You many have read in the Press that JK Rowling and her publishers are taking a fan (and his publishers) to court to stop the publication of a Fan made reference encyclopidia aobut the Harry Potter universe. She thinks only she should be able to write about her work.

Sound a bit familiar?

Here's one of the news articles from the BBC:

Potter fan faces Rowling in court

The author of an unofficial Harry Potter encyclopaedia broke down as he faced JK Rowling in court in a battle over the right to publish his book. Steven Vander Ark said his only goal was to celebrate Rowling, sitting in front of him, who he called a "genius".

Rowling had earlier told the court his plans to publish The Harry Potter Lexicon amounted to "wholesale theft". She is suing Mr Vander Ark and his publisher RDR Books in New York for copyright infringement.

Asked whether he still thought of himself as part of the Harry Potter fan community, Mr Vander Ark struggled to speak through tears.

"I do," he said. "It's been... it's been difficult because there's been a lot of criticism, obviously, but... it has been an important part of my life for the last nine years or so."

Mr Vander Ark set up The Harry Potter Lexicon fan site, a detailed guide to the characters, spells and creatures from Rowling's magical stories, in 2000. He told the US District Court in Manhattan it was a hobby until RDR Books approached him to publish a print version last year.

Mr Vander Ark said he was initially against the idea, partly because he thought it would violate copyright law, but was reassured by RDR that they could publish legally.

The 50-year-old librarian said he had read every Harry Potter book "30 or 40 times" and read every article ever written about Rowling. He also said he was working on two more books about the Harry Potter universe.

In response to Mr Vander Ark's testimony, a spokesman for Rowling and Warner Bros said in a statement: "A fan's affectionate enthusiasm should not obscure acts of plagiarism.

On Monday, Rowling told the court she had stopped work on a new novel because her legal concerns had "decimated my creative work". She denied the case was about money and accused Mr Vander Ark of "an act of betrayal" in using her fiction as the basis for his guide.

"He has simply taken it and copied it," she said. "It is sloppy, lazy and it takes my work wholesale."

Rowling and Warner Bros are seeking to block publication of The Harry Potter Lexicon and are seeking damages for copyright and federal trademark infringement.

Warner Bros is owned by Time Warner Inc, which owns the copyright and trademark rights to the Harry Potter books.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/h...349913.stm


What do you think? Should the artist be allowed that amount of control? Do you think its any more that what Prince is asking?

i think, like Prince, she is right.

dawntreader said:

I have to agree.

what difference does it make. people are always looking anywhere but inside themselves for fulfillment. its so defeatist.

art? artists? novelists? creators of worlds? fans? followers? admirers?

who?

hopefully one day the whole world will wake up and get over itself. there's people starving out there and JK is whinging? she's a millionaire! shut up!

its a sickness bred by a loveless world of me mine you yours..

whatever happened to ours?

its all an illusion as far as i can see cuz there's nothing about it that engages me in the slightest.

Fox said:

this post makes little sense when you know that Rowling gave away lots and lots of money for charity.

it's more about other people just thinking about themselves really and trying to get rich (in any sense) on something they haven't created.

dawntreader said:

But that would lead to autobiography being next to face the chop. They make money from someones elses fame and work.

I think its a slippery slope.

SquirrelMeat said:

you mean biography i think. but that has to do more with fame than with work really. but you are right, slippery indeed and therefore i think Prince's actions are very interesting and challenging.

dawntreader said:

of course my post makes little sense. i'm over here with perspective.

just as fans of an artiste/novelist become obsessive to the point where they dont even realise what they're doing, so do artistes become obsessed with themselves to the point where they dont even realise what they're doing.

some fans just want to feel like they're part of something because its all they've got.

its a humanitarian and ethical issue/problem that starts long before any1 creates or rips off anything.

a gaping hole in the collective womb of the moral fibre we lose as children when our egos develop bigger than Jupiter and we're so cut off from feeling any sense of togetherness with the rest of the human race we jus figure "f you. i did this. u cant have it. ner." or "i'm so empty. can i be part of your world and be so up inside it that i'll even make money off what u've done and wont have the slightest clue as to how completely empty i really i am inside cuz this is fulfilling me. right?"

look at whats happening in the world.

why?

Fox said:

we need to go deep because it's the only way that we can rise up?

she has no case. I hope she loses. People have the right to wirght about things. This is a book about her books. It is not going to hurt sales of hers. She is greedy.

dawntreader said:

in my honest opinion? yes. in some respects. u cant know what right is til u've done a whole bunch of wrong.

some people believe we cant even know what goodness really is until we experience the worst kind of evil.

and how can u know what its like to feel whole inside, at peace, content, free, unless you've felt empty tortured and imprisoned in some way..

maybe i'm just an idealist, but it sure would be nice if we could avoid all of that altogether and just be happy.

i really dont see the problem. its a choice, not a bargaining position.

and what a revelation it is when we wake up and realise there are no victims, nor are there victors. just a bunch of sacrifices of personal pride and disillusionment that vanish when we reconnect with our own inner sense of justice and our birthright to be loved, by ourselves and others.

turn on the tv and what do u see? crap. flat out crap. pumping at you 24/7 unless ur watching some cool documentary or a funny show, or, thank God, a decent movie. but the rest of it is just a machine generating nightmare after nightmare of everything we're not, and everything the world was never meant to be.

people get stuck in that loop and actually live it, thinking their on solid ground! most mass media, whether its commercial art or books or whatever, is happening AT you with a big fat slogan attached.. "BUY ME. I WANT YOUR SOUL. BE MY SLAVE"

so what happens? people do! they hand over their whole life to some random fad, and i dont say that to trivialise the work of great artists and in this case novelist, but if u take a walk outside and feel the breeze and actually breathe in and out for a moment, all the clinging we do to other people's stuff is suddenly very pointless!

art, books, movies, etc.. there to be enjoyed and put in proper perspective, as inspirations we're grateful to receive.

artists, moviemakers, novelists..thank u! count your blessings cuz when the winds of change pick u up and drop u down harder than an avalanche for your own benefit, ur gunna need all the gratitude you can get to free u from your mind-prison that you put urself in. no one else.

...Although I have avoided the Harry Potter books, and did not allow my children to read them, I liked the movie...I think she writes well.

The spiritual issue is this...Witchcraft borrows the Holy Bible for strength, and treats Jesus like the middle man, when He should be placed on the throne of your intentions.
I am a Christian that believes she will have to account for her actions in a divine courtroom...
[Edited 4/17/08 5:46am]

Oh my god.....you've bred?????

SquirrelMeat said:

Not actually, I was artificially inseminated 4 times...With sperm from four father's
Valentino
Christopher Columbus
Sammy Davis Jr.
and
Walt Disney.

Tame said:

So did you name him Sammy Davis Junior Junior? That would be cool.

Tame said:

Fortunately, most sentient beings, children and adults, Christian and otherwise, who read Rowling's work, recognise it as entertaining and harmless fiction, devoid of anything that remotely suggests borrowing the Holy Bible for strength or treating Jesus like a middle man.

JK Rowling has ALWAYS been very protective of the HP franchise, so this is not surprising.

I think LIKE PRINCE, she COULD open up a little and see how others view her work.

It sounds like the "HP Encyclopedia" was done out of love. She COULD look it over, advise on any changes she feels necessary and give it her approval.

"Official" vs "Unofficial" That could be what it boils down to. He certainly is not "stealing"...he has given her full credit for her work.

What I do find offensive, and this is MHO, is that he has gone as far as to write 2 more "HP" books. To me, that crosses the line.

Nothinbutjoy said:

I guess it sounds like a reasonable solution
but I'm thinking that he could have asked permission first
or brought the idea to her and worked along with her
so she could achieve the quality she wanted to keep for the series.
And I thought that I read somewhere that she was
eventually going to publish something of that sort
(I'm not sure what it was she was going to publish but some overview)
and if this man had published his interpretation of her work,
then wouldn't he have frustrated her plans to publish
her 'official' overview version of her work?
(Just my opinion)