The Telegraph reports that J.K. Rowling is testifying today in New York against a fan named Steve Vander Ark over his book The Harry Potter Lexicon. The unofficial reference book, based on the author's fan site (which she's on record as loving), was scheduled to be published by RDR Books, a little publisher whose catalog includes As Good As New: A Consumer's Guide to Dental Implants.
On its website, RDR explains its fair-use defense. An excerpt: "J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. are asserting a startling claim," said Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project and counsel on the case. "The right to create literary reference guides like the Lexicon has remained nearly unquestioned for hundreds of years. The Lexicon is a valuable resource that helps people better understand and enjoy the Harry Potter books. It's exactly what copyright law should encourage, not suppress."
But according to J.K. Rowling, as quoted by Reuters, she's been planning to write just such a companion book and is "very frustrated that a former fan has tried to co-opt my work for financial gain." She calls the Lexicon a "rip-off."
We're not really seeing what the problem is with unauthorized literary supplements or biographies or any of that. They're marked "unauthorized." And they just fan the flames of fandom, so why not let the geeks' O.C.D. run wild? It's not like when Rowling's book comes out millions of people are going to opt for this small-press version instead. Half the pages on RDR's website don't even work.
And this legal action seems like a big PR blunder for Rowling. Even if there was lots of money on the line (which there doesn't really seem to be), isn't it sort of unseemly that one of the richest women on the planet, "richer than the queen," as the BBC reminds us, is suing some poor schlub librarian who just happens to be kind of ridiculously obsessed with her books?
UPDATE (4/17): The librarian broke down on the stand and started crying. He sounds like maybe the sweetest person on the planet. Also, as you can see in the photo if you follow the above link, he totally has Harry Potter's haircut.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 2)
1. a
umut at 1:09PM on Apr 14th 2008
2. If it's a crummy third-party knock off, fans will recognize this and not purchase it. Rowling might take note that her Harry Potter world is fantasy and another author commenting on her fantasy world does not actually change her fantasy world.
She might want to consider being flattered that her creativity has spawned so many loyal followers, though, I guess her modesty does not extend this far.
Phil at 1:28PM on Apr 14th 2008
3. It's not as easy as that.
Copywrite law isn't cut and dry. It's a daily messy fight between some one who creates something and wants to profit off it and people who don't understand how to respect the creative process. Thanks to the internet it's virtually impossible to keep others from using intellectual property, so the next line in the war of intellectual property is printing. If Rowling just gave this guy a pass, what's next? The unauthorized pillow stories of Dumbledore? The story, the world, and the characters inside it are hers and unless she wants so throw ownership to the wolves then she has to use the law to draw the line and show that no matter how much you are a fan, Harry Potter is hers and she is the only one who is allowed to determine what will and won't be published for it.
Somber at 2:18PM on Apr 14th 2008
4. It sounds as though he has created a book similar to "cliff's notes" which every highschool student for the past 100 years has been using to pass english class. I see nothing wrong with a 3rd party creating that type of book.
It would be interesting to view the Potter world from someone's eyes other than JK Rowling.
jeniann at 3:20PM on Apr 14th 2008
5. Just to throw something extra into the debate - JK has stated for ages that she's planning to write an HP Encyclopedia of her own, with all proceeds going to charity.
Having a fan beat her to it for personal profit kind of sucks.
And I can see an encyclopedia being an infringement. What is an encyclopedia but a rehashing of what she's written? It's not like he's writing a commentary or critique of the story. He simply wants to republish her details in a different format. He probably doesn't make much money, if any, from his website so she sees it as a harmless tool (particularly if half his pages don't work?), but making thousands (or more) from a published book is a different thing altogether.
Jo at 3:38PM on Apr 14th 2008
6. I might add that Cliff's Notes suck, and only give a Reader's Digest version of the story. It'll get you a 'C' grade at best. If anyone is to do a lexicon it would be Rowlings alone, unless of course she has long since passed, or agrees to a large % of the profit. This is not about money in the least...she has plenty of that. It's about creative rights. This guy has only done this to profit on someone else's ingenuity. We call these folks 'posers' You should all be thankful that she sold the movie rights. There's a reason that Atlas Shrugged has never been made into a movie. That is, the Fountainhead was butchered. I'm even wondering if Harry Potter will be a literary classic, or if it is simply a trend.
MrWiteKES at 5:19PM on Apr 14th 2008
7. Personally, I don't think Ms. Rowling is doing the "right" thing...though, as it is her property she's certainly at liberty to do as she pleases.
However, as the article states, this is not a new trend, and fan-made lexicons and encyclopedias have been around for years and years. Just look at LOTR or Narnia, and you'll see what I mean. Obviously, the Official Harry Potter Encyclopedia will be the one most consumers will purchase, as it'll be the only one technically Canon. But a cheap, "in-the-meantime" version wouldn't be all that bad, and would certainly help to assuage the growing disinterest in all things Harry Potter, as JK Rowling is taking forever to make her own.
Carlton at 7:47PM on Apr 14th 2008
8. This kind of thing goes on in Japan all the time.Publishers look upon it as a good thing because it brings awareness to their media. The Japanese Manga market would crash if it was not for fan works (even ones done for profit) raising intrest in the original material. The two markets end up supporting eachother this way, and both thrive off of the unspoken aggreement that the production companies will not sue, and the fan artists do not try to pass their work off as original material.
Western companies could learn a lesson from this example.
Vash at 8:27PM on Apr 14th 2008
9. I guess the one thing I don't understand is, if Steve Vander Ark is such a big fan of Harry Potter, and this whole situation is upsetting JK Rowling so much, why would he even continue with his endeavor? Why would he want to piss off the author of his favorite book series? She created the characters and universe, shouldn't her feelings matter a little?
Molly at 9:20PM on Apr 14th 2008
10. While JK's feelings should be respected, the Lexicon isn't exactly copyright infringement. As long as he gives credit where it is due (such as Rowling's quotes and, obviously, books) he should be in the clear. I'm not privvy to any details, tho.
Vash has the right idea - manga markets would crash without the fan-made guides and doujinshi. It's great to get different views of the characters and storyline through the doujin and keep the fans interested.
And as for the "Dumbledore pillow stories," those have been around for quite some time. Fanfiction.net thrives on it. Her lawyers have already made a big stink about fan-made material on the web - I'm worried what this will do to their rights.
I'm not a huge fan, but I know I don't appreciate her way of dealing with true fans. It sounds to me like she's just sore about being beaten to the punch.
Yokokitsu at 11:48PM on Apr 14th 2008
11. u guys r fucking nerds
you know me son at 6:10AM on Apr 15th 2008
12. http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
RICHARD DAWKINS at 7:24AM on Apr 15th 2008
13. WOW ... she really is a witch!
THE POSITRON at 7:52AM on Apr 15th 2008
14. Good Lord, this witch is suing why? Its a piece of fan work. Doesn't she have enough money as it is?
I stopped admiring rowling when she began spouting that crap about particular characters being "gay."
good grief. stop buying her books everyone.
willowreed at 8:33AM on Apr 15th 2008
15. It's not about money. It's about control. I'm a writer and I understand how copyright law works. If you don't sue to maintain control of your creative works then very soon they will be defacto public domain and anyone and everyone can publish whatever they like. There is a reason why Disney invests millions every year to protect their copywrites and trademarks.
And I know that Japan has Doujinshi, where professionals take characters not their own and make stories ranging from the pornographic to contemporary. Did you also know that if they want to publish it they have to send a writen request AND the publisher and original creator gets a cut? That's right. Even Doujinshi has the creator getting a cut.
Now, this fan wanted to make a Lexicon. Fine. But the moment he published it he (and the publisher, who should have known better) were screwed. Why? Maybe Rowling wanted to have the Lexicon arranged differently. Maybe she wanted to include things that ONLY the writer knew. Maybe she wanted to add cultural background notes. Who knows. The point is that it's her world to do with as she pleases and to write as she wants to write. If she doesn't defend her copywrite then there is nothing for "Harry Potter, Book 8, the Auror Academy" coming out and not a penny going to the woman who actually made it... or "Harry Potter, the untold romantic stories of Harry, Ron, Severus Snape." Or "Hary Potur and teh Ordur o the Foinks."
Copywrite exists for a reason. It's hard enough to get published, let alone be successful enough to make money doing it.
Somber at 9:29AM on Apr 15th 2008