Interesting dilemma

[thatwasjen]

Author J.K. Rowling is suing the publisher of an encyclopedia based on her blockbuster "Harry Potter" series of children's books. She says she had planned her own reference guide cataloguing the characters and events in the series

Comments

[anjabeth]

Brushing aside the fanfic issue (some of which is remarkable good, IMHO), I believe the HP lexicon will not run afoul of US Copyright laws because it is not a work that uses her characters or other intellectual property, but is instead a guide to her characters and intellectual property. For the same reasons that Cliff's Notes, or "The Unofficial guide to XXXXX", or even the encyclopedia aren't violating anyone's copyrights, the lexicon wouldn't be, either. And it really has not much to do with profit, since the copyright laws speak more to the point of who has the right to publish a given work or create derivative works from it. If Steve Vander Ark has done all of the research in reading her novels and creating a cross-reference work detailing the characters, places, events, and their interrelations, then that is really his work, and RDR books should be allowed to publish it. If he had written a new novel using her characters, then it's really not entirely his work, because he doesn't have the rights to use those characters. It's a fine point, but as generator of intellectual property myself, I've given myself a pretty decent education in it. :)

I really like JK Rowling, I have voraciously read her novels, and am a strong supporter of copyright enforcement, but I really think she is wrong in this case.

YMMV :)

[thatwasjen]

Oh, interesting point. Does Cliffs Notes have to get the permission of living authors (or recently dead authors' estates)? Does it matter that those involve analysis, where as a simple gazetteer is barely more than a list?

I wonder about the encyclopedia. It seems like a unique case, more like a news report where copyright law doesn't have jurisdiction.

the fanfic issue (some of which is remarkable good, IMHO)
Yes, and some non-copyright-infringing work is remarkably bad.