Harry Potter and the Golden Turd

Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling testified today in her lawsuit against Steven Vander Ark for his unpublished book, Harry Potter Lexicon.  Rowling claims that the book, which is based on the popular website of the same name, "constitutes wholesale theft of 17 years of my hard work."

Hardly. Vander Ark has clearly put in a significant amount of work on his part, including creating a timeline of all the events in the Potter universe.  When his work was just a website, Rowling was tremendously supportive, saying

This is such a great site that I have been known to sneak into an internet café while out writing and check a fact rather than go into a bookshop and buy a copy of Harry Potter (which is embarrassing). A website for the dangerously obsessive; my natural home.

However, now that the work is to appear in print (read: for profit), Rowling is out for blood.  Shame on her.  It ought to be obvious that Vander Ark's work in no way compromises sales of her (absurdly lucrative) Potter franchise.  On the contrary, it probably complements sales well, in much the same way that companion books support Tolkien's sales.  Surely she cannot in any way claim that the sale of a copy of Lexicon equates to a loss of sale of any of her material.

I liked the summary offered by Vander Ark's defense group:

In support of her position Ms Rowling appears to claim a monopoly on the right to publish literary reference guides, and other non-academic research, relating to her own fiction. This is a right no court has ever recognized. It has little to recommend it. If accepted, it would dramatically extend the reach of copyright protection, and eliminate an entire genre of literary supplements: third party reference guides to fiction, which for centuries have helped readers better access, understand and enjoy literary works.

Indeed.  Cliff's Notes beware!

Moreover, Ms Rowling appears to be a sniveling, whiny muggle when she claims

I don’t want to cry, because I’m British, but the [Harry Potter books] meant setting aside my children.

Snork.  Well, thank you, Ms Rowling, for unselfishly setting aside your family obligations to devote your time to the betterment of humanity through fantasy fiction.  What a philanthropist.

She also stated

Should my fans be flooded with a surfeit of substandard books — so called lexicons — I’m not sure I’d have the will or heart to continue.

Oh, please, Ms Rowling.  Your fans have already been flooded with a surfeit of substandard books: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows to name a couple.  Perhaps you should sue yourself.

Besides the fact that she simply has no case, I want Rowling to lose the suit because she is so unimaginably petty.

Comments

[Snape_n_Lily]

You're KIDDING me, right? This is absolutely B.S. JKR has been very kind to allow fansites like the lexicon; how many authors do that? Jo is going to write the Scottish Book, but SVA is trying to beat her to it by publishing his stupid website. If you've ever actually *been* to his site, you'd see it's all things taken directly from the books. There's no commentary, no criticism. The few things he does specualte on are almost always wrong (the origins of names of things, for example). He takes all of Jo's hard work, rearranges the words, and publishes them as his own.

[Rip Rowan]

Snivelus, I have been to the site. It is a sort of concordance. Reference guides are not supposed to offer "commentary or criticism". It obviously adds value, since even Rowling herself admits to using it as a reference, and it even won her fan site award.

But the value-add is irrelevant. Are you saying that "good" reference books are not violations of copyright, but "bad" ones are?

The point is, firstly, JKR does not, and should not, have the right to suppress reference guides to her work. Secondly, it is quite clear that the Lexicon in no way impinges on Rowling's (astronomical) sales. Thirdly, she's stupid for not already having a concordance of her own that could have already gone to press, instead, she has relied on Vander Ark's. And, lastly, she is a whiny and petty billionaire, which makes her less-than-sympathetic.