Several public figures have voiced their opinions on the JKR/WB vs. RDR Books court case:
Hugo and Nebula award-winning writer Orson Scott Card claims that J.K. Rowling’s “hypocrisy is so thick” that he “can hardly breathe”.
He goes on to say:
“Once you publish fiction, Ms. Rowling, anybody is free to write about it, to comment on it, and to quote liberally from it, as long as the source is cited.”
He predicts the outcome of the case:
“1. Publication of Lexicon will go on without any problem or prejudice, because it clearly falls within the copyright law’s provision for scholarly work, commentary and review.
2. Rowling will be forced to pay Steven Vander Ark’s legal fees, since her suit was utterly without merit from the start.
3. People who hear about this suit will have a sour taste in their mouth about Rowling from now on. Her Cinderella story once charmed us. Her greedy evil-witch behavior now disgusts us. And her next book will be perceived as the work of that evil witch.”
(EDITOR’S NOTE: With regard to Mr. Card’s statement that a published work of fiction may be written about or quoted “as long as the source is cited”, note that plaintiffs JKR/WB’s claim that the Lexicon book fails to properly quote or cite Ms. Rowling’s works. Exact testimony regarding such is available here in the trial transcripts).
Game show Jeopardy! wiz Ken Jennings writes about the trial on his blog in an entry entitled “Harry Potter and the Glossary of Doom”. He says:
“Books like The Harry Potter Lexicon are nothing new. When I was a kid, I had a bunch of unlicensed glossaries like these on my shelves: Robert Foster’s Complete Guide to Middle-Earth, Bjo Trimble’s Star Trek Concordance, etc. (Both of these books may later have been approved by their respective marketing empires, I’m not sure, but they were strictly fan-pub back then.) Even today, you can walk up to the TV/Movies shelf in a Barnes & Noble and find cash-in essay collections and reference works analyzing Lost, Firefly, The West Wing, and other hits. All these books profit by putting the Big Media Brand Name front and center on their covers–without the pop-culture teat, they wouldn’t sell a single copy. Profiteers, right, “Jo”? Burn them all!”
Jennings also notes:
”...the plagiarism claims are silly. Direct quotes from the books are rare, and are used only in epigrammatic fashion. Rowling may be referring to the fact that the Lexicon does faithfully describe facts and events from her series, and at length, but that’s an inevitable feature of any reference book. The literary references all look legitimate to me, as if due care has been taken to rephrase them away from Rowling’s language.”
On the subject of companion books, he says:
“In a free society, it’s good that people can talk and write freely about art. Good things come out of a society being able to talk and write freely about art–whether the artist likes it or not. Fan-published “derivative works” are a tiny legal niche, but they’re not an entirely unimportant one. Maybe you’re a Gilmore Girls fan who’d love to see an index annotating and explaining the show’s dense web of cultural references, or a U2 fan working on a complete concordance to their lyrics, or a Spider-Man fan with an issue-by-issue chronology of his Marvel Comics-owned “life” on your website. This stuff is going to keep disappearing if the legal precedents keep following the Twin Peaks and Castle Rock path.”
(EDITOR’S NOTE: With regard to Mr. Jennings’ statement that literary references are legitimate if “due care has been taken to rephrase them away from Rowling’s language”, note plaintiffs JKR/WB’s claim that the Lexicon book too frequently uses JKR’s exact language. Exact testimony regarding such is available here in the trial transcripts).
On the 24th, Mr. Gaiman’s clarifies fair use for a reader of his blog with:
“As far as I can see it’s only about a couple of really grey areas of copyright law—I suspect, and I am SO not a lawyer, that it will come down to whether or not what Mr Vander Ark had done to Ms Rowling’s work in his Lexicon was sufficiently “transformative” as to render it a new work.”
He offers as an example:
“If someone did a website in which everything in Sandman is listed in alphabetical order, as a concordance or lexicon… whether or not I was going to do one doesn’t matter. Whether or not someone else is making money off my work and words and ideas doesn’t matter. Whether it’s a good lexicon or a bad lexicon doesn’t matter. Whether it quotes me extensively may or may not matter (how extensively I’m quoted is a matter of Fair Use, but paraphrase me and you are home and dry on that count). What matters is whether it sufficiently transforms what I’ve done into something else by taking those entries and putting them into alphabetical order. “
Today, Mr. Gaiman writes a follow up on copyright, in which he posts a letter sent to him by one of his readers, a lawyer who co-authored a paper on fair use for the Journal of the Copyright Society of the United States. Leaky readers may find the letter informative.
Thanks as always to our readers who have emailed or posted links to articles or editorials on the trial.
Ken Jennings says: “crummy $10,000 advance” and crosses it out. Um, what? That’s really, really good for an unknown with a manuscript that has a very small market (HP is huge, but companion books are not). Wasn’t Jo’s advance from Bloomsbury 3,000 pounds? That’s about $6,000 today. She had worked on it for seven years. SVA had worked on the manuscript for two weeks. I don’t include work on the website in this as even Steve says that the book is of lesser quality.
I think I may have to blog about this whole mess. My poor f-list who hasn’t been following this case at all or not as much as me…. If I do, I’ll link it here and refer people to the forums here and the documents and Leaky’s archive of articles on it.
I am getting so fed up with people constantly pointing out Jo crying, but not saying a word about SVA doing so. So, her crying is just an act and his is heartfelt? What? I thinnk they were both sincere. I’d cry too. I’m a crier anyway (I cry at Hallmark commercials for goodness’s sakes).
I need blood pressure medication just to read Jenning’s blahg (intentional).
As for us here at Leaky being angry at SVA, apparently he hasn’t read that deeply or he’d have realized how much we feel betrayed by him as well and how much he has lied. There’s not a comment place either. Maybe he’ll read this since his name is in the article:
Mr. Jennings,
For me, and I’m sure for others here, the reason we are so angry with Steve goes far beyond him trying to publish this book. He lied to us and talked about the fandom as if he knew what was best for us. We feel just as betrayed by him as Jo does. Most of us here who are on Jo’s side have read about all the events that lead up to the lawsuit and how RDR evaded. Why? Because he knew what he was doing was wrong and illegal, probably. He got lucky that the people at Stanford with the Fair Use Project stepped in to further their own agenda. We have read court documents. Some of us have already read the manuscript as well. We’ve read or are reading the court transcripts. We had three people present at the trial for all three days, while most media outlets got out of there as soon as Jo had finished her testimony.
I agree that people should be able to talk about art. SVA doesn’t talk about Harry Potter. He restates it. That’s all. There’s little to no commentary and no anaylsis. The citation system is very poor and confusing. In short, it’s not fair use.
Posted by Cam: “Just remember those two men have access to the same information as everyone else and they came to their own conclusions. “
Yes, they have access to it, but by reading some of their comments, they obviously havent looked. You cant have read any part of the LexiBook and then call it a critical/analytical/critique book. There’s nothing critical or analytical in it.
Posted by Cam: “When did leaky become a breeding ground for wannabe lawyers and angry fans, who a year ago were impatiently waiting for the last book?”
Um… about the time that SVA tried to turn his online lexicon into a money generator by publishing. You’ve got to expect it in this case. JKR is LOVED by those of us who enjoy her world (especially those of us who enjoyed her world enough to spend time online on sites like Leaky). You’ve got to expect most fans to side with Jo on an argument like this.
Here’s part of my problem with the whole thing. SVA knew ahead of time that publishing the LexiBook would infringe copyright, as evidenced by emails shown in court. He changed his mind for some reason (perhaps RDR pushed him, who knows). BUT… he was still so worried about it that he had it written into his contract that RDR would take the heat if JKR/WB sued.
If he had that much forethought about the problems the book would encounter, and if he really were a true fan of the author and the books (God, I hate that phrase “true fan”, but it fits), shouldnt he have instead insisted on stating in that contract that if JKR/WB objected legally to the book (ie: C&D letters (which they sent many) or lawsuits) that the book itself should be shelved???? Seems he was more worried about his own neck then the fandom/community that he now cries over being less then welcome in.
My opinion: SVA became so caught up in his “place” in the fandom that it soon became not enough. I think he had a bit of a “rock star” mentality in the fandom, and it went to his head. Being part of the fandom wasnt enough, he thought he deserved to be part of the phenomenon. sorry, Steve, it doesnt work like that.
ps: I highly recommend that you follow that link above to the site of the person who blogged about transformative work. it’s very interesting. Go down to the part labeled “The concept of “transformative” works as applicable to the “Harry Potter” works. Very interesting.
Posted by Beth (with no other alias) on April 26, 2008, 05:09 AM
report to moderator
I’m glad to see some people swinging out in favor of the Lexicon. I like JKR as much as the next HP fan, but based on my experience dealing with other “fair use” issues (which closely parallel this case), JKR doesn’t have a case.
I know the trial is important, and I’ve been following it as obsessively as the next person. And I do have some substantive opinions on the topic, believe it or not.
But this fandom really needs something new to talk about. Something good and exciting. Something that we can be happy about.
Opinions are like noses, everybody has one. However none of the quoted people are lawyers (nor am I, nor I suppose most of the people commenting here) and none of them are the Judge, whose opinion is the only one that counts at this juncture.
I have read about 75% of the trial transcript (thank you so much for posting it Leaky!!) and I would have to add my lay-opinion on the side of Jo and WB. It seems to me that the RDR side has many small points that they are using for their case (pre-trial they even tried to make it a First Amendment issue, which it is NOT). While the JKR WB side has one big point: The Lexicon does not do enough transformative work to Jo’s canon (which is the correct spelling BTW) to make it Steve’s own work. I think that’s the base of the case and all the bloggers who want to see Jo and her success taken down a bit all sound like envy more than anything else.
Posted by Ravenclaw from Glenn on April 26, 2008, 05:24 AM
report to moderator
um… i love the Ender series, but Mr. Card is in the wrong here. He has obviously not taken the time to properly familiarize himself with the case and realize that ~90% was directly taken from Jo’s work, and mostly without quotations and proper references. This ticks me off, because its clear that the people who are commenting and making a lot of noise about the case have not read the transcripts, HP books, and the Lexicon. Jo is not saying people can’t analyze her work… look at just how many companion books are out there that she is not suing… she is saying that you cant lift what she spent 17 years to create.
I’m with you all the way, English Ivy. I am desperate for happy news. I want Rupert to release pics like Emma and Dan did at least. Just think: hopefully we’ll have the trailer on May 16th.
I want Ron/Hermione/Lavender promo pics and one for Harry/Ginny/Dean. Two love triangles is a perfect marketing opportunity. I want a teaser poster too.
Ok i think what these people are saying is wrong, i mean mr card insulting jk like he did, she spent 17 years with these charcthers and mentioend that she would have an encylopedia to tie up the ends.
as far What “The Great Snape Debate” it was a harry potter unauthorized guide to the books that merited the pros for snape being good and the pros for snape being bad, and it was informative and also though here is an importan part is that even though it was unauthorized when it brought up passages from the books it gave you the page.
I mean the people who want to take shots at jk, should realize that when she started this she was dirt broke, barely got an advance and had many publishing houses pass on the series because it was a children’s book series and the first run had of the first book had about what 500,000 first prints as they had no idea how the series would go
Posted by Coby Preimesberger on April 26, 2008, 05:41 AM
report to moderator
The Great Snape Debate is one of the best companion books I have for any of my fandoms. I think the best companion books I have are the four Buffy books that contain stories about previous slayers.
It not only cites correctly, but it uses quotes to support analytical arguments and commentary. It’s very transformative.
Mr. Card’s blog disgusts me, and I left him a not-very-subtle comment telling him so. What a complete moron. Some of the things he says about JKR just make me want to smack him in the face, hard. He makes such ridiculous assumptions, like “JKR just said Dumbledore was gay for attention, duh, and she has no heart, LYK lol!” What a #%#%#. Obviously if he had done any research, he would have noticed that she released this info while answering a fan’s question. Dumbledore’s sexuality had no place in the books, because no one sees Dumbledore as a sexual being at all, so he has no right to say that she was a coward for not putting it in there. I bet he hasn’t even read the HP books. Ignorant morons like this guy make me want to vomit.
I get the feeling these people haven’t researched the case at all. Anyone can argue a convincing point to people who have no information about the subject. You can’t convince us, you ignorant berks.
While I understand the need to report on Harry Potter news, I am getting quite over coming to Leaky only finding story after story on the court case. It really seems to be consuming everything about this site over the past month or so. And while it is related to Harry Potter, it really, in my opinion, has been getting covered far more than it should be. I get frustrated seeing so many articles on this one story, and not enough on “general” Potter news.
I appreciate the time and effort that goes into Leaky, and commend the creators of this site, but could they perhaps just “drop” this issue, or at the very least tone it down to a weekly segment?
“This really pains me as Enders Game is one of the greatest novels of all time.”
This is EXACTLY how I felt when reading that Orson Scott Card, of all people, has “gone negative” and denounced JKR in such a nasty, mean-spirited and woefully uninformed manner. This author’s not a slouch or a hack; he’s one of the greatly-recognized science fiction authors of the age, along with Isaac Asimov, Harlan Elison, Ursula K. Le Guin, and other notable greats. I imagine he’s earned a comfortable share of profit from his books, too, and would be just as vigilant in protecting his copyrights if his works were “stolen” as blatantly as Ms. Rowling has been.
I read his entry (more like scanned; reading his words felt like trying to see through a botched Lasik surgery procedure—endlessly painful!!) and just could not believe that these hateful words were coming from such a (formerly) respected author. It truly made me sick.
While I won’t deliberately run from his books in the future, my opinion of him as a person has just gone down about 75%. Needless to say, I totally disagree with his caustic assessment.
As for Mr. Ken Jennings, the highly-overrated Jeopardy champion, and HIS opinions on the case, I have this answer for him: “These four letters are used in ‘Netspeak’ to cloak an expletive along with a command toward the subject to be silent.” What is the question? If you know it, please do it!!
I would like to echo an earlier sentiment of wanting to vomit.
I don’t care who’s side you are on. Steve’s, Jo’s, Santa Claus’s… the bottom line is, you don’t have to be a jerk about it when you are expressing your opinion. It doesn’t make people want to agree with you. Even if they DO agree with your over all argument, it strays people away from saying they are “with you” if only for the fact that you were so harsh towards the other side. Yelling rude comments at each other doesn’t win arguments. If it did Presidential debates would be a lot more interesting.
While from the moment I read the LexiBook’s pages I was on Jo’s side (I mean come on, I don’t even have my HP books with me in this State, in fact they are on the other side of the country than I am and yet I knew those were her words) I’ve never felt the need to be as harsh as the individuals who are being printed for all the world to see, and who are supposed to be respected.
I’m currently trudging through the transcripts of the trial (I’m about 1/2 way through day 2…)and its only become more clearer to me that if anything Steve has no defense while Jo is just damn lucky she’s with WB (would you want to be up against a WB lawyer? Cause they scare me). Every time RDR said he didn’t do something it seemed as though the WB lawyer could be like …ah ha! but look at this proof that I have with your signature on it! Do you not remember this?! To me… well that’s just being a killer lawyer. But it’s also a really good case.
It makes me sick to think that “respected” authors and individuals like Ken Jennings who many take as “one of the smartest men there are” (though I’m pretty darn good at Jeopardy! and I’m 21 so…) are still so cruel and ignorant about things.
If you’re going to write an opinion piece about a high profile case. That’s cool with me. But do the readers a favor and get all the facts before rushing to your computer and typing out words like “evil-witch”. Cause the internet is a powerful tool. And once it’s out there—- it will come back to bite you. Hard.
"So you smashed my prophecy?" said Voldemort softly, staring at Harry with those pitiless red eyes. "No, Bella, he is not lying... I see the truth looking at me from within his worthless mind... Months of preparation, months of effort... and my Death Eate
Ken Jennings says: “crummy $10,000 advance” and crosses it out. Um, what? That’s really, really good for an unknown with a manuscript that has a very small market (HP is huge, but companion books are not). Wasn’t Jo’s advance from Bloomsbury 3,000 pounds? That’s about $6,000 today. She had worked on it for seven years. SVA had worked on the manuscript for two weeks. I don’t include work on the website in this as even Steve says that the book is of lesser quality.
I think I may have to blog about this whole mess. My poor f-list who hasn’t been following this case at all or not as much as me…. If I do, I’ll link it here and refer people to the forums here and the documents and Leaky’s archive of articles on it.
I am getting so fed up with people constantly pointing out Jo crying, but not saying a word about SVA doing so. So, her crying is just an act and his is heartfelt? What? I thinnk they were both sincere. I’d cry too. I’m a crier anyway (I cry at Hallmark commercials for goodness’s sakes).
I need blood pressure medication just to read Jenning’s blahg (intentional).
As for us here at Leaky being angry at SVA, apparently he hasn’t read that deeply or he’d have realized how much we feel betrayed by him as well and how much he has lied. There’s not a comment place either. Maybe he’ll read this since his name is in the article:
Mr. Jennings,
For me, and I’m sure for others here, the reason we are so angry with Steve goes far beyond him trying to publish this book. He lied to us and talked about the fandom as if he knew what was best for us. We feel just as betrayed by him as Jo does. Most of us here who are on Jo’s side have read about all the events that lead up to the lawsuit and how RDR evaded. Why? Because he knew what he was doing was wrong and illegal, probably. He got lucky that the people at Stanford with the Fair Use Project stepped in to further their own agenda. We have read court documents. Some of us have already read the manuscript as well. We’ve read or are reading the court transcripts. We had three people present at the trial for all three days, while most media outlets got out of there as soon as Jo had finished her testimony.
I agree that people should be able to talk about art. SVA doesn’t talk about Harry Potter. He restates it. That’s all. There’s little to no commentary and no anaylsis. The citation system is very poor and confusing. In short, it’s not fair use.
Sincerely, Katie