NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "J.K. Rowling didn't make enough money on Harry Potter, so she had to make sure that the 'Harry Potter Lexicon' was shut down. After a trial in Manhattan in Warner Bros. v. RDR Books, she won, getting the judge to agree with her (and her friends at Warner Bros. Entertainment) that the 'Lexicon' did not qualify for fair use protection. In a 68-page decision (PDF) the judge concluded that the Lexicon did a little too much 'verbatim copying', competed with Ms. Rowling's planned encyclopedia, and might compete with her exploitation of songs and poems from the Harry Potter books, although she never made any such claim in presenting her evidence. The judge awarded her $6750, and granted her an injunction that would prevent the 'Lexicon' from seeing the light of day." Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Without examining the texts myself, it seems reasonable that it might not be fair use. And the award is quite reasonable for copyright infringement, compared to what the RIAA's demanding.
I agree.
Her books might be plagued with bad latin and consistency errors, but Rowling did come up with those characters, places, spells, poems, etc.
One thing is to write fanfiction, and quite another is to compile a list of places and names and sell them to Potter junkies.
It was a classic fair use. Sorry to disagree with you.
Besides, based on what we know of her, Rowling will probably donate the $6750.00 to a charity.
So what? She's depriving someone else of making a living.
Without examining the texts myself, it seems reasonable that it might not be fair use.
I disagree.
I'm not quite clear here. Are you saying that you've read the texts and believe it's fair use, or that without reading you just believe it's impossible for it not to be fair use?
Neither. I'm assuming that the facts are as described by the Judge, and saying that based on the facts found by the judge, his legal conclusions are incorrect.
Seems reasonable... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree.
Her books might be plagued with bad latin and consistency errors, but Rowling did come up with those characters, places, spells, poems, etc.
One thing is to write fanfiction, and quite another is to compile a list of places and names and sell them to Potter junkies.
Besides, based on what we know of her, Rowling will probably donate the $6750.00 to a charity.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree. Her books might be plagued with bad latin and consistency errors, but Rowling did come up with those characters, places, spells, poems, etc. One thing is to write fanfiction, and quite another is to compile a list of places and names and sell them to Potter junkies.
It was a classic fair use. Sorry to disagree with you.
Besides, based on what we know of her, Rowling will probably donate the $6750.00 to a charity.
So what? She's depriving someone else of making a living.
Re: (Score:2)
Without examining the texts myself, it seems reasonable that it might not be fair use.
I disagree.
And the award is quite reasonable for copyright infringement, compared to what the RIAA's demanding.
I agree. I think it was the judge's way of giving him an incentive not to appeal.
Re: (Score:1)
Without examining the texts myself, it seems reasonable that it might not be fair use.
I disagree.
I'm not quite clear here. Are you saying that you've read the texts and believe it's fair use, or that without reading you just believe it's impossible for it not to be fair use?
Re: (Score:2)