The Court Case - it breaks my heart

[Zara]

> Magpie:
> I think the only ruling that would really be trouble for fans is if 
JKR 
> loses *on the grounds* that she "approved" of the book when she 
> approved of the Lexicon and said she liked it imo. 

zgirnius:
I agree.

> Magpie:
> The other things 
> really don't have to do with us. If JKR wins because it's not fair 
use, 
> it doesn't really change much. If RDR wins because it's fair use it 
> also doesn't change much. It would only apply to fans who wanted to 
put 
> out an encyclopedia.

zgirnius:
I disagree. If RDR wins because it is fair use, I feel this would be 
beneficial to fans everywhere, not merely the few individuals who 
wish to publish book guides to fictional universes. Owners of fan 
websites of various stripes could feel a bit safer about their 
activities. If RDR loses because it is not fair use, the opposite is 
true. 

Consider: http://whysnape.tripod.com/

This is not an encyclopedia, it is a Snape fansite. But the link 
to "Book Analysis" gets you to pages with all the Snape text of the 
series' books, together with short, matchibg snippets 
analysis/paraphrase. The owner of the site is clearly nervous about 
this, the head of the page says:

"Warning: In absolutely no case must this text be used for other 
things than evaluation, fan or inspiration purposes.  I do this only 
to allow other fans to appreciate the delightful work of JK Rowling 
and make a full character analysis of one of her creations.  
No money is being made, keep it that way!"

> magpie:
> Right now, as I understand it, authors can choose which things they
> go after with their copyright.

zgirnius:
I think there are already limits to how arbitrary authors can be. For 
example, if I wrote a typo-free Potterverse Encyclopedia without 
lousy humor (even writing this makes me snicker), and I found a 
publisher, and I published it, I think WB/JKR would have to answer 
some questions about why they are going after SVA and not me/my 
publisher.