Harry Potter dtories gibberish, Judge tells Rowling.

[MarkG]

so content like this

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/da.html

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/abbott.html

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/macmillan.html

is direct quotes from the books?

they seem like a compilation of information

[Alinestra Covelia]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

If it performed a reviewer's or a critic's function, it could be exempt, but it doesn't sound like it does that.

If it did that, it would still be under the copyright, but a fair use. (That might have been what you were trying to say.)

edit: in the US

Aye, that was what I was trying to say, if I weren't so tongue tied.

I *believe* that "fair use for criticism" also holds up in Europe and the UK too.

[TCO]

I think that in a general sense copyright is becoming too much of a monopoly. For one thing the terms keep getting extended. than there are broader and more aggressive actions against deriviative works and commentary (see Church of Scientology). As a counterweight, there is increased piracy, especially on the web. But what it means unfortunately is that we are entering a weird period where the law gives too much to creators and users steal too often.

[Dr Strangelove]

One could argue that copyright law gives Rowling the right to create the lexicon or to designate someone to write it for her. OTOH, if there is a clear need for a Potter lexicon and she refuses to write one, doesn't she forfeit the right?

[Alinestra Covelia]

Originally posted by TCO
I think that in a general sense copyright is becoming too much of a monopoly. For one thing the terms keep getting extended.

Sad but very true. If you look at Disney's lobbying, they've managed to get the copyright moved from 75 years to 90 years, just in time to make sure Mickey Mouse doesn't become public domain. Who's to say what they'll do in another decade or so?

Shameful manipulation of Congress

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Vote Lessig!

(oh yeah, he decided not to run. )

[Henrik]

“magical world hard to follow, filled with strange names and words that would be gibberish in any other context."

All her spells are in latin so I find it kind of funny he considers them gibberish...

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
Sad but very true. If you look at Disney's lobbying, they've managed to get the copyright moved from 75 years to 90 years, just in time to make sure Mickey Mouse doesn't become public domain. Who's to say what they'll do in another decade or so?

when was the last mickey mouse movie?

disney should lose the copyright if they dont do one soon!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MarkG
when was the last mickey mouse movie?

disney should lose the copyright if they dont do one soon!

:facepalm:

just shut up and go away and come back when you know what the **** you're talking about, please

[Locutus]

Originally posted by MarkG
so content like this

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/da.html

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/abbott.html

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/macmillan.html

is direct quotes from the books?

they seem like a compilation of information

The character parts are definitely the least literal (although it varies, look up Dumbledore and much of it consists of literal quotes), but the Bestiary and Magical stuff is often literally copied from the books. Even the 'summarising' parts like some of the character pages, while they might not be word-for-word from the books, they don't add commentary, analysis, review, etc, they don't add anything original and often use the exact same descriptors and choices of words as the books. It's basically a synopsis of what's said in the books, except that it's hundreds of pages of synopsis of every single element in the books, retelling the whole story in A-Z form, much as the lawsuit claims. Again, it's up to the courts where the line between valid analysis and copyright violation lies, but if anyone did that to *my* life's work I'd be inclined to put a halt to such a degree of plagiarism too (at least when someone's trying to make money off of it).

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
One could argue that copyright law gives Rowling the right to create the lexicon or to designate someone to write it for her. OTOH, if there is a clear need for a Potter lexicon and she refuses to write one, doesn't she forfeit the right?

Rowling's said she's *definitely* doing an encyclopedia of her own (she's talked about this long before even the 7th book was finished), she's calling it The Scottish Book and it'll contain a lot more than just a retelling of the original story (she has entire boxes of unused backstory and dropped plotlines to recycle). It just might be a few years before she gets around to it because she has other plans as well (I think she's working on 2 non-HP books right now).

And it's not like this is the first book of its kind, there are MANY companion books and encyclopedias and the like for HP already out there, it's just that this one, according to Rowling, crosses the line from analysis/commentary into plagiarism.

[Alinestra Covelia]

Originally posted by Henrik
“magical world hard to follow, filled with strange names and words that would be gibberish in any other context."

All her spells are in latin so I find it kind of funny he considers them gibberish...

Especially given that US law frequently uses Latin terms.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
just shut up and go away and come back when you know what the **** you're talking about, please

i should be using more smilies on that post and you should lighten up...

[Dr Strangelove]

She should be thankful that Pat Robertson didn't decide to write his own version of how Harry Potter is really a retelling of the gospel like he did with George Lucas' first Star Wars. I imagine suing him would be a nightmare. George Lucas laughed off all the rip-offs of Star Wars, maybe she should take lessons from him.

[Dinner]

They're going to be releasing the next Harry Potter movie at the end of this year (Nov is the tentative scheduled release). Also I've heard they're going to be breaking the final book into two movies (part 1 and 2) because it is so large. The first part is set for 2010 and the second is 2011.

That means since the kids are now just turning 18 while they're filming The half blood prince they'll be 19-20 when they film the final movie. That seems to be pushing things a bit since the main characters are supposed to have just turned 17 at the beginning of the final book. Oh, and my nephew saw some sort of write up about a Harry Potter video game which is coming out and he's asked me to buy it for him.

[snoopy369]

Presumably they will be done filming the movie well before the release (not 2011 for sure). My guess is they finish filming both parts before b7p1 comes out.