: "We differ so greatly as to be polar opposites"
The Leaky Cauldron publicly separates from the Lexicon.
ETA:
lidane brings us a small sampling of comment wank. Also, did you know that this is a Fifth Amendment issue?
ETA 2, via
cbm and
insanitys_place: The defense has requested JKR as a witness.
ETA 3: SVA leaves a comment at the Lexicon site; the Times Online (UK) weighs in with "J. K. Rowling determined to block RDR Books' Harry Potter 'rip-off' "; a discussion of UK law from another site that has admitted to not reading the manuscript; someone is "baffled at how people are so willing to accept the notion that authors own the ideas they publish"; and I really don't even know what's going on here.
ETA 4: More from SVA in a Lexicon thread.
(Something that might be helpful: get ETAs emailed to you from Watch That Page. It's how I keep track of things elsewhere.)
The Leaky Cauldron publicly separates from the Lexicon.
[W]e do not think a win for J.K. Rowling means tighter controls on fan creativity at all, and are concerned for the opposite, as well as the attempt to misportray the issues of the case as stated in sworn affadavits. So, after a few days of careful and many-sided discussion, we, as a full staff, decided that people who have such a fundamental disconnect in beliefs cannot and should not be partners in name or spirit, and two days ago informed the Lexicon that we are severing our association....Note: Compare this statement to the hosting discussion back in December. There's a pretty big discrepancy there, is all I'm saying.
And while Leaky has always owned the hp-lexicon.org domain and paid for the site’s hosting, we’ve promised to transfer the domain to Steve as soon as litigation is complete (a stipulation that would not have been made had ownership not been mentioned in court documents). We will continue to pay for hosting and provide free support until that day.
ETA:
ETA 2, via
ETA 3: SVA leaves a comment at the Lexicon site; the Times Online (UK) weighs in with "J. K. Rowling determined to block RDR Books' Harry Potter 'rip-off' "; a discussion of UK law from another site that has admitted to not reading the manuscript; someone is "baffled at how people are so willing to accept the notion that authors own the ideas they publish"; and I really don't even know what's going on here.
ETA 4: More from SVA in a Lexicon thread.
(Something that might be helpful: get ETAs emailed to you from Watch That Page. It's how I keep track of things elsewhere.)