Why the Lexicon Trial is Important

[puppetmaker]

Someone asked on another com if someone could tell them the short story about the Harry Potter Lexicon which has been a big sprawling mess so I wrote the following

Once upon a time there was a series of popular children's books which had a vast following. Fans created many web sites and wikis to show their love for these books.

One fan rose above the others and created a lexicon based on the material in the books and added more from the movies. This became a useful tool for all who were involved including the creator of the books and the movie studio. All praised the fan for his diligence for creating such a wonderful site.

A book publisher came to the fan and they came up with the idea to move this wonderful information from the internet to the real world in the form of a book.

The creator of the books was not happy with the idea and asked the fan to not do this thing.

The fan decided to do it anyway.

The creator and her minions send a cease and desist to the fan and his publishing company.

The publishing company decided to publish anyway and told everyone that the creator is a big bully.

The creator and her minions are suing the publisher to stop this book for many many legal reasons and points of law.

(EDIT: The publisher counter-sued using the grounds of fair use and that the creator allowed the Lexicon to live on the net and flourish. {Edit again: I am now totally unclear of who sued who first})

Now we are at the point in our story where every one is in court to try to see who will win the battle of words

The trial started yesterday. Ms. Rowling was there to answer to why this lexicon is OK on the net but not as a book selling for 24.95 a pop. And she did a very good job of it. If you care to read a fair transcript of the thing there is one at The Leaky Caldron .

I am firmly on the side of the creator on this one. I have watched friends have to deal with people using their creations for profit that they don't see one thin dime from. I have also talked to friends who have had to use the court system to defend their rights to their property. Believe me, the stress on this sort of thing is great and very wearing.

But people are crying fair use! I think that most people haven't a clue what fair use it. I do because it was one of the things I had to deal with as an editor when I worked on non-fiction books. Just because JKR allowed the Internet site to exist doesn't mean that she gave passive permission for it to be published in book form. And what is happening in court today is going to bring up a whole set of red flags for creators when they find their work being used as the launching point for something on the net. Yes I do believe that down the road this is going to screw things up for someone else who has the best of intentions.

I think the thing I find most disheartening about the whole thing is that the fan asked the creator for her blessing to do thing and she told him gently no and please don't. That should have been the end of that but fan boy thought better of it or rather as he is now stating it, the publisher came to him and said that it would be legal without permission because of fair use so, even though he knew the creator didn't want it done, he did it. And, because of the contract he signed with the publisher, this stunt isn't going to cost him a dime in real money. I just hope he realizes what he really lost when this is all over.

I am grateful for fans that do listen when they ask permission and do take no for an answer.

Comments

[caersidi.livejournal.com]

I would have thought it would have been so obvious as to why the Lexicon was ok on the net and not OK in a book form.

May I link to this entry?

[1-rhiannon-1.livejournal.com]

Thanks for posting this - I haven't been keeping up with the story so I really appreciate the info here :-)

[amarafox.livejournal.com]

This is so not fair use. The publishing company and the author and the legion of people crying fair use need to be smacked.

[booraven22.livejournal.com]

I think someone posted a link to a graph that showed after analyzing the book's content, there was something like 91% content directly lifted verbatim from the novels without any references or notation.

It's ridiculous!

[(Anonymous)]

I also read that the Lexicon in book form was in no way as great as the net version.

[geekgrl64.livejournal.com]

I also read that the Lexicon in book form was in no way as great as the net version.

[celticboy.livejournal.com]

Why can't people understand that if you want to play in someone's world, you have to have permission.

How would this guy like it if I wandered over to his house, knocked on the door, asked to come in, was refused permission, and just walked in anyway.

JKR spent years writing this stuff. She lived and breathed HP, and whilst it may not be the most amazing piece of work in history, it did something no other book could. It got kids reading and talking about reading in a way that hasn't happened in many years.

So Joe Bloggs decides he wanted to cash in on her work. He asked permission (Up to which point I support it), was refused and did it anyway? and he's shocked?

I hope the Judge takes one look at this and throws the book (pun intended) at the guy. No you can't publish, and trying to sue the author to let you publish? No! Bugger off quietly, write your own work and get published you SCHMUCK!

[lanofaylin.livejournal.com]

I don't understand how this is even a case? Intellectual property is just that, how can someone make money off something you created??

[paigemom.livejournal.com]

Wow. JKR really is one classy lady.

[imafarmgirl.livejournal.com]

Thanks for posting this. That site was a big help when I used to write fic. I didn't know about the book and it ending up in court. I'm sort of out of the loop.

Fair Use:

[lunalovegoddess.livejournal.com]

"The fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

2. the nature of the copyrighted work;

3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

~direct quote from Wikipedia on the definition of "Fair Use"~

Simply put, he does not own Harry Potter, nor does he have permission from Rowling to publish, and he contributes nothing original to the body of work, yet he expects to benefit from her work. Pardon my French, but he's a douche.

[wherdafux-d-cat.livejournal.com]

This whole situation appalls me on so many different levels. How they can claim this is fair use with a straight face is completely beyond me. Delusional, perhaps. Greedy, definitely.

[sircaliban.livejournal.com]

it amazes me that the publisher used 'fair use' when it's clearly not a situation in which 'fair use' applies.

[briansiano.livejournal.com]

In the early days of the Web, I did a website devoted to George MacDonald Fraser's _Flashman_ novels. The novels deal with events of the 19th century, so I assembled contemporary accounts of those events and put'em on the site. The idea was to follow Fraser's pretense that the "Flashman papers" were an authentic historical record. (This was YEARS before Wikipedia made such websites superfluous.)

Did I ever want to publish it as a book? Well, the idea occurred to me, and I could have assembled something that wouldn't technically infringe upon Fraser's work... but I decided against it. It wouldn't have worked as anything _but_ a "Flashman Companion," and Flashman is Fraser's, and nobody else's.

So I'm with Rowling on this one.