The Impact of the WB/JKR vs. RDR Lawsuit on the Fandom, How will YOU be affected? |
 May 17 2008, 04:23 PM
Post
#401
|
|
MelvinTLC  Posts: 2,691 Joined: 1:57pm January 4, 2005 Location: My happy place    |
QUOTE Actually, his website hasn't moved location, it is still on an Idologic hosted server, which I presume is physically located in the US. It is. (Atlanta, GA, to be exact.) And occasionally Canada (though I do not think that's where this service is located). -------------------- "I am not big enough to love things the way I do!"
~Edna St. Vincent Millay |
 |
  
 
|
|
May 17 2008, 06:49 PM
Post
#402
|
|
Ron Weasley's #2 squeeze  Posts: 2,807 Joined: 11:00pm July 13, 2007 Location: Ottery St. Catchpole  |
You’re allowed to discuss if you don’t like one of the HP books. Rowling is quoted as saying that some fans are going to like DH and some aren’t. She knows that some are dissatisfied and unhappy with the book so why would she think it a bad thing to discuss it?
--------------------  Win-gar-dium Levi-o-sa Ron Weasley: He Does it Anyway. |
|
|
|
|
May 17 2008, 10:36 PM
Post
#403
|
|
Just Through the Brick Wall Posts: 9 Joined: 8:50pm January 30, 2007 |
After reading this this thread, the wb/jrk vs rdr/sva parts XII and 13 I would like to voice my opinion.
First reading these threads has been interesting and educational to me in the area of Copyright Law, Fair Use and Tolerated use. I always like to learn new things. I do not follow the case as closely as most people posting here seem to, but this is what I think. SVA made some bad decisions, either on his own or inflenced by someone else. I have thought from the moment I heard about this case that WB/JKR were in the right to protect their copyrights. I think that either way this case turns out, the on-line fandom will be affected in some way. No matter who wins; the case could be used as an excuse to exercise more control over how fansites use a person's copyrighted material. If WB/JKR win, however, I think that it is less likelty this would happen because their rights will have been upheld. Only my opinion. This post has been edited by madamebella: May 17 2008, 10:40 PM |
|
|
|
|
May 25 2008, 10:55 PM
Post
#404
|
|
Official Singer of the Sorting Hat Song Posts: 6,605 Joined: 3:12pm July 22, 2005 Location: Lost in Hermione's beaded bag |
I would like to discuss Lisa Bunker's recent thoughts on fandom. (See here.) The fandom LB describes is very much like a family. And the recent quarrel within fandom over the lexicon book has been as intense as any family feud.
These lines of LB's post troubled me: QUOTE What the hell are we doing to ourselves? How is it that we seem to have been taking lessons from Seamus all along, and not Dumbledore? What does it say about people that a community centered upon books that celebrate tolerance, integrity and individual responsibility can turn into angry factions bent on wounding and punishing each other? I'm not sure I understand the reference to Seamus. He was being loyal to his mother and Harry was being quicktempered that night in the dormitory. Loyalty is due to those we know best as family and friends. Seamus did ask Harry to tell his side and Harry was rude and insulted Seamus's mother. We can't expect people to accept us on faith all the time. Not when major issues are involved.And, of course, that's what this lawsuit involves. We must choose who to believe: JKR or SVA. It's true we could wait the months and months until a court verdict, but who can do that? What most of fandom has done is ask questions, collect facts, play attorney, and try to fathom the mysteries of copyright, fair use and fandom's obligation to JKR's world. Families can have factions and feuds and fights --and still be family! But we have to consider that JKR is the matriarch of the family, our Molly. There is no question that Seamus must defend his mother, just as Harry must defend his parents, and the Weasleys will risk expulsion to defend their parents. There was really no contest in this feud. Since the website --a perfectly wonderful fan site-- was not under attack and it was only a book of that website that was, what was there to defend? LB continued in her comments: QUOTE To answer your original question about contracts: fandom, even at very high levels, had always functioned by e-mailed agreements and statements made to each other. And trust. This book was no different. Well, nearly every major dispute in family I ever knew involved property, usually as expressed in a Will or a lack of a Will. A book is so different from a fan site because it is property, it is an object to be bought and sold. And it's the lack of clear legal title to this property that is at the heart of this dispute. JKR said she's fine with with the fan site, but the content can't leave the domain. I don't want to comment further on the book, partly because as the only co-author to be posting much of anything it might give the impression that I speak for all of us, and I don't. LB is right. Fandom is a community. Where I think there is confusion is in the vision of a post-DH community. It is too soon to create a second generation of fandom. We don't yet have the distance from the phenomenon of fandom or the experience of the text to dissolve the familial bonds. And that's what many fans see the lexicon book as, the cutting of family ties. I am truly sorry that LB has had to endure such anger and factional disagreement. And she is right to ask us to think of what Dumbledore would have done? The fight in the dormitory was between Seamus and Harry, not Seamus and Dumbledore. And Harry was largely at fault. Dumbledore would have called for respect for reasonable authority. In this case, JK Rowling. And Dumbledore would have considered the law and its intent. In this case, a free website is welcome, a for-profit book is not. And Dumbledore would have asked us to show compassion for those torn by love and loyalty. 
-------------------- Come the words that bubble
Up through broken laughter, Sweeter than spring-water, "Gods, I am so happy!" |
|
|
|
|
May 26 2008, 02:19 PM
Post
#405
|
|
Personal Secretary to The Minister of Magic  Posts: 9,193 Joined: 4:57am January 28, 2005 Location: near Muggleswick, UK |
QUOTE(davidenglish @ May 26 2008, 03:55 AM)  And, of course, that's what this lawsuit involves. We must choose who to believe: JKR or SVA. That is wrong. You can believe both, either one or neither. The lawsuit isn't a dispute about facts, it is about whose interpretation of the law is correct, whether it is RDR's or JKR/WB's, and that comes down to reading up on what the law actually says, and not choosing between the arguments of the plaintiff or the defence, since neither will give a fair and balanced view of what the law actually says, as both will be trying to interpret the law as best suits their client.It is easy to pick sides, but doing so probably means you are over critical of one side and under critical of the other, and just widens the split. --------------------  W.L.Y.J. We love you Jo |
|
|
|
|
May 26 2008, 03:53 PM
Post
#406
|
|
|
Just Through the Brick Wall Posts: 13 Joined: 8:55am April 29, 2008 |
QUOTE(roonwit @ May 27 2008, 05:19 AM) QUOTE(davidenglish @ May 26 2008, 03:55 AM) And, of course, that's what this lawsuit involves. We must choose who to believe: JKR or SVA. That is wrong. You can believe both, either one or neither. The lawsuit isn't a dispute about facts, it is about whose interpretation of the law is correct, whether it is RDR's or JKR/WB's, and that comes down to reading up on what the law actually says, and not choosing between the arguments of the plaintiff or the defence, since neither will give a fair and balanced view of what the law actually says, as both will be trying to interpret the law as best suits their client.It is easy to pick sides, but doing so probably means you are over critical of one side and under critical of the other, and just widens the split. I have to respectfully disagree with you here, roonwit. It is human nature to take sides and I don't believe anyone who's read the reports and the court documents is going to have an informed opinion on the case. As part of that opinion, they will probably believe one side over the other. You, apparently (forgive me if I'm misreading you, it's 6 am and I have a headcold), believe that Mr. Vander Ark hasn't violated copyright. That's you're right and personally I'm glad to hear it and I'm sure Mr. Vander Ark is greatful for the support. As a writer though, my own sympathy in the case goes to Ms. Rowling and I hope she wins. I am not a Harry Potter fan. I own the books, I've read them and from a writer's perspective, I admire the complex world Ms. Rowling created. I also support Mr. Vander Ark's right to write a book - but not this book. Far too much of the manuscript is taken from Ms. Rowling's work and, while I see what Mr. Vander Ark hopes to accomplish with his series of reference guides, I think he'd have been better off to leave the lexicon in it's online forum and publish his other two books instead. |
|
|
|
|
May 26 2008, 03:59 PM
Post
#407
|
|
|
Personal Secretary to The Minister of Magic Posts: 9,193 Joined: 4:57am January 28, 2005 Location: near Muggleswick, UK |
QUOTE(Northen Light36 @ May 26 2008, 08:53 PM) You, apparently (forgive me if I'm misreading you, it's 6 am and I have a headcold), believe that Mr. Vander Ark hasn't violated copyright. Where did you get that from? I believe that it is up to the judge to decide the copyright issue, and whatever I might or might not believe is irrelevant.
-------------------- W.L.Y.J. We love you Jo |
|
|
|
|
May 26 2008, 04:05 PM
Post
#408
|
|
|
Just Through the Brick Wall Posts: 13 Joined: 8:55am April 29, 2008 |
As I said, I may have misread. It's very early. If I have read something into your posts that wasn't there, I apologise. No offence was intended.
~North |
|
|
|
|
May 26 2008, 04:11 PM
Post
#409
|
|
|
Personal Secretary to The Minister of Magic Posts: 9,193 Joined: 4:57am January 28, 2005 Location: near Muggleswick, UK |
QUOTE(Northen Light36 @ May 26 2008, 09:05 PM) As I said, I may have misread. It's very early. If I have read something into your posts that wasn't there, I apologise. No offence was intended. I wasn't offended, just puzzled since that post was intended to be as neutral as possible.
-------------------- W.L.Y.J. We love you Jo |
|
|
|
|
May 26 2008, 04:22 PM
Post
#410
|
|
|
Ron Weasley's #2 squeeze Posts: 2,807 Joined: 11:00pm July 13, 2007 Location: Ottery St. Catchpole |
There's nothing wrong with following Seamus rather than Dumbledore. Seamus was loyal to his mother and then when presented with all the facts he changed his opinion to side with what he thought was right. There's nothing wrong with that, right?
-------------------- Win-gar-dium Levi-o-sa Ron Weasley: He Does it Anyway. |
|
|
|
