According to the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, Judge Robert Patterson addressed the courtroom at the end of the second day of trial:
“I’m concerned that this case is more lawyer-driven than it is client-driven. The fair use people are on one side, and a large company is on the other side. . . . The parties ought to see if there’s not a way to work this out, because there are strong issues in this case and it could come out one way or the other. The fair use doctrine is not clear.”
Judge Patterson reportedly added:
“I’m bringing it up now so you can think about it before you get into the rest of the case. Maybe it’s too late; maybe we’ve gone too far down the road. But a settlement is better than a lawsuit.”
In addition to Steve Vander Ark taking the witness stand earlier Tuesday, afternoon testimony centered around the impact a published version of website The Harry Potter Lexicon would have on any encyclopedia J.K. Rowling might write. While publishing expert Bruce Davis stated that such a book would likely have a small print run and do little to harm the potential market for a Rowling-penned book, Suzanne Murphy of Scholastic stated that while she finds Vander Ark’s lexicon to be of “poor quality”, she believes it “has potential to do quite well in the marketplace”.
WHO DOES THIS GUY THINK HE IS J.K HAS SPENT YEARS WRIGHTING THESE BOOK NOW SOME EDJET WANTS TO COME ALONG AND RIDE THE BACK OF HER SUCESS I DONT THINK SO !! HE SHOULD HAVE HIS OWN IDEAS R IS HE JUST ONE OF THESE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO THOUGHT POWER OF HIS OWN OTHER WISE HE SHOULD STICK TO WHAT HE DOES BEST WEB SITES
Folks, I realize that the disccussions here at Leaky (or at any open access discussion site) there will be a constant ebb and flow of activity, and of new voices joining in. But, over the past year the copyright, plagiarism, profit, fair use, infringement and other issues have been exhaustively discussed here. Is it really necessary to do so again? Or perhaps someone could go through those discussions, find the relevant claims, quotes and facts, write up a time line? ;-)
The real point that struck me, as others have noted, was ““I’m concerned that this case is more lawyer-driven than it is client-driven.”
As some of have said all along, its not about either SVA or JKR any more, its about the legal teams. so, can we stop talking about JKR and SVA, and try to focus on the evolving legal arguments?
It isn’t totally about Jo wanting to write her own. It’s about SVA copying her work for financial gain. And if you say it’s all in name of fair use, it’s not. The fact its 90% Jo’s words, and hardly no commentary at all. Doesn’t make it a fair use book.
In my legal opinion, I completely agree with you. :) The facts in this case could result in a judgment either way and I think the judge’s recent statement indicates he is thinking along the same lines. A lot of people look at these pie charts (which are now in question considering that SVA got permission from EA to use some material from the wizarding cards) and think that if 84% or 90% was copied it’s not fair use. I have tried to continually remind people that there are four factors involved here. Both sides bring interesting arguments.
Also I am glad you brought up Leaky and other fan sites. I have always wondered about how a hypothetical case against a major HP podcast would turn out. Although these things are arguably more transformative than the Lexicon, they clearly cut into the potential market for the copyright owner. Remember when WB tried to put out a GOF podcast and it pretty much failed? This was because Pottercast and Mugglecast had already cornered the market. A lot fo fans seem to only look at the amount copied and disregard the other factors involved.
Ah what a mess this is…I understand JK but I also think this guy didn’t intend to make money either. I just hope this doesn’t stop the “Scottish book”.
I get the impression that Jo could very well lose and he really doesn’t want to see that happen since shes donated to charity and basically got children to read again or more than they have been.
Thanks @ lawyer and akemi42 for some unbiased legal analysis of the issue. I’m an attorney as well, though with no trademark and copyright experience.
Anyone who believes the judges comments somehow favor JKR are fooling themselves: the issue is far from clean cut and could go either way. When judges make comments like this, it’s often because they realize a compromise would be far better for both parties than the all or nothing solution they’re forced to render.
As others have said, the comment about lawyers driving this is dead on, espeically when you hear the testimony. Both JKR and SVA gave testimony with alot of personal relevance, but they were also both clearly well coached by their attorney’s always striking themes that address the elements of Fair Use.
It really is a shame it’s come to this, I suspect a big reason for the dispute is RDR’s refusal to give an advance copy to JKR and accept her comments. Is a settlement possible? I hope so. I doubt RDR will give in completely, they’d rather take their chances with a verdict. The question becomes what would they need to do to allow JKR to let the book be published. Sadly, I think thelines may be so hardened a this point that a compromise isimpossible.
Lastly, one thing I find a bit silly is the idea that the SVA/RDR book will impact JKR’s sales, either of the HP boks themselves or JKR’s encyclopedia. Let’s face it, the RDR book is dead in the water at this point, the vast majority of HP fans won’t buy it out of loyalty to JKR. Even if that wasn’t the case, the book JKR does herself is still going to be bought by the vast majority of those interested in a reference book on the series, regardless of what else is out there.
I saw in abc news this report that J.k. already went to court to make her statement in her defence for the Harry Potter book and the sadest part of all is that is brought her to tears and I think that is wrong that they have to bring J.k. to this because this is her work and no one has the write to do this to her just because they are big fans and they think that they have the right to it they don’t…... From ABC NEW
After reading a little closer in these news posts (I nothing about laws and legal stuff so I often skim read) I must say I can’t see what Steve is playing at.
I’m not sure who was going to buy it in the first place, to be honest. What’s the difference between having a book copy and having the internet version? Maybe for people with a Dial-Up connection? lol. They obviously can’t stick everything off the website into a book, so the website is clearly going to be better. And the website’s free. And it’s easier for finding things.
If Steve’s book loses then I can’t imagine how it’d be a big loss to the community. However if Jo doesn’t write that book, there’s a million and one new bits and pieces that we could find out.
When it comes down to it, would you rather have an book full of old stuff which you can find on the internet anyway, or a book full of new stuff from the original author?
I wonder if the Judge is right. Is this situation really due to the lawyers, or was it just the ego’s of executives within the companies involved that have sucked their own clients down a path of possible destruction?
"What are you doing, Potter?" said Snape coldly as ever, as he strode over to the four of them.[br]"I'm trying to decide what curse to use on Malfoy, sir," said Harry fiercely.
WHO DOES THIS GUY THINK HE IS J.K HAS SPENT YEARS WRIGHTING THESE BOOK NOW SOME EDJET WANTS TO COME ALONG AND RIDE THE BACK OF HER SUCESS I DONT THINK SO !! HE SHOULD HAVE HIS OWN IDEAS R IS HE JUST ONE OF THESE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO THOUGHT POWER OF HIS OWN OTHER WISE HE SHOULD STICK TO WHAT HE DOES BEST WEB SITES