Copyright Lawsuit Against J. K. Rowling, Bloomsbury Dismissed by Judge

95

Jan 06, 2011

Posted by EdwardTLC

A lawsuit against Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling and the book’s UK publisher, Bloomsbury, by the estate of the late Adrian Jacobs has been dismissed by the judge, a statement from US Potter publisher Scholastic reveals. The statement reads:

Scholastic is extremely pleased that Judge Scheindlin decided to dismiss, at the earliest stage possible, the lawsuit brought against Scholastic by the estate of Adrian Jacobs. The Court’s swift dismissal supports our position that the case was completely without merit and that comparing Willy the Wizard to the Harry Potter series was absurd. Judge Scheindlin clearly agreed, stating: “¦the contrast between the total concept and feel of the works is so stark that any serious comparison of the two strains credulity.” Scholastic will continue to vigorously defend any such frivolous claims challenging the originality of Harry Potter and the brilliant imagination of its author, J.K. Rowling.

This ruling follows a request for dismissal petitioned by Bloomsbury last July. Previously, the estate of Mr. Jacobs charged the publisher and Ms. Rowling with copyright infringement of a 1987 work The Adventures of Willy the Wizard-No 1 Livid Land.





59 Responses to Copyright Lawsuit Against J. K. Rowling, Bloomsbury Dismissed by Judge

Avatar ImageNoble Birth Descending says: This is EXCELLENT news!Avatar ImageSohumdore says: awsome!Avatar ImageSohumdore says: awsome!Avatar ImageSohumdore says: awsome!Avatar ImageA Chocolate Frog says: Good to hear! I can't believe this suit took so long to get settled...it was clearly ridiculous from the start.Avatar ImageGottaGetBackToHogwarts says: Oh, willy...Avatar Imageksddancer says: Great for Jo! She is a brilliant lady and anyone who denies it needs to get rid of the wrackspurts in their brain! It's a relief that the judge dismissed it. It was a rather silly claim. Congrats Jo!Avatar Imagenealiezealbie says: oh, willy! why was this ever taken to court? anyway, congrats to jo; im sure she is happy that this is over!Avatar Imagegexpert says: Wizards are popular topic to use with children fantasy stories. It is not to my surprise that 2 stories happened to possess similar settings. Avatar ImageBless_the_children says: Epic WIN for the court system! I'm so glad Rowling doesn't have to keep going to these court appearances, it sounds like they really upset her.Avatar Imagesessionka says: Congratulations Scholastic and Jo!!!Avatar Imageshi suisen says: Hah! The lawsuit was stupid to begin with~Avatar ImageProfessor Witchard says: Wait, is the lawsuit against Jo and Bloomsbury, or Jo and Scholastic? The article says two different things...Avatar Imagechanngalambeatrice says: Yeah! That Adrain Jacobs was only jealous and wanted to rob from Rowling. Justice. :)Avatar Imagechanngalambeatrice says: Hey guys! I've created a group to celebrate this dismiss of lawsuit! http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/myleaky/groups/9994 Please come and join!Avatar ImageBelariRodas says: Remember, people... it wasn't Jacobs that was mounting the suit. He's been gone for over 10 years now. It was mounted under the name of his ESTATE, by someone else.Avatar ImageNicci Weasley says: GOOD!! Let's hope there will be no more of those pointless claims...!Avatar ImageLemonFaerie says: Awesome! As ridiculous as the suit was, you never know with the courts. I'm glad this judge clearly had his head on straight.Avatar ImageRedbeard says: It wasn't Jacobs himself? That explains a lot. I couldn't imagine a respectable writer humiliating himself for something so higly unlikely, just to get money. Avatar Imagekireiyuki says: Oh Willy......you know you went doooowwwn! XD Go Rowling.Avatar ImageDobbyWinkyKreacher says: excellent. now, hopefully no more idiotic and ridiculous false claims. Avatar ImageFleur-de- Lily says: This is EXCELLENT news!Avatar Imageroonwit says: This isn't the UK case against JKR and Bloomsbury, as that is still pending. This is presumably a separate case against Scholastic in the US (though possibly with the same evidence submitted). The BBC has a report at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12134288Avatar Imagemoglet says: I'm so glad that common sense has won the day, if you looked at the links to this other book the claims were utterly without merit, the standard of writing was not good, much of it was rather nonsensical and the so called similarities existed in the odd word as far as I could see. Thanks for that link roonwit, I'm slightly bemused by the judge in the British case who said "that the claims were "improbable," but he turned down an application by lawyers for Rowling and Bloomsbury for an immediate dismissal of the case." Hmm. well let's hope the US case sets a precedent and the case will get dismissed without giving Jo any more grief, wasting taxpayers money and additional court time on such a ridiculous claim. Avatar Imagemew5645 says: good!Avatar Imagedonna2011 says: I am a big Harry Potter fan and went to look at Willy the Wizard book site to see what it was like. On the site there is an extract that talks about Willy touching a dagger to transport him else where so I can see where the estate were coming from. But that does not mean that I can not enjoy both books and I am buying a copy of Willy the Wizard as it looks like a good story and fun illustrations. Avatar ImageWant to be a Weasley says: Poor JKR, everyone wants a piece of her success. Thank goodness the courts had common sense.Avatar Imageroonwit says: moglet: The UK judge decided that there a few things that could reasonably be tested in court, for example there were some apparent inaccuracies in Christopher Little's evidence. Hence I think his ruling was that there was a small chance of victory if the case proceeded rather than no chance at all.Avatar Imagekbicprez says: GREAT News! May this be the end of these ridiculous suits!Avatar Imageeccentricalice says: Glad this got thrown out early, what a silly claim it was!Avatar ImageCatherine_R_Williams says: I could write a book about how J.K. Rowling ended up with the Harry Potter story in which loads has not ever been told. I know that there are those who will not believe me. I know Jo would. I also just know what I know, I know why and how tired I am of having to prove it to anyone really. However I will if I must should it help any further down the line I feel it is most necessary. I conclude the claims of it being a copy of anyone elses published work is a case of inaccurate and inappropriate bollix. I wish to ask Jo to keep a chin up and just.. believe... keep strong.. close your eyes and slowly count your blessings. Got your hat on? Sitting down now are we? Well....... I am..... taking it a step further here is an Open letter to Jo. "Dear Jo, It was me, I did not think that I will be believed!" Avatar ImageCatherine_R_Williams says: I do not expect anyone to understand the open letter to Jo. However Jo knows why I would type what I did. Should she read it. That is all that matters.Avatar ImageCatherine_R_Williams says: Yes Jo I know. It need be only sent once. How do I know you even got the first one to being with? Or the copies? hmmm? My apologies. Not being rude whatsoever.Avatar ImageCDR says: At last!!It's great!!Avatar ImageLauraKeaton says: Yay! One less frivolous lawsuit in the world. Too bad more judges don't throw out junk lawsuits among average people.Avatar ImageDavidTheUnready says: Ridikulus law suitAvatar ImageWON_TWO says: Good to know this judge had all his head bolts properly tightened!Avatar Imagejhangelgurl says: Good it was such a silly lawsuit. It amazes me that even though the author is dead for more than 10 years that his estate wanted more money. Avatar Imageroonwit says: For those of you who like court documents, look at http://dockets.justia.com/docket/new-york/nysdce/1:2010cv05335/365374/ though the dismissal posting hasn't appeared yet.Avatar Imageanne1 says: common sense prevails! it was so obviously just a stunt by the estate for publicity in the hope that they'd make some money. unfortunately, it probably worked, people probably read the book just to compare, although I didn't on principle. I have nothing against the original author, who was not behind these claims.Avatar ImageExpectoPatronum512 says: YAAAYYY!!! XDAvatar ImageScylla says: I can't believe it took them so long - this whole case was insane.Avatar ImageGiant Squid says: Congratulations JK Rowling! There was never any doubt in the first place!Avatar ImageHogwartsHP says: It's a good news, justice !§! Jo is our magician♥♥♥!§!Avatar ImagePenelopeW says: It is entirely possible for two people to come up with stories with similarities without any knowledge of each other's work. It is also very possible for someone to produce a story line that turns out to be similar to another work of similar or different media without having any knowledge of that material. Not to sound crazy (I am in fact sane and educated, however also spiritual) but I agree with Michael Jackson's notion that when an idea comes to you there is a certain amount of time you have to make something of it before it is (cosmically) given to someone else. (BTW not a huge Michael fan, music aside, but everyone is right about something some of the time) When it happens to you and you don't take it and run with it, all you should do is kick your own butt for working on it too slow or with less intensity. What you should not do is sue the person who took it and ran with it when you've had 10 or 20 or however many years to do something with it. We live in a society that blames everyone else for their own circumstances, rather than admitting that they have to change or move on. People will always be jealous of how far JK ran with her little spark of an idea and want a piece of her. It is just a shame that these things aren't thrown out as soon as they come in; but as you learn in life, everyone has the right to waste your time, especially if you choose to go into law.Avatar ImageAgrippa1 says: Excellent work on the part of that judge to dismiss this as a frivolous lawsuit which would waste time and money senselessly - Yea for Jo!Avatar ImageMJBDE15 says: " the brilliant imagination of its author, J.K. Rowling." Nuff said. Avatar Imageazaadpotter says: Congratulations. That was the most ridiculous lawsuit in the first placeAvatar ImageCDR says: Great!!!Avatar ImageCatherine says: GREAT!!!!!! Congrats yo Jo and Scholastic and Bloomsbury! the case was absurd!!!Avatar Imagenimbus2010 says: yay! such a nutty claim...Avatar Imagefalkowska says: Excellent! It was a stupid charge. Avatar ImageNot Slytherin says: I find this story rather sad ... I'm so glad that Jo was vindicated, but it's unfortunate to think that Mr. Jacobs' estate believed there was a copyright infringement in the first place.Avatar Imagetgfoy says: Sorry to be a party pooper but I don't think this is the end of this story. I am happy that the U.s. case appears to have been dismissed, but think the Uk one is still on going, at least according to this post on the Willy website dated 7/1/11. http://www.willythewizard.com/story024.html any chance of any one in the know clarifying this please. Avatar Imageroonwit says: tgfoy: According to http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/copycat-case-against-rowling-thrown-out-by-new-york-judge-1.1078664 quoting Jo's UK lawyer, there is a hearing in mid-March for the UK case to decide what conditions to impose on Paul Allen for the case to continue (Jo's side requested some surety be lodged with the court to cover costs if Allen's side with an "improbable" chance of success lose).Avatar Imagetgfoy says: Many thanks RoonwitAvatar Imagegreenfinch says: thank god. that lawsuit was so ridiculous. more than one author has used magic schools, it's not a completely unique idea.Avatar Imagechuzzle says: Willy the Wizard?? gee, that sounds STUPID!Avatar Imagelunawannabe says: The guy's appealing now...

Write a Reply or Comment

The Leaky Cauldron is not associated with J.K. Rowling, Warner Bros., or any of the individuals or companies associated with producing and publishing Harry Potter books and films.