The Stouffer case

[heiditandy]

The Leaky Cauldron now has a copy of the judge's ruling in the recent
Stouffer matter. You can find the <a
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TLCdotORG/files/Miscellania/">html</
a> version and the <a
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TLCdotORG/files/Miscellania/stouffer
.txt">text</a> version on our Yahoogroup. Word to the wise - the text
version is quicker to download but a bit harder to read.

The rest of this is basically a redo of what I posted on
TheLeakyCauldron's site: 

Speaking as someone who's litigated copyright and trademark matters in
the Southern District of New York (but not in front of this judge) the
IP side of the analysis is very straightforward and relies heavily on
the likelihood of confusion test from the <i>Polaroid</i> case in ruling
that "by simply comparing the Harry Potter books to Stouffer's works,
and by examining the supposed similarities between the works cited by
Stouffer in her briefs ... no reasonable juror could find a likelihood
of confusion as to the source of the two parties' works."


The sanctions issues are even more interesting - the court held that she
submitted altered advertisements, exhibits evidencing a draft agreement
with Warner Publisher Services, exhibits regarding "Larry Potter & his
Best Friend Lily", a booklet as an "exhibit to support her patently
false allegation that 'between April 1986 and September 1987, Ande
aggressively promoted . . . The Legend of RAH and the MUGGLES'" -
further, the court held that she herself forged invoices regarding sales
of her books to Great Northern Distributors. 

The Court found that Stouffer asserted claims and defenses without any
reasonable basis in fact or law and has attempted to support such claims
and defenses with items of evidence that have been created or altered
for purposes of this litigation.

So... Discuss?

heidi
Will I see you at Nimbus - 2003?
Visit http://www.hp2003.org for more information.