@ Shelli; SVA has said he was committed to leaving his job, family, and community as early as Spring/Summer 2007 to come to the UK and write his HP series of books and establish himself as a writer. He was refused the self-proposed job with JKR in the early summer. He did not approach RDR in August 2007, they approached him. It looks as though Rapaport told him the book was not infringing or if it was it shouldn’t be and suggested his company publish a part of the Lexicon that was (by law) most infringing, namely the A-Z list that is essentially 85-90% copied directly from HP.

What is interesting about SVA’s position is that: 1. He is a librarian and knows or should know copyright law. 2. He is a fan who knows Rowling’s wishes. 3. He is a fan who knows what a certain section of the fandom would feel about infringing JKR’s copyright and going against her express wishes re an encyclopedia. 4. He has publicly stated what he is doing is: a) illegal (May 2005); b) he would never go against JKR’s wishes; c) he has and would continue to discourage anyone from publishing an encyclopedia. 5. He has accused JKR of threatening what his actions are most likely to result in should he/RDR succeed namely: divide fandom, limit fandom’s creative outlets, limit fandom creativity, and close down fan sites. 6. He has put the following people in an invidious position: staff at Scholastic; Lexicon staff; Leaky staff; JKR, and, her staff; Floo Network Staff; large sections of fandom; RDR itself (because SVA probably does not own the copyright to the Lexicon), and that’s just for starters. 7. He has alienated very many of the people he has worked with in the United States, and according to one report I read many of the community he left behind, including family. 8. He has left his country, his job, his family, and his community in search of becoming a published author, which, he assures us will occur this July.

Can we surmise anything from this? His testimony in court will be highly revealing should he be called in court. But let’s say SVA wanted a change, and not only of scenery. I am older than SVA and can understand the itch, I’m just not so sure I could scratch it as ferociously as he has appeared to.

Apologies for my ignorance (and nosiness), but has anyone on the Lexicon staff publicly taken a stand one way or the other regarding SVA’s actions? I haven’t heard anything, but then, I might just be out of the loop in that regard.

SVA appears to have fallen in the trap of believing his own publicity. My son and I have read JKR’s series more than a dozen times. The meticulous attention detail never ceases to fascinate me. To merely catalogue her extensive efforts without the benefit of her other unique insights seems to be a pale imitation (but I’m no expert).

I too, would love to move to those greener climes.  I am currently working on my BA (okay, so I'm a REALLY LATE BLOOMER) and would love to study in Ireland during my graduate years (did I mention I was a late bloomer).  If you're really meant to be a writer you can do it ANYWHERE. JKR did it in coffee shops, trains, etc.  I bet she even did it in the presence of her family.

That’s so true: you can do it anywhere, any time. I remember one New Year’s Eve (at home) I got up and left my family and our guests to go jot down a short little story. (A story about a story being told, which shows how green and insecure in my writing I was and still am, but still). The kind of writing Steve seems interested in isn’t even very creative (ignoring the Lexibook). It’s all to do with someone else’s creativity, which is a lot less daunting. It’s mostly research, if he does it write next go ‘round. Sorry, but I wrote the short version of that kind of stuff, half-awake at 3AM my freshman year of college.

@ mollywobbles23 and Shelli I think I agree with davidenglish on the Forum that SVA is researching and writing about the locations and geography of the series for one book of several in his own book series on HP. He would need to come to the UK to get the feel of them and for descriptions’ sake. His writing style is engaging (see davidenglish’s links to his other works on the forum) and fun, and an easy read. I may disagree with his judgement calls on almost every aspect of this case but I have no problem identifying a keen mind, an easygoing style, and a sense of fun in his work; plus, of course, an obsessive attention to detail. My serious doubts concern depth and maturity. God knows there is a dearth of it around; it’s just that SVA, in this case, seems to have accumulated more than his fair share. It is difficult to be honest, mature, sensitive, considerate, and intelligent, at the best of times but SVA lost it when it came to his encyclopaedia. That’s my guess. Can I understand his frustration and impatience? Yes. Do I blame him for the damage and hurt he has caused. Absolutely – for one reason and one reason alone: he is responsible for his actions. He is intelligent and knows copyright law, fandom, the series and its meaning as well, if not better, than anyone else.

There may be one big problem though and I have a feeling this is why we have heard nothing but a deafening silence from Lexicon staff. He might not own Lexicon copyright. He may have gambled that the myriad contributors would not challenge either him or his team but he may be in for a nasty shock if the book goes ahead and WB/JKR lose. The gloves will be off and every single contributor will be tracked down and asked by WB lawyers whether they gave their consent to SVA/Lexicon team owning their copyright. If any of them say no, that will be just the beginning of the trouble for SVA/Lexicon staff. And, of course, if RDR have a change of mind at any time, realising that neither SVA or the Lexicon staff actually own the copyright, RDR may pull out or worse, sue SVA and the Lexicon staff. But, I am assuming a lot and in any case this will only happen months or even years down the line. Nevertheless, it is an unpleasant prospect for all concerned.

@ Morton,

@ Rotfang07

”. . . .can understand the itch, I’m just not so sure I could scratch it as ferociously as he has appeared to.”

LOL! My favorite statement thus far.

Rotfang07 made a good point about possible challenging from the contributors. Well, they know what’s going on so would they say anything now or would they wait until after the trial?

Has anyone had contact with any member of the HPL? I know mollywobbles23 got a response directly from SVA a few days ago, but what about the rest of the staff. I would like to know if they support SVA or if there is dissension amongst them. I wonder if they were privy to SVA’s plan?

@Heidy (and by implication, Rotfang)

“Rotfang07 made a good point about possible challenging from the contributors. Well, they know what’s going on so would they say anything now or would they wait until after the trial?”

I think a good point was made regarding potential follow-up legal action. But I think that at this point, as is the case with much else on this issue, it is not possible to say for certain. I believe one of two things has happened.

Either RDR lawyers have counseled HPL staff to say nothing (possibly under threat of suit, though this is PURE speculation) until after the case is decided (and yes, Rotfang, I, too, think this could take years of appeals and counter-appeals and so on).

Or, and I think this is more likely, HPL staff are not fools (nor do I think SVA is, though his advice might have been wanting), and realize that if they get involved now, either for or against the case, they could be dragged into it, possibly to their detriment, despite their not wanting to be.

I’d bet that after the decision, there will be a number of stories and comments arising from a lot of people, HPL staff amongst them, supporting the decision, or not, depending on what they hoped would happen.

There is another, possibly even likelier … maybe they have ALREADY spoken. Depositions might have been requested by lawyers from both sides (yes, Discovery would have revealed this, IF the depositions were requested prior to Discovery, otherwise, they may appear in Court proceedings as after_the_fact additions to the documentation).

And further, it is possible that some of the posters, here and on other sites as well, have been HPL staff , expressing their opinions, both for and against SVA or, conversely, WB/JKR (I wouldn’t begin to speculate who, or if, indeed this is even true).

To quote Lewis Carroll’s Alice (in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland)... “curiouser and curiouser”!

At least in my humble opinion.

M.

@ Rotfang: You said:

“There may be one big problem though and I have a feeling this is why we have heard nothing but a deafening silence from Lexicon staff. He might not own Lexicon copyright. “

While this is pure speculation on my part, I believe you may be partially correct. I don’t think that SVA owns the copyright on the essay portion of the Lexicon, and it’s my opinion (for whatever that’s worth) that that is why none of the essays were included in the book. However, I do believe that SVA owns the copyright on the lexicon part of the lexicon, which is what is being included in the book. I hope that makes sense. :)

@ Rotfang

“There may be one big problem though and I have a feeling this is why we have heard nothing but a deafening silence from Lexicon staff. He might not own Lexicon copyright. He may have gambled that the myriad contributors would not challenge either him or his team but he may be in for a nasty shock if the book goes ahead and WB/JKR lose.”

I have been thinking about this idea and there is some merit to it, though, as is the case with ALL this stuff, it may be VERY complicated. Here’s my take on it…

I think that as far as the website is concerned SVA, or some group including SVA owns copyright. From a copyright Law perspective, this includes potentially EVERYTHING on that site (including the lexicon part itself) but ONLY as it appears on the sight. You may be aware that a copyright holder can, in fact, copyright somebody else’s copyrighted material as his or her own, in his or her OWN format … copyright has to do with both content and presentation.

However, this can ONLY happen if the originally copyrighted material is available under Fair Use, or is used with permission. So the case is still open regarding that aspect. And, under ANY circumstances, the original material remains the property of the copyright holder unless she or he legally assigns ownership to some other person or organization. All in all, the issue of Fair Use/Permission is still at the heart of this.

But now, enter Rotfang’s conjecture and the thought it planted.. the fact is that for the website EXCLUDING the lexicon part, there are OTHER contributors. The principle in law is that the author holds copyright, whether registered or not. So unless a copyright holder of a conglomeration of material can show he or she owns copyright on ALL that material, or has permission to use it, he or she is infringing copyright, except under Fair Use. The REALLY fascinating aspect here is that the JKR material used for the NON_lexicon stuff could very readily be used under Fair Use. However, once it appeared in the commentary format on the website, the original contributor has to give permission for it to be used, or you have infringement. The only possible mitigating factor in this latter eventuality is that the analysis is used as the basis for further, NEW analysis, which would be hard to envision.

So, the lexicon part may be infringing on JKR copyright, unless Fair Use can be proved, and the REST of the site may be infringing on other people’s copyright (the contributors) unless agreements of joint copyright or other permission can be proved.

This would, if taken to its possible ultimate conclusion, mean that SVA could be sued by every contributor to the non_lexicon part of the total material, and then also by RDR if they lose the case. Why RDR? Because RDR indemnified SVA from suit by WB/JKR, but NOT from themselves. If RDR loses, can one not envision them turning on SVA and claiming he should have known, as the author, what he had done? And further (I can hear RDR saying), while they, the publisher, have a responsibility to check things out, they relied on SVA’s good intent, knowledge of authorshp, librarianship and sense of fair play, and whatever else they can think of, and were, therefore misled by him.

This could become a VERY sticky wicket indeed!

At least in my humble opinion.

M.

@ Laurie:

Steve can only copyright his “contribution” not any of Rowling’s re-organized works. The re-organized material is still copyrighted to Rowling and her permission still must be sought for its usage OR the book must meet Fair Use.

Remove all of Rowling’s copyrighted materials and what exactly is there for Steve to copyright on his site or in the book? Not much.

The essays, editorials, and fan art are copyrighted to others, not Steve.

As for the site and the book, as has been pointed out on the LeakyLounge, the site and the book are very much “collective works”. What does that mean, one might ask? The Supreme Court ruled:

According to Section 201©, the copyright in an author’s contribution to a collective work belongs to the author unless the author transfers copyright ownership to the publisher. Copyright ownership of the collective work belongs to the publisher. A copyright owner of a collective work who does not have copyright ownership of the individual contributions to the collective work is only permitted to reproduce and distribute (1) the contribution as part of the collective work, (2) any revision of the collective work, and (3) any later collective work in the same series.

Unless everyone who has contributed to the Lexicon site/book have signed away the rights to what they’ve contributed, then Steve does not own copyrights to the work he’s trying to publish.

@Cara

“Unless everyone who has contributed to the Lexicon site/book have signed away the rights to what they’ve contributed, then Steve does not own copyrights to the work he’s trying to publish.”

True, but alo if the contributors received any (and I mean ANY) compensation for the work, or were considered employees of HPL, then the work is the copyright of the employer.

I know it may be unlikely, but if there was an employer/employee relationship, or ther was any consideration “paid” to the contributors, they do NOT maintain copyright.

M.

And I had another long posting with some details about the differences between Fair Use (U.S.) and Fair Dealing (Canada, where I reside) that disappeared into the ether again. Another mysteriously empty page!

Perhaps Sybil can divine (using, of course, her Inner Eye, or the Crystal Orb, or perhaps the tea leaves) where the posting went!!

M.

@ Morton

Well completely off topic…I knew we had something in common – I am Canadian as well.

@ Cara, I agree with davidenglish and your line of argument that SVA probably does not own copyright to even the A-Z Lexicon for 2 reasons: 1. as davidenglish and you point out it is a collective work. 2. again as davidenglish pointed out the old site has no claimer/disclaimer saying that all fan/non-Lexicon staff contributions become the property of the site, or are copyrighted exclusively to the site.

This presents several possibilities, that almost certainly early contributors, and very probably recent ones, could claim copyright or insist their permission was not given for their contributions to be published. Secondly, as a collective work each contributor has to have been consulted re the book and there is no evidence that this was/is the case.

We are then faced with the prospect of RDR claiming that he was sold a car with stolen parts in it. This then gets very complicated because the ‘police’ could demand the removal of the parts, the original owners could ask they be returned to them, the purchaser of the car could be told it was his fault “buyer beware”, the purchaser could also claim he was deliberately duped therefore he is not at fault (then as M says he could sue in turn), the purchaser could claim he was sold the car under false pretences that it was not a car at all etc.

But, weirdest and most wonderfully ironic of all, SVA could end up having his alleged copyright to the Lexicon challenged. His “baby” may not end up belonging to him at all; any Tom Dick and Harry could use it or claim ownership and copyright. Sound familiar?

I just wanted to add that I see SVA’s book as something like a car upon which SVA has lavished and invested an enormous amount of time and energy but whose core components were all stolen or donated. As long as the car remained in the garage or back yard and he worked on it as a hobby no one was too bothered but as soon as he attempted to sell it all sorts of issues then arise.

Such as: Is it even really his car to sell?