I actually feel kind of bad for Steve. I think he’s wrong, and I think he has been wrong all along, but I’m wondering if maybe he’s just gotten in over his head with this whole court case. I mean, lawyers are supposed to convince people that they have a case with ANYTHING—otherwise how would they make a living? Sounds like Steve COULD have been talked into it by them, you know? Anyway, I’m just very sad over this whole thing because it reminds me of Dumbledore’s one line about “how often this happens, even between the best of friends!” I don’t think Steve had bad intentions. I think he just got led down a path too easily without stopping to think what he was doing. If he wants to get off that road, he still has time. I feel like Jo would forgive him if he apologized. And I think the fan community would, too. I just hope we can resolve this whole thing without having to resort to bitter divisions that end up lasting for years, like some kind of Gryffindor-Slytherin thing.
No Harriett sadly the Leaky Cauldron has severed ties with the Lexicon.
I just hope both parties settle amicably. It’s sad to see that such good relations have soured. Rowling undoubtedly is the genius and the reason why we’re all here, but I also appreciated Vander Ark’s website – it got me to be a really big Harry Potter fan. I don’t think it is sloppy work – the website is well researched and the average fan wouldn’t be able to figure all that out by themselves. She did praise it herself. Perhaps the book version is different from the website.
I hope he can suitably change the content of the book to include the essays from the website and more commentary and still be able to publish it. I’m sure there are people who would appreciate Ark’s book if it was amended to suit Rowling’s wishes. I’m sure Rowling herself would appreciate the book if it included more commentary and criticism. It should also follow basic citation guidelines and credit her work.
She is contributing the proceeds of her companion book to the Children’s Voice and other charities. I can’t wait to read it. If this court business settles quickly, she’ll get her book out faster. If given a choice, I would be more interested to read her version because it is the official companion book. But the lexicon would be a good book for fans researching the series. It is very user friendly. I have used it countless times.
Good luck to both sides. Hope they settle this without bitterness. I’m sure neither of them really want to be there. Godspeed
Just a comment in response to the WSJ blog comment about judges putting pressure on litigants to settle:
This is a bit misleading. I’m a trial lawyer and have handled thousands upon thousands of cases. In every single case, the judge pressures the litigants to settle, regardless of the merits, because the American court system is beyond overburdened. (Right now, about 3% of American cases go to trial. If even 10% did, the system would collapse.)
There are two things that are unique here. One, the judge pressured the parties to settle on the record. This is exceptionally rare. Usually the judge will call the lawyers back into chambers to do the pressuring, for a variety of reasons—judges don’t want to seem like they’re doing something improper (they’re not, but it’s easy for people, especially the media, to take something from a court record out of context), judges feel more comfortable addressing lawyers without clients around to listen, and everyone can discuss things more freely and frankly back in chambers than they can formally, on the record.
In this case, the judge made his comments on the record - which says to me that the judge wanted the parties, not just the lawyers, to hear what he had to say. The judge probably believes that the clients are more willing to settle than the lawyers are - that’s what he means when he says that he thinks this is a lawyer-driven case. This points at a tremendous lack of faith, on the judge’s part, in the lawyers—a colossal slap on the face for the lawyers representing all the parties. In my experience, when the judge flatly states, on the record, that a case is lawyer-driven, he’s basically saying that he doesn’t believe the lawyers are representing their clients well or honorably.
The second thing that is unique is that the judge said all these things on the record during trial. As I mentioned, judges will pressure litigants to settle often simply to get a case off the docket. In this case, that bridge had already been crossed—the case was in trial. There was really no time to save at this point, because the judge’s calendar would’ve been cleared for as long as the trial was supposed to last. This means that the judge was urging a settlement based on the merits of the case alone. And I can see his point. Intellectual property is an extremely fuzzy area of the law, because the law wants to protect both creators and innovators, and the rights of the two often clash.
It is extremely rare for a judge to comment on the merits of a case on the record. Off the record, back in chambers, judges will often point out strengths and weaknesses in the parties’ cases, but almost never on the record. Judges have the obligation to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
I don’t think what the judge did here was improper. From what I’ve read, it sounds like he has a lot more faith in the parties than in the lawyers. Since judges usually are a lot more comfortable with the lawyers, I find that extremely interesting.
Ugh. Screwed up on the coding; I did not mean for those words to be crossed out.
Why is the press so blatantly sympathetic to Steve? I just read an article in the New York Times that was so unbiased and sympathetic ttoward Steve that it angered me. That kind of bias isn’t journalism, that’s FOX News.
WTF
Melissa, don’t worry about that, youll be fine
(just know YOUR book will be sure to gain A LOT of money from A LOT of fans who are totally willing to buy your book! Your book is NOT just taking jo’s work and rearranging it)
I too deplore the constant wacking on SVA but I can certainly understand the anger behind it: a lot of fans feel very betrayed. And from the sounds of it, more than a few web-sites’ staff are feeling equally equally dismayed and let down by people they had counted as friends.
My most heart-felt thanks and hugs are extended to the entire Leaky Staff, and most especially Melissa, for their very professional handling of an incredibly painful situation. At the end of the day, there really will be no winners: the fandom’s trust has been shaken by the actions of one of its more well-known voices, and a beloved author had to spend time explaining why 17 years of her life’s work should be protected from theft instead of being able to devote time to her family and her writing.
(I take that back: the lawyers billing hourly for this mess are definitely winning.)
In close, I sincerely hope this will be settled soon (AND in Jo’s favor) so we can focus on the books, and not the drama of the last few months.
I read on another blog that Melissa can’t report on this anymore because correspondence to her was mentioned as evidence today. Don’t know if any of that is true, but in any case we have the trusty John Dawlish in the courtroom too.
I didn’t know having passion for a book series meant pocketing $24.95 in royalties from the author’s created content and planned project of which they had intended to do for charity. This whole ordeal just shows what lengths people will take their “passion” in order to get money and fame, even if it means treading on other people and their creations in utmost disregard of their ownership rights. Lockhart comes to mind. I hope this case ends soon, and with a fair conclusion. Hang in there, Jo!
Does anyone else agree that the Lexicon was/is sloppy and unorganized? From an un-biased standpoint, I’ve always found it to be about as much help as Wikipedia.
Thank You to Melissa, John, Sue and the rest of the Leaky crew for their hard work, personal effort, and angst over this proceeding. Chin up and here’s hoping that it all turns out for the best.
_
I hate people like Gwynnie who don’t understand subtleties. The Lexicon is the only one being sued at the moment because other companion books actually add commentary and original analysis to their books, and the Lexicon didn’t. The Lexicon does not have scholarly value, since anything you read in the Lexicon can be found in the HP books themselves or in a Latin dictionary. An index of the HP books is fine and good, but it was sheer nerve (or stupidity?) of SVA to try to sell it for $24.95 a pop. I’m sure he feels bad now and his tears were genuine, but he should have known better. In fact, he DID know better, but was arrogant enough to think that he could get away with it and that fandom would support him.
I wish I could send Jo a fruit basket or something to show my support.
I for one am supporting Steve. The Lexicon has never shown anything but the upmost respect for Jo and is well done. To call it sloppy is an insult. I think Jo has become a little sue happy. Love ya Jo, but I am highly dissapointed in you at the moment.
Playerking315 – I’ve never been impressed by the Lexicon and I’m not just saying that because I’m on Jo side. I wouldn’t say it’s sloppy but I think its way over-rated. The layout is terrible.
Oops, sorry lol read only the first page and thought it was the latest comment. I dont think Steve has a change in it, I think that he is just trying becuase of the publishing company. Steve knew what he was doing, I think he just didnt know if he could legally get away with it or not.