J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

re: J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

judey mcjudgerson — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:06:32 GMT

This has nothing to do with her feelings or leniency on the matter. It's about law and what is fair use and what is not. In order for a work like an encyclopedia based on another work to be within the allowed fair use provisions. When creating a critical work or a commentary it's author(s) must limit their quotation and paraphasing of the original and transform it into a new work of independent value (even if that value is to understand the original).

The judge denied she had the right absolutely to block encyclopedias as derivative works (as she does with movie adaptations or television retellings).

It was this man's RIGHT to run an american based website so long as it doesn’t conflict with her copyright. It has NOTHING to do with her permission or her feelings about the matter.

Basically the ruling said he didn’t provide quite enough commentary and he quoted and paraphased too much for the work to be considered transformative. This means any book that DOES meet the threshold (whatever that may be) is not within any author’s authority to block.

Thus ends our legal lesson so we can stop considering Dr. Rowling queen of the world.

re: J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

coolteamblt — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:49:29 GMT

I'm a Harry Potter fan. My understanding is that JK Rowling was fine with the Lexicon because it wasn't for profit. Her objection came when Vander Ark decided to make money off of it. Personally, I think it was kind of her to let him run the free website to begin with, and Vander Ark tried to take advantage of her leniency.

re: J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

Maeby — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:08:31 GMT

I'm with Brett.

I also saw on Oprah a couple of years back that no one wanted to publish harry potter then one lady read it at a publishing place and forced her boss (or whoever was above her) to read it so it would get published. All JK gave her was a signed book (at a book signing event) that was after she had already made millions. That woman was the only reason she got published! I think greed has a little something to do with it.

re: J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

LeighS — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:06:00 GMT

But it doesn't matter how much monay she has. What apparently matters to her is that it is HER work, HER ideas, and therefore SHE has the right to decide what happens with it. Period. The amount of money she has made from her series shouldn't be brought into play here. She wants to maintain a level of control over her books and she doesn't want to share. Were her books not so incredibly successful, I think she would engender a great deal more sympathy.

re: J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

Brett Singer — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:44:51 GMT

I'm genuinely confused by this. First, she allowed the website to exist for years. Second, doesn't this mean that all of the other books about existing works of literature (like a Klingon dictionary, for example) are also copyright violations?

Third, don't you have enough money JK? (Sorry, had to say that.)