A month after J.K. Rowling went to court to ban the publication of a photograph of her son, she’s back in court to ban the publication of an encyclopedia of the Harry Potter universe.
RDR Books, a small publishing firm located in Michigan, had teamed up with Steven Vander Ark, the creator of The Harry Potter Lexicon, a free fan website that serves as an encyclopedia and a glossary, to release printed books of the website’s extensive information.
Unfortunately for RDR Books, plans were halted when J.K. Rowling and Warner Brothers took the publisher (but not Steven Vander Ark) to court instead, citing copyright infringement. According to The New York Times, this isn’t the only case the author and Warner Brothers have filed against publishers attempting to print books that might border on plagiarism.
Appearing in court yesterday, J.K. Rowling also called RDR’s efforts to publish the Lexicon “wholesale theft” and a stressful situation that has “decimated my creative work.” CNN reports J.K. Rowling looked like she was holding back tears as she shared why RDR was profiting from “nothing more than a rearrangement” of her work.
Given all the Harry Potter-themed books that have been released to profit from J.K. Rowling’s success over the years, I sympathize with J.K. Rowling. The worst thing in the world for a writer is to feel someone else has “borrowed” an original idea in order to profit from it. J.K. Rowling has also been an avid fan of The Harry Potter Lexicon, so this ordeal must be a huge disappointment.
But having said this, I’m also surprised J.K. Rowling feels threatened enough by RDR Books to reconsider compiling her own comprehensive Harry Potter encyclopedia, a project she had hinted at writing post-Deathly Hallows. AP quoted her stating, ”I’m not at all convinced that I would have the will or the heart to continue with my encyclopedia.”
As a huge Harry Potter fan, I hope she will find the strength to relax and write the encyclopedia, especially since writing is a much better way for her to spend time than appearing in court. Yet, at the same time, I feel guilty for thinking she’s being too maudlin about the court case.
What do you think? Is J.K. Rowling justified for suing RDR Books? Is RDR Books (and Steven Vander Ark) wrong for trying to profit from her ideas? Or is this whole situation just overblown?
posted April 15, 2008 at 5:32 pm
If the encyclopedia is offering no critical analysis of the Harry Potter series as a literary work but instead just alphabetizing the elements of the Hogwarts world in encyclopedic fashion, than it is indeed plagiarism. If the author does not offer any new ideas– if he only re-writes the ideas Rowling has already created, it is plagiarism.
posted April 16, 2008 at 1:56 am
When Steven Vander Ark’s publisher, RDR Books, told him it was okay to publish a printed version of Vander Ark’s Harry Potter Lexicon Web site, which is largely derived from work by Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, Vander Ark accepted that without further question and proceeded with the project. That cavalier attitude is no surprise when one considers he had been trying to market this idea to two other publishers.
When did it become okay to lift someone else’s copyrighted material and present it as one’s own? That’s why, “in the name of scholastic pursuit”, I’ve made a copy of Vander Ark’s Web site to use as my own Web site. Oh, it’s okay. I’ve changed the name of the site and reorganized it a little. My version is called Harry Potter’s Maxicon. Different enough, right?
Http://www.maxicon.org
posted April 16, 2008 at 10:46 am
An encyclopedia just describes what or who something or someone is, a simple description of the people, places, and things. The authors of the encyclopedia talk about Harry or the other characters, places and things in the series, and site quotations and sources correctly, the in my opinion it is not plagiarism. Building on the works of others has been happened before. Look at the Star Trek and Star Wars genres a number of different authors have written many additional books of stories and technical manuals, these just flesh out the universes where these stories take place. If the authors of the encyclopedia can be sued successfully, simply because someone else didn’t get their encyclopedia to print first, then who’s to say that other authors can’t sue because another author printed “their” idea first?
posted June 25, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Yes, JK Rowling should be able to sue for damages. And her family should be entitled to privacy…no one should infringe on any one’s right…she has worked had to get where she is today..she came from a mother on welfare. She DESERVES fairness!
posted June 25, 2008 at 1:23 pm
YES, JK Rowling should sue. People should not get credit for her works. Infringement on her and family rights.
JK Rowling worked too hard to get where she is today…and her family should be entitled to privacy too.