JK Rowling wins Harry Potter copyright case
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Harry Potter author JK Rowling has triumphed over small online publisher Steven Vander Ark.
“The Harry Potter Lexicon – This is such a great site that I have been known to sneak into an internet café while out writing and check a fact rather than go into a bookshop and buy a copy of Harry Potter (which is embarrassing). A website for the dangerously obsessive; my natural home.”
The words were Rowling’s and, as p2pnet posted, they appeared on her official site, which was was a little peculiar considering she later said she’d feel “exploited” if Vander Ark published his online Harry Potter Lexicon, an unofficial reference guide to the Potter series, as a hardcover book.
So she sued him in a case which had the Stanford Law School’s Fair Use Project representing would-be Harry Potter Lexicon publisher RDR Books in a copyright lawsuit lodged by Rowling and her partners, Warner Bros.
Now, “Author JK Rowling has won her legal battle in a New York court to get an unofficial Harry Potter encyclopaedia banned from publication,” says the BBC.
“Judge Robert Patterson said in a ruling Ms Rowling, 43, had proven Steven Vander Ark’s Harry Potter Lexicon would cause her irreparable harm as a writer.”
Patterson said reference materials could help readers, but Vander Ark had gone too far.
“While the Lexicon, in its current state, is not a fair use of the Harry Potter works, reference works that share the Lexicon’s purpose of aiding readers of literature generally should be encouraged rather than stifled,” the story has Patterson saying.
p2pnet – Harry Potter goes to court: Rowling case, April 14, 2008
BBC – Rowling wins book copyright claim, September 8, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
September 9th, 2008 at 10:02 am
I hope she writes something new, and others like me refuse to buy it.
Not another dime for Rowling from my family .. ever.
All because she might someday get around to writing her own lexicon ..eventually ..and
would go ‘broke’ if she ever eventually got around to maybe writing it.
September 9th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Hmm i actually don’t think there’s anything particularly wrong with what she’s done, an online reference is great and all, but once someone starts making money off of someone else’s work (even if they’ve put in some work of their own), that should really be where the line is drawn. For instance we’re all backing up the guy who invented the i-pod but got no money out of it, but when it comes to someone “with money” they don’t deserve the same level of defence against their works being plundered? I think sharing of info, in whatever form, movies, books, music, (anything basically), is ok as long as the person distributing them is not making money off of them. In that sense P2P sharing is great and all, and I do agree with the fact that the music industry is wrong to count each download as a lost sale, wouldn’t you agree though that if people actually started reselling music en masse it would be wrong?
September 9th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Because of this ruling, publishers will now be much more hesitant to put out reference books that complement others’ work. Remember the Star Trek Technical Manuals? The guide books for various software packages? TV show “companion” books? This ruling will set a precedent that will allow other authors to either block, or squeeze money out of anyone who writes such books.
September 10th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
” This ruling will set a precedent that will allow other authors to either block, or squeeze money out of anyone who writes such books. ”
Whether or not the original author ever plans on making their own.
That’s the most damning point.
Even if they never ever would have created one on their own .. no one else can either.
Another way of corporate control of information.
note that the suit was run by Warner Brothers.