Slashdot Mirror


Rowling Sues Harry Potter Lexicon

Snape kills Trinity with Rosebud writes "Apparently famous authors don't like it if you try to make a buck using their imaginary property because J.K. Rowling is suing the publishers of the Harry Potter Lexicon for infringement. This should prove an interesting test case for fair use given that the lexicon contains mostly factual information about the series, not copies of the books' text. Of course, both sides seem a bit touchy about imaginary property rights, with Rowling's lawyers being miffed after being told to print it themselves when they asked for a paper copy of the lexicon's website, and the lexicon website itself using one of those insipid right click disabling scripts."

10 of 527 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Out of creative juice.. become an IP vulture. by heinousjay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, who does this woman think she is? All she did was all the hard work in creating something. Who is she to profit from it?

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  2. Re:Out of creative juice.. become an IP vulture. by fractoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    She's a billionaire who has profited from it. It's not like she is in the gutter eating scraps of food. Let me rephrase the GP's post:

    Seriously, who does this woman think she is? All she did was all the hard work in creating something. Who is she to profit more than you say she should from it?
    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  3. Re:well that's funny by Kierthos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did the publishers of those books make a deal with the publishers of the Harry Potter books? Unless we're talking about those "fanfic" Chinese HP books, I'll bet they did.

    And there's the crux of the matter. If the publishers/creators/whatever of this lexicon had sat down and hammered out a deal with the HP publishers, there wouldn't be a court case. But it looks like they're trying to do an end run around those publishers, possibly in order to keep all the potential cash for themselves.

    Which is damned foolish, considering the amount of money they're going to have spend on lawyers.

    --
    Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
  4. "imaginary property" by richie2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think we should use the phrase imaginary property much more often.

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
  5. Re:well that's funny by hdparm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...which is also tax deductible.

  6. Re:well that's funny by edwardpickman · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It was her choice to stop writing Harry Potter books and she had planned this for a decade so it has nothing to do with running out of ideas.

    A lot of people seem to feel the situation is different because she made a billion or so off the Potter series. Why legally has her situation changed since she was an out of work single mother handwriting a novel? She worked for more than a decade creating the characters so why shouldn't she have the right to control her work? If she allows people to freely expand on her work then she looses control and it becomes something she never intended. It happened with Robert E Howard's work after his death. Many other authors added to his mythologies but none of them equaled the original and most were just trying to make a buck off something popular. Nothing is stopping any of these people from creating original works but they know it's easier to get noticed if you lift from something popular. This is more about taking the easy road to success than creating something. She didn't take the easy road so why should others be allowed to ride her coat tails? Rowlings got lucky with the success of the series but I'm thrilled for her. She's not part of the evil empire she's a little person that made good and crossed over. She should be an axample to everyone not some one to villify when she tries to protect her creation.

  7. Re:well that's funny by z0idberg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If her lawyers are working for free I will eat my hat.

    In my very limited opinion it is a grey area as to whether this is infringement or not. According to this post Rowling was planning a similar book the profits of which would go to charity, so she asked Lexicon to at least do the same which they wouldn't do.

    If she is so concerned about getting money to her charity then why not make "the official" version of the book and donate the proceeds to charity, then instead of pushing the boundaries of fair use with a potentially long and expensive trial donate the money she would have spent on a trial to her charity as well?

    That way at least the pile of money that would have been swallowed up by lawyers fees goes to charity. So what if Lexicon makes some money off it as well? did they not put some time and effort into this? With a trial instead of Lexicon making some money it is the lawyers on both sides that make the money that charity will never see.

    This comes across less like forcing the profits of the book to go to charity and more like being bitter about someone else getting a (tiny) slice of money out of the H.P. empire.

  8. Re: suing for charity... by Macthorpe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do some actual charity work yourself, Rowling. rather than farming it out. Here's a link where JK wrote two books specifically for charity.

    Consider this a learning experience.
    --
    "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
  9. Re:Out of creative juice.. become an IP vulture. by elFisico · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I support the idea of having a lexicon/wiki/whatever. But going out and trying to sell the information that is inside the books is taking it too far. Wrong. Information is free (well, it used to be and it definitely should). It is the physical representation of that information that gets protection, via copyright or patents.

    So Rowling is clearly in the wrong if she insists that the whole H.P. universe is protected because she invented it. Only her words describing that universe are protected. The lexicon has every right to collect and write about each and every item in that universe, using the exact names and concepts and so forth. But it must not use any of Rowlings sentences to do so...
  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion