AA's "Fat Flier" Got Whole Row
Ashley Dupre On Tiger Woods' Babes: "At Least I Kept My Mouth Shut"
Same-Sex Marriage Blame Game Aims at Paterson, Addabbo
Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Rihanna's Random Airport Search
J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. have won their copyright infringement lawsuit against a web site operator who intended to publish an encyclopedia based on the author's multi-billion dollar fantasy franchise. Today a judge agreed with Rowling's argument that Steven Vander Ark's Harry Potter Lexicon would amount to "the wholesale theft of 17 years of my hard work." Vander Ark and his publisher had contended that the lexicon was a fair use allowable by law for reference books. But today's ruling found that it "appropriates too much of Rowling's creative work for its purposes as a reference guide." The judge also awarded Rowling and Warner Bros. $6,750 in statutory damages, which should finally permit the struggling author to enjoy a modest retirement.
Judge Rules Against Harry Potter Lexicon
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (17) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Newsmap
Contribute
I feel sorry for the guy. This was his life. It's not like people who didn't go out and buy and read the books already are planning on reading the Lexicon website, so why the big deal?
Expellilexicus!
Bitch.
haha - thats funny John.
Wow. She invented gibberish. Tolkien did it too. And he didn't bother suing nerds.
Let's take a look at words created by a true wordsmith: Words invented by William Shakespeare.
wow what a bitch.
I am huge Harry Potter fan, and now I have to say:
JK Rowling I hope a Death Eater disembowels your children.
This is absurd. What this gent has compiled is an academic work, and it's no different than an Encyclopedia for Shakespeare,Jane Austen or a reading guide for 'Ulysses'. Beyond that, it's gross. JK Rowling has more money than her, her children and grandchildren can ever spend, yet she is putting someone through the ringer for admiring her writing enough to research and catalogue it. That's greed. Artists are supposed to be a bit of a different species.
Bitch? Hardly. Copyright infringement = srs bzns.
contro is that Mario banging Goldilocks? Wtf!
How does Webster's unabridged dictionary get away with listing new words?
They are not "words" but spells, because she is a witch.
Copyright laws in this country is a joke in itself.
He didn't lose for writing a reference book. He lost for trying to publish a reference book that relied too heavily on the source material. Not a hard concept to grasp.
Nicely said, emilydickinson.
Rowling's a pill.
This case is not about JK Rowling or nerds. Its about traditional limits on copyrights being over turned by multinational corporations. A previous comment drew a comparison to Tolkien; the difference between Tolkien's era and the Rowling suit is its unlikely Tolkien's suit against a similar project would have ever seen the inside of a courtroom. It probably would have been dismissed before even reaching that point. This is simply a win for large corporations. The whole intent of copyright is to encourage the production of intellectual material, not suppress it. Copyright was to create a financial incentive for the creation of new works. Yet, all this ruling has done is allowed Rowling to continue to profit from existing creations, and allow her children and eventual grandchildren to profit without ever writing another book. That is not how copyright is suppose to work.
a lot of haters here, or people who don't understand copyright. as someone who watched order of the phoenix this weekend (yeah, i own it), i have to tell you that AHT is right & most of you muggles are wrong.
even steven vander ark knew it was wrong & had the publisher put into his contract that they would defend any lawsuits. i read it in the daily prophet you mugblood!
Just because she's right doesn't mean we have to like that mad old slag or her shite prose.