MyLeaky Login

Join the largest Harry Potter Social Network on the Web! | FAQ

In the News

JKR/WB vs RDR Books Trial Day Three: JKR's courtroom statement; closing remarks from the plantiffs

Companion Books
Posted by: Kristin
April 16, 2008, 10:08 PM

From Reuters, via Yahoo News: JKR told the courtroom on Wednesday: “This case is about an author’s right to protect their creation. If this book is allowed to be published the floodgates will open.”

She added: “Are we, or are we not, the owners of our own work? It’s not just my work that is endangered.” According to the article, she also expressed “outrage” that her work is considered fair game because it is popular.”

Literary experts for both sides testified on whether Vander Ark copied too much text. A lawyer for RDR Books said that the Lexicon book would promote the Potter series and not hurt sales.

In closing arguments, lawyers for JKR and WB said the Lexicon book copied JKR’s work without attribution, and did not add content. “There has been no testimony that it would add anything new or original. The lexicon is filled with errors.”

Previous Article | Next Article Browse all Recent Companion Books News

58 Comments

Ahmed

jk god bless you, and we are all with you.

Posted by Ahmed on April 17, 2008, 12:38 AM report to moderator
Vicky

JKR and WB are going to win. I don’t see any way for them not to, to be perfectly honest. The things that Steve and RDR Books have been saying just don’t make any sense.

Posted by Vicky on April 17, 2008, 12:38 AM report to moderator
Sam

Jo, you rock! Keep it up, your fans are 100% behind you.

Posted by Sam on April 17, 2008, 12:41 AM report to moderator
lilyp

Vicky, you don’t see any way for JKR not winning, but that’s not what the non-fans comments I’ve found say: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/04/16/potter-trial-on-last-day-defense-outshines-rowling/?mod=WSJBlog http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/04/16/potter-case-ip-lawyer-calls-it-a-toss-up/?mod=WSJBlog http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/04/16/notes-from-the-potter-trial-after-a-partial-settlement-the-defense-digs-in/?mod=WSJBlog http://www.pr-inside.com/andy-martin-says-j-k-rowling-r541769.htm

Posted by lilyp on April 17, 2008, 12:43 AM report to moderator
whateves

I notice this the WSJ blog – http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/04/16/potter-trial-on-last-day-defense-outshines-rowling/?mod=WSJBlog

was not linked. Perhaps because it was less complementary?

Posted by whateves on April 17, 2008, 12:45 AM report to moderator
Catherine

Go JK and WB! You guys are going to win!!!

Posted by Catherine on April 17, 2008, 12:49 AM report to moderator
Tarhisie

I’ve learned to take stories about this case posted on The Leaky Cauldron and MuggleNet with a HUGE grain of salt.

Their reporting is obviously extremely biased, as are the fans who comment, simply because (I am assuming) they support JKR no matter what. They are, after all fansites.

I just wish other fans could stop blindly supporting JKR, and actually do their own research on the case, especially the suit on fair use.

There are many articles and blogs on The Wall Street Journal and MSNBC that actually strive to report on the case objectively. And as for the blogs, they see both sides to the case, and can see strengths and weaknesses to both JKR/WB and RDR/Vander Ark.

It’s not “JKR will win.” It’s a toss up at this point.

People, please stop blindly supporting something you like without really knowing the full story. It doesn’t hurt (and it doesn’t take much time) to do further research.

At the VERY least, DO NOT get all your facts SOLELY from a Harry Potter fansite. Of course they are going to support JKR (although, I do wish they could report with less bias).

Posted by Tarhisie on April 17, 2008, 12:56 AM report to moderator
zoltan42

I just realized something: SVA is Vanilla Ice.

I’m partially serious about this. When Ice Ice Baby was a hit, notably absent from the credit were Queen & David Bowie for the sampled rift from “Under Pressure.” Vanilla Ice tried some bogus rationalization that removing one note made it a whole new work. (Or was it extending one? After all these years I can’t remember the exact details.) The key factor was his claim that taking another’s work, only making minor changes to it, resulted in a new work for which the original creators were not entitled to compensation. The case was settled out of court, he paid Queen & Bowie, and later stated “What happened is I was trying not to get sued and it didn’t work. So yeah, they’re the same songs, in case you were wondering.”

Isn’t that basically what SVA & RDR are trying to do?

Posted by zoltan42 on April 17, 2008, 12:58 AM report to moderator
anonymouse

I totally agree, Tarhisie. I’m just hoping that this can be settled in a manner that is agreeable to everyone involved. High hopes, I know.

Posted by anonymouse on April 17, 2008, 01:01 AM report to moderator
Tarhisie

To whateves:

Yes, it was linked. It was the first one listed by lilyp, actually…

Posted by Tarhisie on April 17, 2008, 01:02 AM report to moderator
whateves

Thanks. Though I think we may have posted at the same time (or close to it) I don’t think teh comment was up when I was…commenting. Though I should clarify that I meant in the original post it was not linked.

Posted by whateves on April 17, 2008, 01:04 AM report to moderator
Sasha

We all need to read other reports and opinions to get the broader picture, and right now, it is not looking good for JKR and WB. I have a horrible feeling RDR are going to win this round. Then we go to appeal and the whole circus begins again.

Posted by Sasha on April 17, 2008, 01:11 AM report to moderator
Sasha

A friend (also law student) attended the trial yesterday. She said the defense was strong then as well. She seemed really impressed with Mr. Hammer’s cross examination of Cheryl Klein of Scholastic Books. Mr. Hammer must have totally unraveled her testimony leaving the plaintiffs counsel with no option but give her a chance to say she was nervous. She then proceeded to undermine her credentials as a witness and bury her. She thought the plaintiffs case was largely an emotional plea that was quite often poorly presented. Can’t imagine this will be a win for MS. Rowling. Comment by Laura – April 16, 2008 at 8:17 pm

From the WSJ blog, oh no, this does not look good.

Posted by Sasha on April 17, 2008, 01:18 AM report to moderator
Cheryl Klein

Well, as a matter of fact, I was not cross-examined in court yesterday, so I would doubt the legal wisdom of that commenter.

Posted by Cheryl Klein on April 17, 2008, 01:30 AM report to moderator
Andy

I really try to look at this with an open mind- the main thing that tips me to Jo’s side is how RDR handled the situation as it emerged. WB asked for a copy of the book and they said “get one of your people to print the website”. They asked for a week to work out their case, and during that week turned around and sued WB for using SVA’s timeline from the movie, which he made using Jo’s work. They really did not make it easy to make a compromise, and now that they see how blown out of proportion this became, now they want to back off and try to lose the least amount of money as possible.

Posted by Andy on April 17, 2008, 01:30 AM report to moderator
You must be logged in to MyLeaky to comment. Please click here to log in.
Why is Leaky YELLOW? Because Hufflepuff WON the House Cup! LeakyCon Live Album! The best wizard rock from LeakyCon on a two-disc set! Introducing MyLeaky! Your Harry Potter Social Network
PotterCast Interviews Jo Rowling! Click here to Listen! The Books Everything...Half-Blood Prince...and the rest of the HP Films Cast spells and chat with your friends at the Chamber of Chat!

Scribbulus Essay Project

Issue 26 - Nov. 2009

Scribbulus is THE place for Leaky Cauldron readers to submit their essays and opinion pieces!
See more over at Scribbulus!
Learn to knit your own 'Weasley Sweater'. Learn to brew your own 'Butterbeer'. Find out how at Leaky Crafts!

Guess That Book

"What about those [i]Monster Books[/i], eh? The assistant nearly cried when we said we wanted two."


Introducing MyLeaky! Your Harry Potter Social Network Hosted by Idologic Inc.