|
|
Cleolinda Jones (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} cleolinda) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} fandom_wank,@ 2008-01-16 17:13:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| Entry tags: | entitlement, fandom: harry potter, internet lawyers, this is the wank that never ends |
JK Rowling, Defender of Fandom
Apologies to folks sick of Lexicon wank, but--from jedi_dwh: JKR Files Full Request for Injunction of HP Lexicon. "A rule against JKR/WB would harm the fan community by 'necessitating more monitoring and restriction of fan activity by copyright owners afraid of compromising their rights against infringers.' "
It's a huge post and I haven't read it all yet--and apparently it's part one of two. The sentence "The text of the e-mail string between Steve Vander Ark and the Christopher Little Agency requesting employment on the official encyclopedia is included in the document [and reprinted in the post]" jumped out at me, though.
ETA from white_serpent: "Oh, and you can read the whole text of the requested injunction yourself here."
ETA 2: Part two is up. There's interesting stuff in there, but at the very end:
Claims that the book is an academic resource are rebuffed by a piece of evidence showing Roger Rapoport's instruction to a colleague to focus on children's bookstores for sales.
The question of authorship arises here as well: Steve Vander Ark has said the Lexicon was "created, edited, written and maintained primarily by one person, me," and the book has listed only one author; however an e-mail from Roger Rapoport says the book was the result of 20 academic scholars and reference experts' work.
Also, being discussed in the comments here:
>>
lidane: "Remember the fans that contacted Steve about publishing an encyclopedia? Well, they've both filed official statements in the court documents that JKR/WB submitted.">>
auralan: "Thus, rather than being a work of scholarship or research, the Lexicon simply takes Ms. Rowling's intellectual 'furniture,' catalogues it through descriptions that have either been lifted or synthesized from Ms. Rowling, and rearranges it in unoriginal alphabetical order. She's read the Lexicon according to her declaration. I'd say this answers the question on the inclusion of the essays. They're not in there."ETA 3: More discussions of note:
>> Cassie Edwards-style comparison between Lexicon entries and related JKR text in court documents.
>> WB tech guy's declaration that he did, in fact, try to print the Lexicon website.
ETA 4, from
auralan: a Plantiffs' First Amended Complaint ("This is basically the initial filing updated now that they've seen the book. The lawyers seem mighty cranky now that they've done some discovery and have some smoking guns"):Ms. Rowling and Warner Bros. are concerned about the Infringing Book not only because of the infringing material it contains, as is discussed below, and not only because it will undermine the companion guide that Ms. Rowling herself intends to write, but also because RDR Books has confirmed -- through its refusal to be above-board about its intentions and engage in reasonable discussion about the Infringing Book -- that it cannot be trusted with one of the most beloved children's book series in history.
