The Media & JKR/WB vs RDR Books, Has the media been fair in their coverage? |
 May 20 2008, 09:32 PM
Post
#51
|
|
Shopping for a New Firebolt  Posts: 836 Joined: 11:35pm February 3, 2006 Location: Harry Potter Heaven    |
The media is doing what it always does: sensationalizing something that has to do with a celebrity. They don't care about the facts; they only care about what will make a good headline, even if they have to twist the facts to make it their idea of "good."
-------------------- " [Rupert] really has made [Malachy] his own. He's just such a fine film actor. [...] He knows just how much and how little to do - there are wonderful moments of stillness in his performance in Cherrybomb, for all the wildness and energy of the world around him. He's very subtle and expressive." - Daragh Carville, screenwriter of Cherrybomb |
 |
  
 
|
|
May 21 2008, 01:16 AM
Post
#52
|
|
Eeylops Owl Cage Cleaner Posts: 209 Joined: 7:43am August 2, 2005 |
QUOTE(Pleione @ May 20 2008, 09:58 PM)  QUOTE(hannah abbot ;) @ May 20 2008, 05:18 PM) Jo rowling, is one of the most succesful and talented writer of this century. She has worked on the book series for what... 17 years? she has made children and adults que outside of book shops for days! she has a world wide fan base of millions! she has brought people together, countires together...(well i'm in england, and i wouldn't be on an american fan site if it wasn't for her, plus i wouldnt either be listening to mellissa, john, sue or Frak!.. so i reckon it's maybe brought countires together  lol ) anyway... any fan who respects Jo would respect her wishes, her writing and her books. what i'm trying to say is, i don't know why any fan would want to hurt, upset or distress Jo. And cause all this fuss over a book, which is basaically jo's. i don't know why one fan would want ruin the relationship between the fans and warner bros/jo rowling. i really want jo to win, cause she deserves it.  hannah x I respectfully disagree.  If a fan has written an HP companion book that they feel is lawful and doesn't infringe on her copyrights and JKR disagrees, then the fan should be able to have a court settle the matter. I think it would be a shame if the measure of being a fan is somehow predicated on automatically complying with JKR's wishes. It's possible to admire her and her accomplishments and love the books and still have a difference of opinion over a legal matter. A fan of a potentially infringing work seeking just treatment under the law isn't a betrayal to JKR (or any author), just as it isn't an attack on a fan if JKR seeks to have her rights enforced. Just my .02.  Pleione, your post is rational and well-argued. Thanks for this input. I really couldn't have said it better myself. -------------------- "At least two thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity: idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political idols." ---ALDOUS HUXLEY
http://www.thelppc.com/karenbrown-blogg-pr...arrypotter.html |
|
|
|
|
Oct 14 2008, 02:51 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Firebolt-Polisher at Quality Quidditch Supplies Posts: 1,089 Joined: 4:38pm June 27, 2005 |
Personally, I see it as a battle between Warner Bros and RDR rather than between JKR and SVA. If Melissa had signed on with RDR and Steven with a Warner Bros affiliate (rather than the other way around), then he would have gotten the hug and she would have had her reputation dragged through the papers.
I have a few questions regarding the American media since I get mixed up some times. Is Time-Warner the same as Warner Bros? Does Warner Bros own CNN? Does Disney own ABC? Does NAFTA (especially NAFTA chapter 11) have something to do with this? I saw an interesting quote in an article entitled "Fan being sued over Harry Potter guide cries in court" by: David B. Caruso, WPG Free Press, April 16, 2008, p. D2. I know that JKR later cried too - so it was an emotional situation for both of them and actually crying has nothing to do with my point - it is just the reference for the following: QUOTE Vander Ark testified on the second day of a trial in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, pitting his publishing company, RDR Books, against Rowling and Warner Bros., the maker of the Harry Potter films and owner of all the intellectual property related to the Potter books and movies. What does it mean to say that Warner Bros owns ALL of the "intellectual property" related to the books? Does this mean that Warner Bros owns the characters? Warner Bros doesn't just make money with the movies - but they have opened theme parks and have merchandised the characters. If JKR did or said anything which caused Warner Bros to lose money, would she be in breach of contract and could Warner Bros sue JKR under NAFTA chapter 11 for loss of income (including estimated future income)? We have no way of knowing whether or not JKR is happy with her relationship with Warner Bros or not but, would JKR not be in breach of contract if she were to speak out against Warner Bros? If so, anything other than saying publicly that she walks happily lock step with Warner Bros would be in breach of contract. Would JKR be in breach of contract if she took the belief that if one has nothing nice to say then one can remain silent or does the contract stipulate that she has to back up Warner Bros whenever Warner Bros copywrite has been infringed on? I am not asking whether JKR wants to or doesn't want to - only whether she is legally obliged. Then this brings us to the last book - which fans either love or hate. In a series, you can't really change the plot that much because it can mess up something that comes later. However, in the last book of a series, could an editor or the owner of "intellectual property" rights as for changes in the subplots (areas that do not affect the main plot) so that the book could later be more marketable as a movie etc? Whatever you think of the last book, you must admit that it is the easiest of the seven books to fit into one movie without taking major parts out - yet it is being made into two movies. There is not enough for two movies out of the last book unless Warner Bros plans to add to the movies things that did not happen in the books (including stuff that expands on what did happen). QUOTE Jo rowling, is one of the most succesful and talented writer of this century. She has worked on the book series for what... 17 years? Harry Potter may be the best thing that Rowling ever writes and her fans can't seem to get enough of the series. In fact, some of my theories, such as that the Creavey Bros and Dudley's friend Dennis were descended from Amy Benson and Dennis Benson, I won't know one way or the other until the encyclopedia comes out. Remember what JKR said about the Troll and Hermione .... ok back to topic JKR seems to want to write something that is in a different direction that HP so she would be appealing to a different fan base - so it may be a while before we determine whether or not there is a backlash (I doubt there is). It may be a while before JKR writes another series. But the characters of these non-HP books will not be the "intellectual property" of Warner Bros under the existing contract. I guess we won't know how happy JKR is with the present contract with Warner Bros until she decides whether they do movies for subsequent series of her books or not. QUOTE If a fan has written an HP companion book that they feel is lawful and doesn't infringe on her copyrights and JKR disagrees, then the fan should be able to have a court settle the matter. From what I heard, the fan did ask JKR if she wanted him to change anything in the book before he published it. There were no list of changes to be made submitted to the fan in question. Either the changes to be made were too substantial or it was some other issue besides the content of the book which was in question. RDR, who went after the fan in question and requested that he write the book, is not one of Warner Bros affiliates. I would feel this more an author versus fan issue if JKR did say what she wanted changed (even to the point of deleting the the odd whole section here and there) and SVA refused to make said changes. QUOTE It seems that the only really "special" and "unprecedented" aspect is the fact that JKR allowed the on-line site for so long. Now, she objects to what RDR claims is simply a print version of the site. The comments about the coveted fan site award, her using the lexicon, WB stealing SVA's timeline...all of those reference the website. There is a bit of a difference in that, since the internet is such a new medium, copywrite does not extend there. Thus, the operation of a website does not infringe on Warner Bros "intellectual property" rights the same way a book would. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 14 2008, 03:09 PM
Post
#54
|
|
Claw-Clipping Kneazles at the Magical Menegerie Posts: 2,452 Joined: 9:26am July 24, 2007 Location: I'm either in the Muggle Underground Forum or at the Hogwarts Express Roundhouse |
Frankly, I think most of the media, from what I've seen, knows little and cares less about the entire issue. The business/contract lawyer press is one exception, the law governing the suit is the stuff of their trade.
The generalist media? They've blown the coverage imo, more than not. I've been glad for the 17 fora of RDR/JKR, now here in the Underground. That's been the best source for low spin news. My thoughts.
-------------------- The last enemy to be destroyed is death-- First Corinthians, Chapter 15, Verse 26 The epitaph of James and Lily Potter |
|
|
|
|
Oct 15 2008, 10:20 AM
Post
#55
|
|
|
Firebolt-Polisher at Quality Quidditch Supplies Posts: 1,089 Joined: 4:38pm June 27, 2005 |
JohannMdlAmerica,
Do you think that the fact that one major news organization is owned by Warner Bros and another is owned by Disney makes a difference? Speaking of Disney, you know that the Winnie the Pooh books were originally based on a bear in the London Zoo named Winnipeg (or Winnie for short). When Winnipeg Manitoba decided to open a Pooh Museum to honour a bear named in our honour, Disney put a stop to it because they now own all the rights to Winnie the Pooh - meaning no Pooh theme park or official shrine can be put up anywhere in the world unless they do it. For the record, Winnipeg comes from an old native word meaning "muddy waters" and refers to the huge clay deposits on the banks of the Red and Assiniboine rivers. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 15 2008, 12:57 PM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Claw-Clipping Kneazles at the Magical Menegerie Posts: 2,452 Joined: 9:26am July 24, 2007 Location: I'm either in the Muggle Underground Forum or at the Hogwarts Express Roundhouse |
vaudree,
No. I discount both CNN and ABC on their very faces. I'm talking Scripps-Howard, the NYT Publishing Company, the Post, McGraw-Hill publications, ad infinitum. CNN and ABC are simply members of the band in not following the case very well. You'd think CNN would have; it after all is the WB unit. Sigh. -------------------- The last enemy to be destroyed is death-- First Corinthians, Chapter 15, Verse 26 The epitaph of James and Lily Potter |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2008, 08:29 PM
Post
#57
|
|
The Newest Googlebot  Posts: 6,600 Joined: 1:00pm January 4, 2005 Location: Waiting for the G2 |
Sorry guys! I had thought I'd locked all of the related topics that I moved over from the PotterCast forum, but this one flew under my radar somehow. As I mentioned in my announcement post, we're closing all threads related to the case except for the main thread's incarnations. Sorry for the confusion!
--NickTLC |
|
|
|
