First!!!!! Vander Ark’s quote of : “It was disheartening how quickly people were more than happy to turn on me,”, is ridiculous. If you go against a much loved and respected author like this, of course her community will turn on you!!!!!!!

Sorry, it wouldn’t come up!

Mr. Rapoport’s claim about court rulings is rubbish, I think he fails to see how little commentary is contained in the Lexicon. I hope Judge Patterson is given copies of the Potter books, tabbed with specific places where the Lexicon lifts Jo’s words, because it’s sick when you actually go through and look at it.

I’m just constantly surprised by the sense of entitlement that RDR (and even Vander Ark) exhibit in their public statements. And the biggest thing that bothers me, personally, is that Vander Ark KNEW that publishing this book was wrong; he included a clause in his contract that RDR would cover any legal action against him. That’s premeditated and completely dispicable.

And yes, guides have been written about many copyrighted works (Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, etc.) but many of those books have been required to secure licensing rights from the copyright holders. I just don’t understand why RDR thinks they can get away with this… and hope the judge doesn’t set precedent by allowing them to.

Seriously though I can’t feel sorry for him. Like everyone’s been saying I think he knew it was wrong, but he wanted to go ahead and do it anyway. I have to say though I never really liked him anyway.

Of course we are happy to turn on you, Mr Vander Ark! I have written several stories about Harry Potter – including a 40 chapters book, and a very detailed chronology – but I’ve never wanted to make money with it! It’s disgusting. When you published it on the internet everybody loved it, but you had to ruin it. Harr Potter is not yours, he belongs to JKR, forever! And if you were a true fan, you wouldn’t have written that book.

Is he insane?

One thing is for sure – somebody is lying.

I have no doubt that the judge will find in RDR’s favor, which is unfortunate. But fair use is, I think, beside the point, at this point. What’s most sad about this whole affair is that Vander Ark allowed himself to be led astray, if you will, by a publishing company that has no emotional investment in the Potter books, but was simply seeing dollar signs. (Their chances of cashing in at this point are negligable, as the whole Potter world seems to be against them.) But as soon as Vander Ark discovered that Rowling herself was going to be publishing an encyclopaedia - with proceeds going to CHARITY - he should have respectfully backed off. Perhaps Rowling and her lawyers (who are also representing Warner Brothers, I believe - a Goliath you don’t want to go up against) have made mistakes in how they’ve handled things, but the bottom line is that an author has a right to object to someone else making money off a book that would not even exist if not for her efforts. As far as I can see, there’s not a single original idea in the Lexicon; it’s a cut and paste job of information gleaned from the books. The timeline is valuable, and yes, Vander Ark put his own time and effort into it - but didn’t he do that for love of a world that someone else created? No one forced him to do that; why should he expect to be paid for it now?

This article is positively glowing compared to the stuff that’s come out lately. However, it’s still slanted. Their characterization of the case is that it’s part of a larger effort of copyright holders to crack down and that if the suit is successful it will limit others’ rights to comment and analyze, etc.

Alright, I give up on the media. Would it kill ANYONE to include some specifics about this particular case, including the unprecedented lack of commentary and analysis and unprecedented amount of uncited taking? Geez, at least make an effort.

Based on the actual facts of the case, they could have written that a win for the defense would limit the ability that copyright holders previously had to protect their work, but do you see that? NO, it’s always the big corporations trying to snuff out the little guy and kill “creativity”. No specifics are in the article about this particular case, it’s all broad generalizations.

It’s like they got all their background research material from Roger Rapaport as well as the quotes.

And they say that a settlement in this case would probably clear SVA’s reputation. Who gave them that information? That seems like a pretty big assumption given that it is unsubstantiated with any verification from HP fans.

this is rita skeeter all over again.

@dcrazmo

I am totally on JKR’s side, but I too am starting the think the judge will probably rule for RDR. At least, I am preparing myself for when it happens, basically by realizing that me being a fan of JKR has nothing to do with the outcome of this case.

I certainly hope that a copy of the book was given to the Judge with everything lifted from JKRs books highlighted, with a summary at the end of the actual percentage of copied vs new.

If the book gets publisked, I will be sure to look at the publishers name on each and every book I buy and make sure it isn’t published by RDR. If it is, I won’t buy it. I hope that someone comes up with a website that you can sign up and state “I will not buy this book or anything ever published from RDR.”

“Not a Potter fan, Mr. Rapoport was unfamiliar with the Lexicon website until he saw a newspaper profile on Vander Ark in July 2007.

“I couldn’t understand why this book hadn’t been published yet,” he said.”

Translation: “Guy was sitting on a gold mine, the chump! And I’m just the guy with the pickaxe to dig it up!”

Rapoport is a complete weasel.