We owe quite a few updates tonight, and there is an important announcement following (since the information in this post is vital to that announcement, so make sure to read the whole thing):
Firstly, the April 14 trial in the JKR/WB vs. RDR Books case will be a bench trial, meaning that there will be no jury. A witness list is due by April 4.
Secondly, Steve Vander Ark of the Harry Potter Lexicon gave an interview recently to BlogHogwarts, which Alejandro of BlogHogwarts kindly sent to us in the original English (it was translated to Spanish for the site):
* * *
“Do you think that, if Lexicon wins the case, the Harry Potter fansites are going to be affected in any way(Lexicon Online included)?
A victory for RDR Books will protect the rights of fans to create based on someone else’s work. If RDR Books loses, copyright holders will be given broad new control over fan activity, control which will allow them to shut down sites, stop authors from writing about their works, etc. So a win for RDR Books is definitely in the best interest of fans who create websites, write fanfiction, make wands, compose wizard rock, and so on. I am surprised how many fans have missed this point. Their freedom to create is on the line here.
How many pages does the Lexicon book have?
The Lexicon book will have around 400 pages. It’s 160,000 words. The book has four authors. I am the main author, but three of my Lexicon editors worked on the book as well.
If the Lexicon is published, once the Scottish Book gets out, will you still update Lexicon Online and Book?
I’m as excited to buy Rowling’s Scottish book as anyone! It will be very different from the Lexicon book, with a lot of new and exciting information which only Rowling can provide. I will continue to update the Lexicon website. I love working on the Lexicon and will do so even if I have no staff and even when people don’t read Harry Potter much anymore. Beyond that, I have written another book, called In Search of Harry Potter, which will be published in July. I’m starting on another one as well. I intend this series of books to comprise a complete independent reference library to Harry Potter. The second and third books will not generate the kind of legal concern that the Lexicon book has, thankfully.
Do you consider that your fanatism or admiration to J.K. Rowling is less now after all that have happened?
My admiration for the Harry Potter books is as great as ever. I’m still a huge fan. I’m also still a fan of Rowling, although I think her current actions are unfortunate and badly advised. I still admire her as a writer and a person and I don’t expect that to change just because she and I have a disagreement over a legal issue. Friends can disagree and still be friends.”
* * *
And finally, we have a very important and related announcement regarding the status of the Floo Network.
The following is an announcement that contains commentary.
The interview quoted above contains a number of assessments about J.K. Rowling’s intentions and what the Lexicon case means for fandom as a whole. The comments sat uneasily with many of us as soon as we learned about them, and prompted a discussion among our entire staff about Leaky’s association with the Harry Potter Lexicon, in which it became overwhelmingly clear that Steve’s thoughts on this matter and ours differ so greatly as to be polar opposites; we do not think a win for J.K. Rowling means tighter controls on fan creativity at all, and are concerned for the opposite, as well as the attempt to misportray the issues of the case as stated in sworn affadavits. So, after a few days of careful and many-sided discussion, we, as a full staff, decided that people who have such a fundamental disconnect in beliefs cannot and should not be partners in name or spirit, and two days ago informed the Lexicon that we are severing our association.
There were many who called for this since the day the lawsuit was filed, and on many occasions since, but we decided to wait to make the final decision until we were able to shake out more about the case and the beliefs of the parties involved. Now that it has been made clear to us that the Lexicon’s leader and we disconnect on such a fundamental level regarding fandom, it would be disingenuous to continue calling ourselves partners.
We had intended not to make this decision until the case was completed, so as to not sway public opinion. The comments in question, however, combined with the suit’s history and revelations therein, make us too uneasy to continue affiliation for a moment longer. We had also wanted to refrain from offering commentary on the case, but we all agree that if it meant the continued propagation of comments against our beliefs by someone so visibly associated with us, silence could not be maintained.
That it was a fully supported decision doesn’t mean it wasn’t very hard for this staff, who have for so long considered the Lexicon an ally in all things. The staff was sobered and saddened to find itself walking so uniformly toward this decision, even knowing it was the right one. We have enjoyed an excellent five years as a member of the Floo Network, and don’t regret that time for a moment. We wish everyone associated with the Lexicon health and happiness in the future.
We plan to retain strong affiliations with Accio Quote, though how it would manifest depends on some future decisionmaking, as things are slightly upended right now. This decision in no way affects the regard and admiration we continue to have for Lisa Bunker and her staff, or for Belinda Hobbs and the work she has done on the main Floo page; we hope to remain closely associated with them and their sites. In addition we strenuously discourage anyone from taking frustration for this decision out on any associated staff members, of the Lexicon or any other site. This was not a decision based on hate and hurt, it was rooted in the sad realization that we are much too different now to remain partners.
As for what this means, more functionally: This essentially means the Floo Network has been dismantled, as the network would be, then, Leaky projects and Accio Quote, and that’s more a partnership than a network. (We will sort out what to do with the main Floo page, and its content, as well.) There have been many asking, since November, whether Steve would return to PotterCast: That answer is now no. And while Leaky has always owned the hp-lexicon.org domain and paid for the site’s hosting, we’ve promised to transfer the domain to Steve as soon as litigation is complete (a stipulation that would not have been made had ownership not been mentioned in court documents). We will continue to pay for hosting and provide free support until that day.
This has been very emotional and trying for the staff here so we hope you’ll forgive our little foray into the commentary area. Since people are by nature opinionated, and we are all human, we wanted to keep the personal opinions we all have separate from the pages here, which is why after the first few weeks of figuring out what was going on with this case, we began to stick to linking to and summarizing court documents and other publicly available pieces, and trying to ask further questions to clear up misconceptions when they occurred. The rationale there is that if it’s publicly available there’s an easy check on its accuracy, and goodness knows our users are nothing if not close readers. We have been mentioned time and again in these proceedings, which makes us involved to a certain, small extent; therefore the coverage will continue to be simple linking-to and explaining-in-layman’s-terms legal documents, so you can easily read them yourself if there’s ever any doubt what we say is true. That said, we don’t expect any significant public documents until reports start surfacing of the April 14 trial; there might be a few article updates and more interviews, but mostly we are waiting for the courtroom proceedings to occur. As usual, we’ll keep you updated to the best of our ability.
Thank you for understanding, and as always, we thank you in advance for your civility and respect to each other in the comments.
I’m in the minority here, but I re-read Steve’s comments a few times and don’t understand what the big deal is. It didn’t seem to me that he was trying to say that JKR personally intends to squash anything as far as fan creativity. I think he was just trying to point out that every court decision sets a precedent and can be used as such in future cases. I think he was just saying that a ruling against him and RDR COULD be used in the future to block fan creativity, not that JKR WILL use it that way.
Go to Justia and read some of the exhibits that WB has provided as support for their suit.
1. As a trained librarian he knows very well (and has said so and in fact has discouraged others from attempting such a publication) that this book infringes on JKR’s copyright.
2. He implies that should RDR LOSE it would be bad for fandom. As stated many times by many others, JKR is simply exercising rights SHE ALREADY HAS. She could have made it miserable for fandom from the start if she had chosen. She has instead encouraged fan works that follow the standards of Fair Use and abide by Copyright law.
3. This suit would have died long ago (IMHO) if Stanford hadn’t decided to use it as a test case to stretch beyond recognition the current standard of Fair Use. Intellectual Property rights and open access are hot button topics on campuses everywhere.
This case might serve their purposes nicely (and other members of academia as well). I am not so sure it would be such a kewl thing for fandom. But I’m no expert.
“I’m in the minority here, but I re-read Steve’s comments a few times and don’t understand what the big deal is. It didn’t seem to me that he was trying to say that JKR personally intends to squash anything as far as fan creativity. I think he was just trying to point out that every court decision sets a precedent and can be used as such in future cases. I think he was just saying that a ruling against him and RDR COULD be used in the future to block fan creativity, not that JKR WILL use it that way.”
Aside from what Shelli pointed out above, one very important issue, that has actually been repeated numerous times, is that a win by WB/JKR actually changes nothing. Under current copyright law (even INCLUDING Fair Use), the owner of the copyright already has EXCLUSIVE control over the use of the material, except if permission is given or it falls under the Doctrine of Fair Use. And a simple way of thinking about the Doctrine of Fair Use is to imagine it as a circumstance that recognizes that material has been infringed, but allows such infringement under certain conditions (this is in line with several explanations from lawyers and the copyright law itself).
So a loss by RDR, which can only be because the material is considered NOT to comply with the Fair Use principles, and is therefore a disallowed infringement, means that THAT book (The Lexicon book) cannot be published. However such a ruling does not speak to any of the fandom works and so on that are already out there, nor to future ones. Nothing changes.
Now, having said that, if WB/JKR wins, I could envision not a shutdown of fandom, but a clarification/specification by authors on what they agree they can live with without giving up their control of their copyrighted material. This would be done to prevent this sort of case from arising again. Please understand that it will probably NOT stop it from happening. For any organization wishing to actually test the limits of the law, this sort of case will continue to crop up. The issue for the defendants is really not whether the material ingringes, since they’ve admitted it does. Rather they want a change in the law to ALLOW even MORE infringement on a broader basis, essentially.
However, if RDR wins this case, THEN you will see something signifanct. It won’t be a shut down of fandom per se, but more a very rapid withering of the concept because NO author will consent to their material being used in any way. Why? Beause the effect of a win by RDR is to say that infringemet IS allowed on a broader scale than ever before, and an author’s protection of his or her material is impossible if it is allowed to be used in fan websites, articles, etc.
I have read all of the interviews since this began, as this whole thing seemed to have started from a disagreement between SVA and WB over his timeline. WB used his timeline as Bonus Footage on several Harry Potter DVD’s (don’t remember exactly which ones at the moment) taken straight from the Lexicon website. The timeline was updated, but had an error in it, yet each update appeared on the next DVD with the error. Now to put that into perspective…imagine posting a drawing of the trio on your My Space page, then when you buy your next Harry Potter DVD…your drawing is there…without warning. Then you post more drawings, and they end up on the Deathly Hallows DVD. You’re first reaction is flattery…but then it wears off after a while as you realize you’re not credited for the drawings on the DVD because its about Harry Potter.
The whole thing I believe is based on a complete misunderstanding and fear from J.K. Rowling. From what I understand from interviews from SVA and RDR, the book covers commentary on the books, not really touching base on the encyclopedia that he could have done. I think the only reason SVA was singled out was because of that fear. Still despite this, Steve shows no hard feelings towards Jo, and I strongly believe this mess was more on the Warner Brothers side than Jo’s.
As far as Leaky’s decision, I realize it was hard, but it is sad to think that when the chips are down your friends abandon you, even if you don’t agree, because they are afraid to get involved. When he was talking about ownership, he was referring to what was on the site, what he has worked years to compile for us the fans, and yes, even J.K. Rowling herself. Is Steve right or wrong? Does it really matter? This case has already destroyed friendships, dissolved the Floo Network, and now Leaky is going to wait until “litigation ends” to turn over ownership of his domain and website hosting? Sad….really sad situation.
I can see things from both sides. As far a rights go, you are “technically” published on a webpage, as you would be in a book. You can make money from both however, with a book you can reach a different audience and many times make more money, although you can reach a larger audience with a webpage.
I think Leaky should have stuck to their original plan and waited until after the trial was over. Despite what has been said here about hime, I still think Steve Van Ark is biggest Harry Potter fan of us all, and has been for years. There has been no disrespect in any interviews that I have seen for this community or J.K. Rowling, yet all I just heard on Pottercast was about his lack of disrespect for us as fans and Jo. That’s the whole reason he started the book in the first place. For those who didn’t have access to the internet…so I don’t know. It’s Leaky’s decison, I guess.
Thank you Shelli and Morton for your responses. I think I can see the other side better now. I guess that’s what’s dangerous about SVA’s comments—someone like me, who doesn’t now the details of the case or copyright law, takes what he says at face value, even if it’s not exactly true. Thanks for setting me straight.
Are all OLD people Canadians…hmmm. Well I have noticed that in my area there are an exceptional number of very old people driving around in huge, massive cars. Reminds me of the people in Florida. Oh, wait a minute all the old people in Florida are Canadian. Making a note to myself – get rid of huge, massive car and buy sportier, younger model.
@ Trevorsmom
Regarding your comments about the Leaky making their decision to distance themselves from the Lexicon. Under the circumstances I think they needed to do this and I believe that they are the group that felt that they had been betrayed and their friendship and cooperation with the Lexicon was not valued. From their postings and comments on Pottercast it would seem that this was not a hasty decision – just a necessary one.
I don’t think anyone fears JKR. She and WB are trying to protect their property. SVA wants to be a published author, RDR wants to publish their book and should they win this case, open the floodgates to this type of book and future business and the Stanford Group of want to change the rules as they are lawyers that represent “Cyber-World” clients that would benefit from the change.
I’ll admit, I never saw saw this coming, but after listening to the latest PotterCast, I must say that I agree wholeheartedly with Melissa and the Leaky staffers. Best of luck to you all. <3
I have to say that I must have been reading and listening to different reports and broadcasts than you have, because I have seen, heard and read a great deal of disrespect on RDR’s side and certainly from purported “fans”, thoug who they really are is, of course, anyone’s guess.
However, you need to get your facts straight. SVA’s book is not the “only one singled out”.. there have been others, and for exactly the same reasons, that is copyright infringement. If you read RDR’s statement to the courts, they admit that what they have done is infringe on JKR’s copyright. What they, and particularly their Stanford lawyers, are saying is, they don’t agree with the law as it stands and want it changed (by winning this case) to allow the infringement that they have admitted to doing to become legally acceptable.
So there has been no “singling out”, it is clearly admitted that what SVA/RDR have done is illegal under the law as it stands, and they are taking their chances.
As to the point about fear… I am assuming, as it was not entirely clear to me from reading, that you mean JKR was afraid. I think all the evidence points to the idea that there is NO fear on either side. This is a case being handled according to the law, and we shall see what happens.
At least in my humble opinion.
ps, typed this faster than I am really able, so apologies for typos!
@Trevorsmom
I think you have fallen into a rather interesting trap, one that RDR was possibly counting on. You say you have read the interviews but do not mention the court documents. The court documents are often at odds with the interviews. This partly explains TLC’s statement: “as well as the attempt to misportray the issues of the case as stated in sworn affidavits.”
The SVA Timeline is a red herring and your example of the drawing is an exquisite example of copyright infringement. If the drawing is based upon any image created by WB how on earth could it be considered the artist’s? It’s just a copy of WB’s work. The Timeline is based upon information from JKR’s books, any child could have drawn it, but remember ALL the information contained in it belongs to JKR and NOBODY else. It ALL came from her imagination and by law it is all her copyright. The proof that SVA/RDR have NO case whatsoever over the Timeline is that they dropped the issue like a hot potato in their subsequent arguments to the court precisely because they realised that they didn’t have a leg to stand on in law. But, it does make for a really good red herring.
You say you saw no evidence of disrespect by Steve towards JKR. Here’s his take on JKR’s motivation and attitude to fandom (as well as his own):
“Part of the problem all along has been the automatic assumption on the part of many that Rowling has the right to completely control anything written about the Harry Potter world. That’s quite a huge power grab on her part and from everything I can tell, not legal. You and I are part of a subculture that lives off the creative work of others. We always try to do that in a legal and respectful way. However, if Rowling manages to extend her reach that far into our subculture, she will choke us off very quickly. And if she doesn’t, what’s to stop the next person from taking this legal precedent to even more dangerous places?”’ [21 Jan]
Source: http://news.ansible.co.uk/a247.html
It is important to understand that SVA is either ignoring his own stated belief that to copy her work through an encyclopaedia is “illegal” (his words on Lexicon May 2005), or he is deliberately misleading the reader. To put it crudely he has either made a total U turn, or, he is dissembling.
You say there is commentary in the Lexicon book. Please visit Justia.com, the book is there for all to see. There is barely any commentary and what there is can only be described as feeble at best (assuming he is not treating his potential children’s or reader’s intelligence with contempt).
The other explanation for TLC’s comment “as well as the attempt to misportray the issues of the case as stated in sworn affidavits” is this little gem from SVA:
“A victory for RDR Books will protect the rights of fans to create based on someone else’s work. If RDR Books loses, copyright holders will be given broad new control over fan activity, control which will allow them to shut down sites, stop authors from writing about their works, etc. So a win for RDR Books is definitely in the best interest of fans who create websites, write fanfiction, make wands, compose wizard rock, and so on. I am surprised how many fans have missed this point. Their freedom to create is on the line here.”
This is total bunkum for reasons that have been endlessly stated on the Forum and Comment pages:
1. The law will only be changed if JKR loses NOT if she wins. JKR HAS to protect her copyright by law, and Fair Use will continue as normal should JKR win.
2. If RDR win Fair Use will have had its meaning and purpose fundamentally altered, and author’s copyright will be substantially eroded.
3. It is precisely as a result of this change that authors will have no choice but to be far more stringent with the fandom. Not the other way around. As a result fandom’s so-called “rights” will be eroded NOT protected.
4. A win for JKR/WB will in no way restrict fan activity. Precisely the opposite. It will ensure that author’s copyright is protected and therefore allow JKR to continue to be generous with her copyright to the fans and thus perpetuate the fans’ “freedom to create”. What it will not do is allow the fans to steal.
5. Fair Use and Copyright parameters are clear and SVA/RDR have almost certainly broken almost all of them, or do not meet any of them.
If the court decides otherwise this will be one of the most revolutionary changes in the law assuming a higher court confirms the decision. This is not impossible but highly unlikely because it will drive a horse and cart through copyright law, bring the law itself into disrepute, and the courts will be besieged and paralysed by copyright cases.
I have to apologize. I was not as objective as ZI hoped I was in my last response .. to Trevorsmom. My only excuse is I was rushed and having a less than perfect day. I think my statements were right, I noted that it was my opinion, but I think the tone was less tolerant than I would have liked.
Now, this could be construed as perhaps the Canadian penchant for apologizing, even when nobody else sees the need (Cathy can back me up on this very Canadian trait, no doubt), but believe me when I say it is not.
I try very hard to be polite, because I never know if what I am saying is going to affect someone else in any deletorious way, and I would not want to seem like I am either belittling anyone, or do not take their opinion seriously…. else how could I hope to have others take MY opinion seriously.
In the afore-mentioned response (see above), I made a statement that might be interpreted as saying that the writer did not know what they were talking about. Rotfang responded better by saying perhaps not ALL the available material was being used to formulate an opinion, whereas I may have implied that perhaps there was some intent not to state all the facts as they existed. Everybody has an opinion, and they all should be respected. We don’t always have to agree, but we should listen with respect and respond with respect, I believe..
In any case, I apologize to Trevorsmom .. no slight was intended.
I’m prretty sure davidenglish is Canadian too. His posts are the best researched (fantastic links), knowledgeable (I believe he’s in the publishing business), funny (when he’s relaxed and had a good day at the office), and astute. You guys are certainlyt holding your own!! For more fun with davidenglish check this out, post 347:
for a minute i thought TLC was going to be shut down – im sooo glad this is not the case and i think they made the right choice :D
Posted by matthew_minerva_flitwick on April 04, 2008, 03:55 AM
report to moderator
@ Morton
I am so sorry, Morton but as I was reading your humble apology to Trevorsmom I was busy trying to reword my response to comments as well as I didn’t feel I was polite enough, sorry again:) And would like to take the opportunity to say sorry to anyone that may have taken offence to my sorry comments:) My goodness we are a sorry bunch having say sorry all the time. Ummm, Morton was that polite enough? If not, I am so sorry
(I do believe we Canadians have mastered the use of the word!:) By the way if it’s not taken would like to change my name to The Weird Sister. If it’s in use, sorry!
I’m sorry if you felt the need to say you’re sorry becasuse of the fact that I was sorry for posting a sorry excuse for a comment regarding a sorry situation indeed.
As for the name “The Weird Sister”, I have taken the liberty of usurping all rights to Shakespeare’s work (partially by claiming that, in fact, he did NOT write the plays, and since there is no proof either way, I clearly own the rights).
So, you will have to pay a rather hefty royalty to me, else I shall haul my sorry bottom into a courtroom (a venue, of course where the sorry excuse for a justice system operates), and although it makes me very sorry indeed, I shall sue you!
And if THAT works, the wizard rock band using that name (clearly a derivative work), is next on my list.. clearly I’m a sorry excuse for a human being. Sorry!
Ahhh, it is refreshing isn’t it, to post such sorry entries on this Friday in Canada, fully 2 weeks after the official start of spring, while watching the snow fall outside my office window … what a sorry excuse for a season!!
Note: In case you hadn’t figured it out (for which, clearly I am terribly sorry!) my tongue was, once again, firmly ensconced in my cheek except for my thanks to rotfang which were sincere). I would have thought the incoherent mumbling would have given it away!!
@ Cathy
“Well completely off topic…I knew we had something in common – I am Canadian as well.”
Hmmm… does this mean that all the OLD people are Canadian?
Nahhh!
Just the best?
Nahhh! (although I’d love to be able to say so! ... please friends.. tongue firmly in cheek!)
So, I guess its … just us!
But boy, do we know what we’re talking about … eh?
M.