The copyright lawsuit between JK Rowling and The Harry Potter Lexicon finished yesterday, but don’t think you can go back to not giving a stuff about it again.
As you remember, JK Rowling claims that The Harry Potter Lexicon unfairly and illegally plagiarises the Harry Potter novels, while the makers of The Harry Potter Lexicon just claim that it’s nothing more than a reference book. And now the case has concluded.
However, we won’t know if JK Rowling or The Harry Potter Lexicon author Steven Vander Ark will win yet, because the judge needs to go away and think about it. And he won’t do that until both JK Rowling and Steven Vander Ark have submitted written summations of their arguments to him. We’re just guessing here, but we’d assume that Vander Ark’s summation is going to be identical to Rowling’s, but with a couple of words changed and cheaper-looking artwork.
Chances are the copyright lawsuit between Harry Potter author JK Rowling and the makers of The Harry Potter Lexicon has had you on the edge of your seat, assuming that you really have nothing better to do than concern yourself with a petty legal squabble between an obscenely rich woman and the makers of a trashy cash-in book that you wouldn’t have even known existed otherwise. If that’s you, then consider this your Super Bowl.
So, to quickly get everyone up to speed, this is what happened. David Vander Ark ran a Harry Potter fan website that JK Rowling gave an award to once. Then there were plans to turn the website into a book, which JK Rowling didn’t like the idea of because she was writing a similar Harry Potter reference book and she thought that Vander Ark’s book would step on its toes. JK Rowling sued David Vander Ark to stop publication of The Harry Potter Lexicon, saying that it amounted to theft. And that’s where we are today.
Well, almost. Yesterday was the final day of the court case in New York, and JK Rowling took to the stand once again to angrily declare that she’s being royally ripped off, as the New York Daily News reports:
Author JK Rowling Wednesday trashed the geeky librarian who’s trying to publish a Harry Potter encyclopedia as a literary thief who ripped off her novels. “If I may say so without being arrogant or vain,” Rowling [said], “I think there are funny things in there, and I wrote them.”… This time around, Rowling, wearing a crisp, white jacket, was testier, turning away from her lawyer to speak directly to Patterson as she urged him to defend authors like herself against plagiarists. “I did not fly here because I thought I would lose some sales,” Rowling said. “If this book is allowed to be published, the floodgates will open….I see this as an incredibly important case. Are we or are we not the owners of our own work?”
JK Rowling has a point. If she loses this case, then web nerds everywhere will be able to make their own hastily-compiled reference books – not just about Harry Potter, but about any rubbish, inexplicably popular series of kid’s books. It might be Harry Potter today, but tomorrow it’ll be Clifford The Big Red Dog. Is that something you want on your conscience? Is it?
Anyway, nobody’s going to know who’s come out on top of this case for a while, because the judge has requested that both JK Rowling and Steven Vander Ark hand in written summations of their arguments for him to peruse before coming to a conclusion. And if the Harry Potter books are anything to go by, JK Rowling’s summation is going to be about four billion pages long and full of about 18 pointless Quidditch matches. So don’t expect a result for a while.
Read more:
Harry Potter ‘Lexicon’ trial gets testier – New York Daily News
Keith Mansfield says
As a children’s author worth perhaps only a billionth of JKR, I still support her wholeheartedly in this case. The only argument I’ve heard in favour of Vander Ark’s publisher is that surely JKR doesn’t need the money. What if it were an impoverished author (ie me!) in the same position? It’s not about money – it’s about protecting the characters you’ve created. How can someone else expect to profit so directly from JKR’s author notes?
mst3kster says
Why would anyone write a lexicon on an impoverished author’s collection of writings? To become even more impoverished than the impoverished author, I guess.
Sorry, your post makes no sense.
Or cents.
Joe in CA says
I totally see Rowling’s point. It’s not the money, but that someone’s actually pretending to have written works that are not his, and then making money off of it. Just because a work is popular doesn’t mean other people have the right to slap their name on it and capitalize on it. It’s wrong. This guy needs to get an actual job instead of sitting on the internet obsessing about Harry Potter. Cutting and pasting gets you NO-WHERE. Even if it IS the works of your heart’s most sincere desire. I bet Vander Ark pleasures himself while looking at stolen pictures of Harry Potter nekkid.