: It's over - but not really
This story has been out for a couple of days, but as it hasn't been brought to Fandom Wank yet, I thought I'd write it up. I hope that's okay.
As previously reported, RDR Books stated their intention of appealing the Lexicon verdict.
RDR Books have now withdrawn their appeal.
Lest anyone think that this is the end, however, RDR Books and Steve Vander Ark are going ahead with a "revised" version of the encyclopedia. E! Online quotes "the 50-year-old with free time to spare" as saying:
RDR's Roger Rapoport says that the book contains "a lot more critical commentary, which means more analysis", while the decision "to publish a different book prepared with reference to Judge Patterson's decision" has been welcomed by Neil Blair, a lawyer for Rowling's London-based agent, and also by a spokeman for Warner Bros. (The Associated Press.)
I haven't found any indication of whether J.K. Rowling's and Warner Brothers' lawyers have reviewed the entire content of the new encyclopedia. 10,000 copies are to be printed for a January 12 release.
ETA: Thanks to mariem_1 for some more information.
The Stanford Fair Use Project have commented:( Voldemort hasn't gone away, you know )
SVA supporter![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif)
rattlesnakeroot celebrates. Includes links to SVA's posts on the Leaky Lounge and other fun.
The report on the HP Lexicon site.
ETA 2: Thanks again to mariem_1 for this.
Via author/illustrator Matthew Holm (Harry Potter Lexicon Dispute Concludes with Worst Book Title Ever) here is a quote from a Publishers Weekly article:
( Here's the snappy title of the revised Lexicon )
ETA 3: From cleolinda: ( There's a tour! )
This story has been out for a couple of days, but as it hasn't been brought to Fandom Wank yet, I thought I'd write it up. I hope that's okay.
As previously reported, RDR Books stated their intention of appealing the Lexicon verdict.
RDR Books have now withdrawn their appeal.
Lest anyone think that this is the end, however, RDR Books and Steve Vander Ark are going ahead with a "revised" version of the encyclopedia. E! Online quotes "the 50-year-old with free time to spare" as saying:
"We learned a lot at the trial about what was acceptable, what would follow the fair-use guidelines," he said. "That was not clear before. There was no law on the books that made it clear what was acceptable and what wasn't.
"Coming out of the trial, I had a much better idea of what should go into the book."
RDR's Roger Rapoport says that the book contains "a lot more critical commentary, which means more analysis", while the decision "to publish a different book prepared with reference to Judge Patterson's decision" has been welcomed by Neil Blair, a lawyer for Rowling's London-based agent, and also by a spokeman for Warner Bros. (The Associated Press.)
I haven't found any indication of whether J.K. Rowling's and Warner Brothers' lawyers have reviewed the entire content of the new encyclopedia. 10,000 copies are to be printed for a January 12 release.
ETA: Thanks to mariem_1 for some more information.
The Stanford Fair Use Project have commented:( Voldemort hasn't gone away, you know )
SVA supporter
rattlesnakeroot celebrates. Includes links to SVA's posts on the Leaky Lounge and other fun.The report on the HP Lexicon site.
ETA 2: Thanks again to mariem_1 for this.
Via author/illustrator Matthew Holm (Harry Potter Lexicon Dispute Concludes with Worst Book Title Ever) here is a quote from a Publishers Weekly article:
( Here's the snappy title of the revised Lexicon )
ETA 3: From cleolinda: ( There's a tour! )
Current Mood: Obsessed