Entry tags:

entitlement, fandom: harry potter, internet lawyers, this is the wank that never ends

The book has been seen
Well, this answers a few questions. Previously:

TLC updates on the case, saying that "[t]he day before last, a court ordered RDR to hand a copy of the manuscript to J.K. Rowling's lawyers, and one was delivered, according to those lawyers. JKR/WB are seeking a preliminary injunction to the sale of the book, and have not apparently been deterred by viewing the manuscript. RDR has also made claims on their web site that they have "repeatedly offer[ed] to settle this case to Ms. Rowling's satisfaction and publish the book," requests which apparently have not been agreed upon. TLC has asked RDR what the settlement was and has not been met with a response." 

Praetorianguard posts another analysis, and in the comments we find out that the A-Z book accused of plagiarizing the Lexicon was also hit with a C&D, but was published after JKR's reps edited it.

WB figures out how to hit print. Exhibit A: Severus Snape. Note: This was filed Monday, when (I think?) they were still operating under the idea that the book was "typeset from the website."

New: A TLC update. "A new document authored by a recently retained lawyer for RDR claims that owing to RDR's lack of an intellectual property lawyer, status as a small publishing house (it claims sales of a little more than $100,000/year), and present plan to have legal briefs prepared by a cousin of the house's owner, a delay in responding to JKR/WB is necessary. The lawyer requested a seven-week delay, until the first week in January, which is after the current US publication date for the book. The letter notes, however, that during the delay RDR would voluntarily freeze their actions, amounting to the same results as a preliminary injunction on publication. According to the document, the application has been 'denied without prejudice to counsel for defendant and plaintiff appearing this afternoon[.]' " Update: A second update at TLC seems to indicate that it was approved, and TLC is going to try to figure out which one it is. "Also, the entire page containing previous statements by RDR regarding the Lexicon book has been deleted. The product has also been removed from pre-order on the site." Looks like a real lawyer really is on the case.

auralan points out the full sentence: "Indeed, RDR's present plan is to have its briefs composed by the cousin of RDR's owner, a solo practitioner who is not himself an intellectual property lawyer, and a man who (though he has some general idea of what RDR does), will need some time to educate himself as to the facts and issues in this particular case."

ETA: The RDR page is back. The additions:

LATEST NEWS ON THE HARRY POTTER LEXICON

RDR Books Agrees to Delay Publication of Harry Potter Lexicon

Earlier today, New York Federal Court Judge Robert Patterson accepted an order proposed by RDR Books, agreeing to temporarily withhold publication of Steve Vander Ark’s Harry Potter Lexicon. The order delays the publication of this 400-plus-page book until Judge Patterson can preliminarly determine the merits of the lawsuit initiated by J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. In a complaint filed on Halloween, the plaintiffs contend that the proposed Lexicon violates Ms. Rowling’s copyright, an allegation RDR Books denies.

Plantiffs' papers in support of its request for a preliminary injunction are due January 7. RDR’s response is due January 22. The hearing on the plantiff’s request for a preliminary injunction is set for February 6. The Lexicon, which is now in preparation, will not be published until the book is ready to be examined by the court, which will decide if it violates the rights of Ms. Rowling, one of the world’s best known authors. Ms. Rowling has suggested that the Lexicon could hurt the performance of her own encyclopedia, which she has not begun writing.

[Fan site award, etc.]

“It is ironic that publication of Steve Vander Ark's Lexicon is being threatened by Ms. Rowling after he has joined other librarians to fight organizations that have attempted to ban or curtail Ms. Rowling own work,� says RDR Books publisher Roger Rapoport. "It is our wish that Ms. Rowling join Mr. Vander Ark in his campaign for literary freedom and free expression by dropping her complaint against a book we are confident she would enjoy reading. We will continue to defend our author and the Lexicon in this David and Goliath battle with an eye toward protecting the rights of readers and writers everywhere.�

Note: The "’" characters are all original to the RDR page. I'm not sure why their apostrophes are borked, but it seems fitting that the trademark symbol's involved.

ETA 2, and it's a big one from TLC, via lidane: NY Judge Issues Restraining Order to Prevent Publication of Lexicon; JK Rowling Updates. 

As stated in a public document and now on JK Rowling’s Web site a judge has issued a restraining order against publication of The Harry Potter Lexicon.

This document, signed by Judge Robert Patterson in NY, denies RDR Books’ claim to delay the matter until January and grants a restraining order for JKR/WB to prevent the book from being published or licensed anywhere worldwide until February 2008.

JKR says,

I take no pleasure in the fact that publication has been prevented for the present. On the contrary, I feel massively disappointed that this matter had to come to court at all. Despite repeated requests, the publishers have refused to even countenance making any changes to the book to ensure that it does not infringe my rights. Unless their position changes, we will all return to court next year. Given my past good relations with the Lexicon fansite, I can only feel sad and disillusioned that this is where we have ended up.

Back to TLC:

Earlier today, RDR Books issued a press release that claimed that a judge “accepted an order proposed by RDR Books, agreeing to temporarily withhold publication of Steve Vander Ark’s Harry Potter Lexicon.” The release did not mention the restraining order. A motion to delay proceedings owing to RDR Books’ need to retain and familiarize a copyright lawyer with the case was denied.

RDR Books claims on its site that the delay was voluntary and perhaps even their idea, but that contradicts what has been put forth in legal documents as well as what JK Rowling has said has occurred. Also, a source has told TLC that it was Judge Patterson’s preference to restrain the case (and therefore publication) until February, not RDR’s.

We have a copy of the judge’s letter (you can download it here). It says that the book has not been fully typeset for printing, that RDR has instructed its typesetters to cease operations, and that the book “cannot be printed and distributed to the public at this time.” The court orders that the book and all those associated with its publication cannot complete the book, typeset it, print it, distribute it, advertise it, promote it, sell it, license it, accept orders for it – not in the US or anywhere abroad. It also ordered RDR to take the book off Amazon, their own Web site, and any other means of “advertising, soliciting orders for, and distributing the book.”

[...]

You can now download here JKR/WB’s lawyers’ response to RDR lawyers’ attempt to delay the case (a delay attempt that was denied by Judge Patterson after this letter was filed).The letter notes that although RDR is a small company with limited resources, “RDR faced no such obstacles in garnering significant and international attention for itself and its book. Indeed, upon information…RDR continues to trumpet its intention to publish its book.” The letter also says “RDR has used this lawsuit as an opportunity to publicize the book and disparage my clients in the press.”

Let it be noted that SVA's side has taken issue in earlier discussions here on FW with negative characterizations of the Lexicon enterprise. elanor said at one point, "I don't believe that either side is being knowingly wrong or deceitful - there are reasons Steve believed it was okay to publish"--keep in mind that no one has actually seen communications from JKR saying "No, you may specifically not publish the Lexicon," even if she declined his help with her own encyclopedia--"and there are reasons Rowling et al would rather he didn't. They both have a point. [...] I will agree that some of the people (supposedly) representing Steve have not done him any favours." Also, "All I'm asking is that you (that's a collective 'you') try to be reasonable, accept that there is a good reason I don't say more than I do"--in fact, I agreed with this stance--"and also understand that, given the situation, there is absolutely no chance that I would risk saying something that I wasn't 100% sure of." I'm not linking to where she said this so that people don't go jump on her, but I can if credibility is at stake.

My response at the time was that it kind of comes down to a he said/she said with RDR and WB, since they both allege non-communicativeness, and that we at FW are inclined to take RDR less seriously because of comments about police states and Nagasaki and You Can't Assume What's in the Book So Why Didn't You Just Read the Website That's Not Exactly the Book or Maybe It Is. I mean, y'all can say whatever you want. Since we're here to mock, I'm just trying to present your teal deer mocking material as clearly and fairly as possible, not preside over Fandom Court or anything.

ETA 3: Someone claiming to be an RDR employee has issues with WB's side of the story as well.

ETA 4: Elanor's telling me now (she says she's allowed to say this, but please regard these as unofficial, non-binding communications) that the British cover was "a rush job just to have something and was never intended to be used. The actual cover does not look like the adult HP books, and they've had quite a lot of grief getting it changed. The British publisher regrets sending that other cover and apologised for it." Furthermore, she asks people not to assume that SVA = RDR (and with good reason, quite frankly).

ETA 5: God help us all, there's a new RDR update.

By now the story of the J.K. Rowling/Warner Bros. Halloween lawsuit aimed at Steve Vander Ark's Harry Potter Lexicon has become news from Shanghai to South Bend. More than 1,000 stories in newspapers, on wire services, television and radio have brought this David and Voldemort battle to the readers of the New York Times, MTV and the International Herald Tribune. Determined to publish this book for the benefit of Harry Potter fans everywhere, RDR Books believes Ms. Rowling who has championed the Lexicon for years will love reading the book just as much as she does the website on which it is based. While waiting for the court to decide if the book is to be published, here is interesting background on this extraordinary case that has captured the attention of readers everywhere.

Attention! Attention! Please pay it to us! Look at all the other people who are paying attention!

RDR Books Agrees to Delay Publication of Harry Potter Lexicon

On November 8th, New York Federal Court Judge Robert Patterson accepted an order proposed by RDR Books, agreeing to temporarily withhold publication of Steve Vander Ark's Harry Potter Lexicon. The order delays the publication of this 400-plus-page book until Judge Patterson can preliminarly determine the merits of the lawsuit initiated by J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. In a complaint filed on Halloween, the plaintiffs contend that the proposed Lexicon violates Ms. Rowling's copyright, an allegation RDR Books denies.

Note: TLC said that the court papers seem to indicate that the delay was NOT RDR's idea.

[...] We have discovered that the complaint was based on a complete misunderstanding as to the contents of our proposed Lexicon.

O RLY. I wonder how that happened.

[...] We are pleased to note that many students and scholars agree with us and support our case including librarians, copyright attorneys and first amendment advocates.

Most of whom don't actually understand what's going on in the case--or only what RDR has told them, and we know what that sounds like. Case in point, linked by RDR: WHY DO YOU HATE LIBRARIANS, JKR?

ETA 6: TLC update: WB statement. “Although sad that this had to go to court, the judgement granting an order against RDR books is an important step in helping us to protect our intellectual property and at the same time, protect JK Rowling’s right to produce her own companion book to the Harry Potter series she created. Both Warner Bros. and JK Rowling are clear that this claim is a matter of infringement of copyright, not a matter of literary freedom.”

ETA 7: SVA posts again at the Lexicon. Also, I've gotten a clarification to the effect that there are two lawyers working for RDR now--the New York lawyer who wrote that last document and the cousin lawyer he mentioned, who is still writing the briefs. You know, as soon as he reads up on IP law.

ETA 8: The Whomping Willows weigh in. Alliteration is awesome!

ETA 9 from mistressrenet: Lexiwank hits Salon. "Moreover, Vander Ark and others who work on the HPL have spent much time compiling it. Why shouldn't they be entitled to profit from their labor?" And then, "It's whether she's on solid moral ground. And the answer, obviously, is no; indeed, considering how much her fans have done for her, her move is even more lamentable than Prince's recent promise to sue his supporters." Comments are just getting started--in fact, the second commenter links to praetorianguard.