@Vicki K.
“Well said php. I basically agree with your statement. I just can’t get over how incredibly one-eyed Harry Potter fans are when it comes to their author.
This issue is far from a straight-forward case as the judge himself has said, so people burning SVA at the proverbial stake is far from productive.
And Jo has, I fear, painted herself into a corner by going after one person and not the many others that have also benefitted from her work.”
People are people and regardless of how reasonable one may be in many situations, when there is what has been described as a “personal stake”, people often become UNreasonable. And I am talking about a LOT of people here… the fans, SVA, JKR… and so, things are said in the heat of emotional turmoil.
I sometimes think that onemight speculate as to which party’s emotional turmoil may be viewed as valid, and then I quickly stop and try and expunge such thinking, because who am I to judge. I look, rather, for some logic, some reason for things being said or progeressing in certain directions (and when it is not there, then I can only leave t alone, because, again, I am far from qualified to judge… most of us.. the vast majority, in fact, are equally unqualified in that regard).
So I deplore the tone taken by some supporters of BOTH sides of this issue, and fervently have hoped the issues were the focus. In that regard, I have a theory as to why SVA is now saying things that appear to contradict his earlier statements.
Remember that the indemnification clause in the RDR/SVA contract, which everybody has noted is an unusual inclusion in such a contract, was specifically regarding this issue and this author only. It has been speculated here and elsewhere that one result of an RDR loss (and probably even of a settlement should the case be settled by the parties directly) is going to be a suit (and possibly a counter-suit) between RDR and SVA. Could this now be an effort to set the stage for various offensive/defensive positions in such a case? Perhaps SVA is trying to establish that he relied on RDR and was, therefore, misled by them, as a primary defence against an RDR lawsuit, or possibly as a primary offense in a suit against RDR by SVA.
It is certainly a plausible possibility, at least in my opinion. But that is to come later. First this case must reach whatever ultimate concluson it is heading for.
BTW, the statement by WB outside the courtroom regarding their position is an attempt to set the stage for negotiations between the parties in the event of a settlement. I am trying very hard to envision what kind of settlement could possibly be arrived at between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants. And remember, there is no settlement to be had, at this point, between the Plaintiffs and SVA… he is not a named defendant.
One last point regarding JKR’s presence in the courtroom during SVA’s testimony. As you all remember, SVA was not present during JKR’s testimony, and many have or might say how come JKR was there for SVA’s. Again, remember that as SVA is NOT a defendant in this case, he can be asked to leave or to not attend (a not unsusual occurence). JKR, however, cannot be barred, because she is one of the named Plaintiffs.
Everybody, take it easy, tone down the rhetoric, have some respect, even if you don’t feel it is earned or deserved. Please remember that one never knows when that little bit of respect that is shown will come back to help you someday.
At least in my humble opinion!
M.
Can we get 90% accurate quotes like we did on day one with Jo? Or is this a don’t quote Steve’s side of the lawsuit area?
Snape:
Melissa said earlier in the comments that since an email to her was brought up during testimony yesterday, she can’t report on this anymore – journalistic ethics :)
Kirsten is now doing it, and she may not have the sort of notes Melissa took during day 1.
It is unfortunate, but its not the Leaky’s fault.
To Elizabeth:
Thank you so much for your amazingly informative post – it really helped clear things up for me. I was confused by the judge’s comments on settlement and that the case was lawyer-driven!
Elyzie,
You’re welcome. :)
But what the judge said is apparently having little effect on the lawyers. They settled minor parts of the case but informed the court they intended to proceed on the fair use issue. I know clients can be stubborn sometimes, but when the judge actually makes a point of commenting on the merits of the case during trial, urging settlement, and darkly implying that the lawyers aren’t doing their jobs, you’d think that would make everyone in the room realize that the judge believes they’re all making a colossal mistake.
It’s fairly easy to see that the lawyers just want their chance at the Supremes. I’m a little befuddled that the clients are going along with it.
Quick! Someone remind me why I ever liked JK Rowling!
Does any serious HP fan believe that her encyclopedia would suffer even if there were 10,000 Lexicons that preceeded it? She alone has the ability to create new Canon!
If she wins this case, I will dismantle my site. Can’t face the legal risk!
@ caius marcius:
And around and around we go….please pay attention to what’s previously been posted, stated as fact within the trial, or presented in the media about the trial.
This lawsuit is not about the website, in fact JKR’s allowance for fan sites is the main reason they are at trial right now. The lawsuit is about the book, you need to cite sources, there is only so much of your published material that can be derived of secondary sources before it’s illegal, and you need to get the original author’s/researcher’s okay ahead of time. If you were writing a newspaper column, journal article blog, or web site than no it doesn’t follow with the same guidelines.
JKR doesn’t believe her “Scottish Book” will suffer, but believes it to be a scam on the Harry Potter fandom to allow a book to published with Harry Potter’s name that has false, misleading information, and ask payment when at first it was offered as free. WB’s case is to prove that RDR’s publishing of HPL will violate Fair Use, the copyright infringement is another bag of issues. A concept under Fair Use is that a desired to be published book will conflict within the general market with an original author’s book, so JKR had to prove that her “Scottish Book” would have the same and greater components than HPL, and that the publication of HPL produces false documents that will be presented in her “Scottish Book.”
Now like it or not the FCC (America) is going to start restricting internet, much like it does with our news and television programming, that has nothing to do with this lawsuit.
Whilst J. Rowling may have some argument about copyright infringement, i cannot see how this is any worse than what is on the website. okay so he may be making some money out of it, but so what? Its not like she needs anymore, i personally feel she is just being greedy. it make me laugh when se says she is protecting her work whilst she has allready sold the movie rights, and let some very shody films be made, and now is making a theme park. how much money does this women want?
She is not some superwomen like you all make out, she is human and is not the only person in the world who went through a tough patch in life. Fair enough maybe this book does go to far, but how can any of us really comment on any of this at a personal level, we have not seen the book, and we do not know either S. Vander Ark or J. Rowling personaly.
from, a fan of the books!
Nik- If you read the trancripts of the court documents you will see that she does not want more money. She is donating 100% of the profits to charity for her Encyclopedia and she has already donated 100% of the profits for her two supplementary books. She has repeated that this is not about money, it is about her right as an author to manage her own creations of which she owns the legal rights.
SVA is taking what she has spent the last 17 years working on and simply reaaranging it into an alphabetical list. Since it does not provide sufficient commentary or analysis, it is plagiarism. The transcripts also say that SVA scanned all of her books so that he could cut and paste from them. How is this not blatent plagiarism?
Also, for those of you who believe that he was suckered in to this by RDR, he was not. He was a librarian for years and STUDIED copyright laws. He even talked at seminars about how the internet violates all sorts of copyright laws. He knew full well that he was breaking the law.
GO JO! If you say NO means NO! Thanks for creating HP. May you win this one.