The Associated Press has a brief history of the trial, as well as the challenges of deciding when the claim of fair use has gone to far:
“Lawrence Pulgram, an intellectual property lawyer who represented Napster in a copyright fight with the rock band Metallica, said deciding where to draw the line is rarely easy.
“Fair use is the most erratically applied doctrine in copyright.”
The article notes that A-to-Z reader guides, such as a lexicon, may be allowed under law, but that J.K. Rowling and WB charge that Steve Vander Ark went too far with the Lexicon.
“Rowling said during her testimony that Vander Ark could still do his book, as long as he changed it to take less of her material.
“I never ever once wanted to stop Mr. Vander Ark from doing his own guide. Never ever,” she said, before asking the judge again to block it in its current form.”
RDR Books Publisher Roger Rapoport says he’s willing to consider a revision, but that neither J.K. Rowling or Warner Brothers have expressed a willingness to compromise. He was asked whether there is a “danger” in granting authors too much control in “books about them”. Said Rapoport:
“We would have to get approval before we could write or publish on people’s work. They would control critical commentary on their work, at any time, whether it is our kind of book or an Associated Press article. It would create total chaos in the area of critical commentary. Frankly, I don’t think that would be good for anyone, even the authors themselves.”
The article notes that Judge Patterson is not expected to make a ruling for another month.
All Steve Vandar Ark would have to do is write a fifteen page essay discussing how J.K. Rowling’s Christian faith may have informed her storytelling. Not only would this be incredibly easy to do, but it would make his work undoubtedly protected under Fair Use doctrine, as it would make his material “transformative”.
I just don’t know why Steve Vandar Ark and RDR Books didn’t take this route from the beginning. It would have spared us all this insanity (though I will admit hearing JKR be witty on the stand was fun).
Having just finished listening to the report on PotterCast, I find the question put to Mr. Rappoport to be way off base. The book in question isn’t about JO it’s about her CREATIONS and whether someone is allowed to copy her creations practically word for word into a book without offering commentary. This case isn’t about getting approval from an author to publish a book about them or their work – it’s about using (as pointed out in the podcast report) 90% of an author’s published work as the base for another book. Jo even said in the trial that she has no problem with books about Harry Potter, but that the Lexicon book offered little if any of SVA’s own thoughts or commentary was what she objected to. Mr. Rappoport even put this into the “critical commentary” genre, when if there had actually been any, they probably wouldn’t have had to go to trial.
Posted by Ravenclaw from Glenn on April 20, 2008, 12:46 PM
report to moderator
“He was asked whether there is a “danger” in granting authors too much control in “books about them”. Said Rapoport: “We would have to get approval before we could write or publish on people’s work. They would control critical commentary on their work”
What Rappaport says is absolutely ridiculous! In the UK we have Fair Dealing which aims to prevent people from doing what SVA/RDR are trying to do with the Lexicon, but the UK law still allows people to publish academic critical works about authors and their books without their permission! Because Fair Dealing specifically covers ‘private study and criticism and review and news reporting’. So the principal of ‘free speech’, which I understand is said to the the basis of Fair Use law, can still exist even when authors retain control over their work! The point is the amount of direct quotation versus academic analysis that exists in the books.
I can’t believe this case is about copyright/plagiarism issues. If it was, then surely JKR would have demanded that the lexicon website be closed down ages ago – instead of giving it a fansite award and admitting that she used it as research while writing her last few books. Also when she claims that it’s not fair for someone else to make profits from an author’s work – that is EXACTLY what WB does by making films based on her stories. The difference is that they paid her in advance. I’m sorry to say that this case is about money – pure and simple .
I can’t believe this case is about copyright/plagiarism issues. If it was, then surely JKR would have demanded that the lexicon website be closed down ages ago – instead of giving it a fansite award and admitting that she used it as research while writing her last few books. Also when she claims that it’s not fair for someone else to make profits from an author’s work – that is EXACTLY what WB does by making films based on her stories. The difference is that they paid her in advance. I’m sorry to say that this case is about money – pure and simple .
Harry Potter’s serias is JK’s. NO one has the right to publish a lexions about somebody else’s work. Uh I was having such a nice day but now I am pissed off again.
Ok I was just wondering if the author of the lexicon had been in the UK if it would have even gone as far as it has. And I do agree it’s basicly about money not the fact that JKR was infringed upon. If the author had paid JKR for use would there be a trial? Things that make you go whem (wonder about that)
JKR never used the Lexicon to write her books. The whole point of the case is the web Lexicon is a free-to-use non-profit making fan-based site NOT a personal SVA/RDR cash cow, which is what the book is attempting to do, and, by the way, which steals all the freely given fan input into the site without acknowledgement or remuneration. You are right about it being partly about money though, RDR and SVA are keen for different reasons to profit off of JKR’s hard work, like Voldemort’s parasitical piece of soul in Harry, its raison d’être becomes living off others.
Most important of all is the clear evidence, once again, of Rapaport’s congenital and wilful dissembling, the case was never about stopping critical commentary, it was always about theft, pure and simple. The trouble with Fair Use is that it is a grey area of law that might permit the legalisation of theft for the common good. But, one has to ask, is SVA’s theft really for the common good? Yes, the book may be useful, as the judge hinted at in court, but useful enough to legitimise common theft? That is the real question, and, it has to be asked, will not the law itself be brought into disrepute by the legalisation of such common theft?
rotfang07 – did you actually read my comment? I never stated that the lexicon did not violate copyright law, which is a complicated area in itself. I merely questioned the fact that if JKR is so upset about plagiarism/copyright issues, why did she not demand that the lexicon website be shut down years ago, instead of giving it a fansite award? And she DID use it for research. On her own website she stated that, while out writing, she had gone into internet cafes to check out facts. My own suspicion was that the money that this book would make was the reason that this case has ended up in court, rather that her rights as author may or may not have been violated.
I find the argument that it’s about money not about copright ludicous. Just becasue WB makes money off it and they paid her first yada yada yada – well hello she CONSENTED to that. Money, no money whatever she signed papers that give WB the right to do it.
Where is it so obvious to everybody that it is about money? The woman doesn’t NEED scads of more money! What I hear from the trial is that is it not a critique and contains little analysis and that becasue it quotes verbatim passages without acknowlegement this isn’t fair or sporting or even good publishing and lowers the quality of the piece and therefore the Harry Potter world.
Being a good reference guide doesn’t mean it has to be copied. And quite frankly why would I buy the book when I can whack something in the search engine and find it quicker than in a book??
No I am not hearing money I am hearing “I don’t want this because it isn’t very high quality and it breaks every quoting ocnvention a first year tertiary student knows like the back of their hand – you ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR SOURCES every single time you quote them!
I don’t understand why the judge keeps telling JKR/WB to settle when they have clearly stated what they want to occur as a compromise – and it’s reasonable too. Provide commentary on the books don’t just quote them. Why don’t they tell SVA/RDR to compromise with JKR/WB? there is a compromise on the table!!!!!!!! Take it you fools.
This is NOT about JKR being greedy, she didn’t even bring the case against SVA, that was WB. This is about SVA being a greedy little so & so. The Lexicon fan site didn’t come up for any criticism or concern from JRK because it was nothing to do with financial gain, it was purely informative, but now SVA is trying to make money & that’s the difference. JKR has told him to write his own book, so why doesn’t he? Is he intellectually deficient & can only copy things? The one thing that I can see coming out of this is that RDR are getting exactly what THEY want, more publicity than they could ever have dreamed of!! Could this be the reason they told SVA that it was OK to print the Lexicon? or am I just being cynical! And think of all the publicity that SVA now has!! & he’s decided to live in the UK, oh, joy for us!! I don’t think so somehow, he sounds very up his own butt to me!!
Harry raised his wand. Now was the moment to do it. Now was the moment to avenge his mother and father. He was going to kill Black. He had to kill Black. This was his chance... [br]The seconds lengthened. And still Harry stood frozen there, wand poised, B
SVA could easily just adapt the lexicon book to fit in with Jo’s wishes. I wish he would just compromise!
1st comment?