WB/JKR vs. RDR Part 16 |
 Sep 10 2008, 01:45 PM
Post
#11
|
|
Official Singer of the Sorting Hat Song  Posts: 6,605 Joined: 3:12pm July 22, 2005 Location: Lost in Hermione's beaded bag    |
Weird One, I've noticed that several blawgs have been confused by Judge Patterson's definition of Derivative Work vs Secondary Work. And this includes those on either side. I think the judge quite deliberately co-opted many of Stanford's Falzone's arguments to undermine any zeal to appeal.
Indeed, look at Falzone's press release. He's trying to strike that "Freedom of the Press" and "Right to Write" pose, but he's obviously befuddled by the fact that the judge agreed with him but said the Lexicon just didn't make it. The judge even agreed with Falzone that the fact that the Lexicon was a very poorly written reference work didn't matter; it's that it wasn't original enough that mattered. praetorianguard's reasoning on the contract is interesting. And contracts do seem to be her speciality. So, who knows? Perhaps we shall see RDR turn on SVA. I still don't know how Methuen figures in this as they're the mutual friend in this quarrel. And, speaking of Methuen, the UK trade journal The Bookseller reports that, because of the ruling, Methuen would be reviewing the SVA's Potter Places book for potential problems: QUOTE(The Bookseller) [Methuen's Peter Tummons] added the firm had not yet decided whether to acquiese to Rowlings' lawyers' requests to see the new book prior to publication."There is no strong objection," said Tummons. "This is not matter of intransigence, it is a matter of whether there is any need to do so." Tummons stressed the high level of original material in the travel book. "It was done under [Vander Ark's] own initiative, with his own camera, own film and he wrote the text himself. He has drawn on the names of the Potter books, but that is all. At the head of each chapter of his book Steve Vander Ark has included a short quote from one or other of the Harry Potter series. We've applied in the customary way for permission to include these but that seems unlikely to be granted so w'll no doubt exclude them."
Neil Blair, Rowling's agent at Christopher Little, said there was less concern over Vander Ark's new venture, but added it would be "helpful" if a preview was forwarded. "We hope it won't be an issue," he said. "There are hundreds if not thousands of companion books around the world, and I don't think there will be a problem with this [new] book, but we would like them to be helpful." This post has been edited by davidenglish: Sep 10 2008, 07:16 PM -------------------- Come the words that bubble
Up through broken laughter, Sweeter than spring-water, "Gods, I am so happy!" |
 |
  
 
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 01:52 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Cauldron Bottom Measurer Posts: 129 Joined: 10:27am May 2, 2008 |
I thought information about attorney's fees (the amount) is kept confidential unless there is a legal reason to release that information. Has this information been officially disclosed or is this speculation?
If RDR Books files an appeal, are they still required to pay attorney's fees and court costs or is this obligation put on hold pending the outcome of the request for an appeal? This post has been edited by Pepper-Imp: Sep 10 2008, 01:53 PM |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 02:51 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Official Singer of the Sorting Hat Song Posts: 6,605 Joined: 3:12pm July 22, 2005 Location: Lost in Hermione's beaded bag |
By way of SIP, I offer the following links on the verdict:
Top Eight Things To Know About the Ruling from the blog A Chair, A Fireplace & a Tea Cozy. And our own foresthouse has this analysis in several parts. Lots of fun reading. -------------------- Come the words that bubble
Up through broken laughter, Sweeter than spring-water, "Gods, I am so happy!" |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 03:07 PM
Post
#14
|
|
Daily Prophet Photographer Posts: 888 Joined: 6:35pm April 4, 2008 Location: Great White North |
QUOTE(davidenglish @ Sep 10 2008, 03:51 PM)  By way of SIP, I offer the following links on the verdict: Top Eight Things To Know About the Ruling from the blog A Chair, A Fireplace & a Tea Cozy. And our own foresthouse has this analysis in several parts. Lots of fun reading. QUOTE #2 of the Top Eight Things to Know About the Ruling 2. Steve Vander Ark's "vigorous" protection of his own copyright in the Lexicon worked against him. "Additionally, because the Lexicon engages in considerable verbatim copying of the Harry Potter works, publication of the Lexicon would diminish Rowling’s copyright in her own language. Based on evidence of Vander Ark’s vigorous claim to his rights in the Lexicon website (Tr. (Rowling) at 100:18-101:7; id. (Vander Ark) at 312:6-313:13), publication of the Lexicon may result in conflicting assertions of copyright over the same material by Rowling on one hand and Vander Ark or RDR Books on the other." Common sense; do we really want to see lawsuits where the author of an unofficial guide to a body of work is suing the author of the body of work for copyright infringement? This is one area of the lawsuit that we bounced back and forth on - whether JKR could actually be considered infringing upon SVA's copyright from his Lexicon book should she decide to use some of the same material in her own encyclopedia. I am glad this was made clear in the ruling while it didn't seem possible, had the Lexicon gone to print could have been a problem. -------------------- '- yet sadly, accidental rudeness occurs alarmingly often,'.....Albus Dumbledore |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 03:46 PM
Post
#15
|
|
Disgruntled House-Elf at The Leaky Cauldron Posts: 421 Joined: 4:30pm March 12, 2006 |
Thiswas rather fun to read. That link aside the verdict coming this early has totally interfered with my initial posting plans for my book podcast. I was kind of hoping I had another month before a verdict came. Oh well. Moving it back a few weeks won't be totally awful.
--------------------  |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 03:58 PM
Post
#16
|
|
Disgruntled House-Elf at The Leaky Cauldron Posts: 410 Joined: 9:20am February 14, 2008 Location: Storming Arctis Tor |
Generally, attorney's fees are confidential---strictly between client/attorney, unless the attorney's seek a ruling in which the losing side pays their fees or a Plaintiff/Defendant who won their case is awarded, by the judge, the fees in addition to a statutory or punitive damage award {happens sometimes with frivolous suits}...the judge will generally ask for an itemized list of fees to determine whether the charges are valid and reasonable and appropriate.
If RDR files an appeal then everything---judgement/award/court costs etc---is in limbo, while the lower courts decision is being challenged. JK Rowling was absolutely right to go to court over the Harry Potter Lexicon, says the general secretary of the Society of Authors -------------------- Every absurdity has a champion to defend it. ~ Oliver Goldsmith What interest rate does your Santa charge? I don't enjoy your pain, I just enjoy watching it. ~ S. Baker |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 04:07 PM
Post
#17
|
|
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 |
QUOTE(davidenglish @ Sep 10 2008, 01:45 PM) And, speaking of Methuen, the UK trade journal The Bookseller reports that, because of the ruling, Methuen would be reviewing the SVA's Potter Places book for potential problems: Thanks for that link DE. Here's how I interpreted Mr Blair: ~~SVA has done all the damage needed to destroy his bridges to the HP property. If he does anything near the HP property line, we're going to scrutinize it. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... we don't think so.~~~ -------------------- The last enemy to be destroyed is death-- First Corinthians, Chapter 15, Verse 26 The epitaph of James and Lily Potter |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 04:55 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Kibble Boy/Girl at the Magical Menagerie Posts: 263 Joined: 7:41am January 19, 2008 Location: NoThingfjord |
QUOTE Tummons stressed the high level of original material in the travel book. "It was done under [Vander Ark's] own initiative, with his own camera, own film and he wrote the text himself. He has drawn on the names of the Potter books, but that is all. At the head of each chapter of his book Steve Vander Ark has included a short quote from one or other of the Harry Potter series. We've applied in the customary way for permission to include these but that seems unlikely to be granted so we'll no doubt exclude them." I beg to disagree. If the rest of the book really is all SVA's words and pictures a short introductory quote wouldn't be a problem. As Neil Blair says: QUOTE "There are hundreds if not thousands of companion books around the world, and I don't think there will be a problem with this [new] book, but we would like them to be helpful." As long as the companion books meet fair use, there will be no objection. This post has been edited by Eir de Scania: Sep 10 2008, 04:56 PM -------------------- Never mind what should be or
what might be or what ought to be. It's what things are that's important. Granny Weatherwax |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 05:00 PM
Post
#19
|
|
Personal Secretary to The Minister of Magic  Posts: 9,192 Joined: 4:57am January 28, 2005 Location: near Muggleswick, UK |
For those tracking the documents in the case 93 is up, a clerk's order echoing the judgement.
--------------------  W.L.Y.J. We love you Jo |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2008, 07:12 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
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 |
QUOTE(Eir de Scania @ Sep 10 2008, 03:55 PM) As long as the companion books meet fair use, there will be no objection. EDS, If it were anyone other than SVA, and they were proactive in sending working drafts to Mr Blair, I'd agree heartily. Note that one of the triggers for the action was the failure to share the working drafts. If, in the future, SVA were to publish his tax returns, CLLA and Mr Blair are going to look at it under a microscope. He's been caught, his publisher has been enjoined, he's under full scrutiny. WB/CLLA/Scholastic and JKR have every right to put this man's actions regarding the HP property under scrutiny. I think Methuen understands this. I think the closest SVA is going to get to a quotation is a true MLA formatted footnote. There, he might get the operative sentence in. roonwit, Thank you. I see on justia that there's a notice of right to appeal bundled, but I only get the one page on download. Have you seen the notice anywhere else? ETA: ? to roonwit. This post has been edited by JohannMdlAmerica: Sep 10 2008, 07:30 PM -------------------- The last enemy to be destroyed is death-- First Corinthians, Chapter 15, Verse 26 The epitaph of James and Lily Potter |
|
|
|
