From the Scotsman newspaper today

[slashfairy]

http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1312472007

follow down: second half about 'slash porn' and harry potter.

ETA: pictishqueen in comments below http://community.livejournal.com/innocence_jihad/210129.html?thread= ( Read more... )

Comments

[her_schism]

Eh, I don't really believe it. Because now would be a really stupid time to say "LOL. SLASH IS TEH SUCK." as opposed to you know, about 7 years ago when HP was starting to explode and slash was starting to become more mainstream. And she's always allowed people to do fanfic and such. I think it's just a matter of either miscommunication or just making shit up.

Plus, shouldn't she be singling out het too?

[aphrodeia]

It's a shame that we keep drawing attention to ourselves.

[lilimarrionette]

What bothers me is the fact they call it a huge global problem. and the whole maintaining the character's image. Ok, most children who read Harry Potter probably don't read slash. Slash is targeted towards teenage girls (and boys sometimes). Also, no one is making money off of Harry Potter slash (except dounjinshi artists perhaps) so what's the problem.

[pictishqueen]

I dealt with this in the comments further down - this is sloppy journalism based on a rehash of a six year old article, garnished with a quote lifted from a Nelly Furtado fan site thread. The quotes from Time Warner (AOL Time Warner as they were then) are from 2001.

http://community.livejournal.com/innocence_jihad/210129.html?thread=3622097#t3622097

[serenanna]

Ok, if this article is true, then how come Fiction Alley, Portkey, and Sugar Quill haven't been hit yet? Or Fanfiction.net, or Aff.net?

I'm not in the HP fandom, but I am on aff.net's forum. If they got hit by a legal problem, that place would be the first to know but nada.

[serenanna]

Ok. I take that back. ::points up:: Thank you, Pictishqueen.