would make my position known, I would explain how I would want to help, and I would explain what I would set as my limits of tolerance (which would be based on the law, of course). And you know, that is how I would want to do it regardless of whether this case existed or not.
And, just so, I believe, is the way JKR has looked at it as well. Else she wouldn’t have allowed some of the things the fans have done in the first place. I believe she has approached the fan base as I have described, and has been more than generous with her time and encouragement, while maintaining a clear point beyond which neither she nor the fans should be going.
As a last point, from my part, all this could be very different if I were as famous and successful as JKR, because time becomes something that others expect you to give, advice likewise, and to be honest, it takes a special person not to be swayed in either direction by that attention and fame. JKR could as easily have said no from the beginning or could as easily have allowed too much. It is a difficult thing, but I believe she (and others in the same “boat”) have managed to keep their balance and their sanity along with it.
At least, in my humble opinion.
Please Note: Tongue unhinged from rollers and stuffed back in cheek.
Heidy, Mollywobbles, Cara, Cathy, NotTheHBP, and so many others… you know who you are… what say we send a letter to Melissa, offering our assistance in her further work, noting that, of course, we ONLY want to help, and when she turns us down (politely, of course) we… no .. never mind.. we aren’t going down that road.
Tongue back on rollers. :)
M.
To those who don’t feel SVA truly understands the ramifi-ramafi—consequences of this suit===
He has said numerous times that he is a librarian. As a properly trained librarian he would be well versed in the issues of Copyright vs Fair Use. In fact he told others who were interested in a similar project that it would be illegal to do so. I’m just a lowly staff member and I know this is a big time no-go. Heck! I knew that my first year of college.
It seems to me (and I’m no expert) that it wasn’t until he was turned down for a position he solicited with JKR’s literary agent that publishing the Lexibook came to be. At least that’s what I can piece together from the timing so far.(I’m stuck at 39 Exhibit A ). Any thoughts?
@ Morton
Beautifully said. As JKR has been inspired and encouraged by other artists so has she tried to pass on the same inspiration and encouragement.
Perfect!
@ Ashley