Prayers For Lexicon Steve

[Carol]

bboyminn wrote:
<snip>
> 
> Second, what I've quoted from the Lexicon is NOT /FROM/
> the books or interviews, it is /ABOUT/ the books or interviews
> written in SteveV's own words. He does not copy or quote
> anything from anywhere beyond normal 'fair use'. 
><snip>
> Steve has created a reference books. A Spell is defined, the
> origins of the incantations are researched, and references to
> where this Spell can be found in the books is listed. Not one
> bit of that other than the word 'Accio' comes from the books
> or from interviews.


Carol responds:

Exactly. the whole concept of a reference book is that its fact-based
(in this case, based on fictional fact) and does *not* contain
interpretation or opinion.

JKR states that all the work that went into it is her own, but as we
can see from the inconsistencies in her books and her own statement
that she hasn't reread the books since they were published, she hasn't
done a great deal of researching within her own books and, it seems,
doesn't realize the amount of work that it takes to find the relevant
quotes to compile the needed information. This morning, for example, I
posted on Aberforth and the references to him either by name of as the
bartender at the Hog's Head (BTW, I forgot one--Trelawney mentions
"the uncouth barman" who caught Severus Snape listening in on her job
interview). It probably took ten or fifteen minutes to compose that
post based on memory alone. If I had actually hunted up the relevant
passages and quoted them, it would have taken much longer. The post I
wrote on Voldemort's powers probably took three hours to compose.
Finding the relevant passages and working them into what amounts to an
encyclopedia entry would take similar amounts of time, and no doubt
the entries were revised and new ones written each time a new book cam
out as new information became available.

Indexers, the compilers of concordances, and similar researchers work
long and hard organizing the words of other people in an alphabetical
format so that others can find those references without effort.
Similarly, the Lexicon puts together all the references to a
particular person or potion or spell or creature so that a Harry
Potter reader can find them or remember them.

JKR's claim that the format is not useful is simply erroneous, as
those of us who have used the Lexicon know. the Lexicon by no means
substitutes for reading the books. It is not an imaginative work; it
does not create suspense or make the reader feel any sort of emotion.
It lacks JKR's slightly warped sense of humor. It tries to provide
background information on the etymology of spells, which, JKR to the
contrary, is not something that any seven-year-old with a Latin
dictionary could do. (Erm, JKR--most seven-year-olds these days can't
even use a dictionary in their own native language.) And just how
Steve was supposed to know that Alohomora was based on a West African
word, which she claims he could have done by Googling it, is beyond me.

As someone (the defense lawyer?) indicated, the sources of Lexicon
Steve's information are indicated by lead-ins, such as "according to
Phineas Nigellus" (which is to say, according to a specific character
created by Rowling herself). What follows is not always the
character's exact words, but have JKR and her lawyers never heard the
term "paraphrase," defined by Merriam-Webster Online as "a restatement
of a text, passage, or work giving the meaning in another form"? As
long as the meaning is not altered and exact phrases are placed in
quotation marks and the source is indicated with an attribution or
page or chapter reference, paraphrase is perfectly legitimate, and in
fact eliminates JKR's objection that her words are being "stolen." No,
JKR. Your words aren't being stolen. Your characters, spells, places,
and artifacts are being defined and arranged so that the references to
them in your books can be easily accessed. Not only is there nothing
wrong with such a work, it is highly useful.

She complains about the quality of the writing (without citing a
single instance of bad writing) yet complains that Steve has stolen
her words. Has he stolen her bad writing or is she trying to have it
both ways?
 
Kemper:
> > 
> > I feel if Steve V wins it could limit what fans of future writers
might want to do (fanfic/art/movie/sites/etc) because then those
writers will have to fight for control of their work which would hurt
developing a fan base.  ...
 
> bboyminn:
> 
> Quite the opposite, if JKR wins 'reference works' which were
> previously allowed, will not no longer be allowed. This is
> an expansion of the rights of the author of an original work,
> but it is the contraction of the rights of people to write
> reference, speculation, and commentary on existing works. 
> 
> Consider this, the average college student, and even high
> school student must draw on existing knowledge, that is,
> existing written works, to write essays and term papers.
> They are allowed to take information from other written
> works and include them in their own, and this included
> reference and statistical data, but they can't directly
> quote their references beyond fair use. They must compile
> the data and information they collect into their own words,
> but that doesn't change the fact that their own words are 
> drawn from other sources.

Carol responds:

Exactly. Having written a six-hundred-plus page doctoral dissertation
and numerous critical essays and research papers, not to mention
teaching college English for eighteen years, I can just imagine the
disastrous consequences if "fair use" is limited by this case and
students and researchers can no longer quote or paraphrase their
sources in literary analysis. JKR *thinks* she's fighting plagiarism
and limiting only a certain kind of "companion book," but I'm afraid
that the limitations would extend far beyond books like the Lexicon.
and woe betide the writers of fanfic if an encyclopedia is considered
plagiarism! Steve never once indicates that the work in the Lexicon
(other than the time line) is his own. He is merely reorganizing JKR's
scattered (and sometimes inconsistent) references to a particular
person, place, or thing for easy reference. It's sort of like cleaning
up her desk or organizing her notes on file cards on a larger scale,
except that it involves introducing quotations and paraphrases and
providing introductory or supplementary material (such as suggested
etymologies) and transitions between the quoted or paraphrased
passages. In short, it's like writing a report as opposed to an
analysis. (Let's hope that children are still encouraged to quote from
the books they've read in their book reports! Or is even that--the
summarizing of plots and the naming of characters--to be considered
"plagiarism" because it doesn't involve interpretation?

bboyminn:
> 
> A extremely vast majority of the Lexicon is compiled data written in
SteveV's own words. <snip>
> 
Carol responds:
It isn't analysis, exactly, but it's paraphrased from the books and
credited to the source, which is perfectly legitimate and, as the MLA
Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, fifth edition, indicates,
"easier to integrate into the text" than quotations (2.7.1).

bboyminn:
> Again, I haven't seen the actual book, but it still sounds like
'fair use' to me. Nothing in SteveV's book is taken from JKR or her
books, it is compiled ABOUT her books and again, I think that
qualifies as fair use. <snip>

Carol:
Exactly. And I sincerely hope that "fair use" is not restricted as a
result of this case.

bboyminn: 
> Notice in one of the interviews SteveV said he had previously said
he hadn't published because he felt the might be a copyright conflict.
However, his publisher assured him there was not, and that this type
of reference work was allowed. <snip>

Carol responds:
Exactly. Poor man. He was trying to do what was right--and now he's
crying on the witness stand because JKR is accusing him of plagiarism.
And now she's even claiming that she only consulted the Lexicon twice
before giving it an award on her website--yet she's read the whole
thing and thinks the hard work behind it is her own? And she's too
distraught to write her own reference work because it's "drudgery"?
I'm sorry, JKR, but I don't think you're the one whose life and career
are being ruined.

bboyminn:
> Still, once again, I say that I have very conflicting emotions
around this. On one hand, I don't want to go against JKR, but on the
other hand, sight unseen, I do think SteveV is working from a very
real and very valid legal position.
> 
> Regardless of outcome, I think however the judge rules will be fair
and reasonable.

Carol responds:
I think that JKR is, shall we say, mistaken to call Steve's work
"shoddy," and she seems to have only a limited understanding of
copyright and plagiarism.

However, I do think that RDR should have asked JKR's permission to
publish the Lexicon and submitted the manuscript for her corrections
to make sure that it didn't include any "factual" errors (rather than
suggesting that they just print it from the website).

I have no objections to Steve's receiving royalties for his hard work
in creating a useful reference for HP fans, and I don't consider what
he had done to be plagiarism or copyright infringement. But both sides
should have been more considerate. If the summarized testimony I read
today is accurate, we have screaming lawyers and scheming publishers
muddying the waters.

What's important here, much more important than the mental state and
emotions of the plaintiff and defendant or their profits and losses,
is the concept of fair use, which is in desperate need of
clarification. I only hope that the rights of both sides--the original
author and those who wish to make fair use of her book for the benefit
of other readers--are respected.

Meantime, I hope that JKR realizes that she's not the only one who's
suffering here, and that Steve V. would never have produced the
Lexicon in the first place if he hadn't been a devoted fan. I'm not
impressed by the representatives of RDR, but Steve V. himself is in
need of empathy and compassion.

Carol, hoping for a fair judgment and fearing the worst if Steve V. loses