Thoughts from a Different Perspective

[nrenka]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:

> Also, note that Steve V. says that he is one of FOUR authors
> of the Lexicon, though I think he means the web Lexicon. 

No, he means the print Lexicon.  If you read the trial transcripts,
this topic comes up.

Having been following this from the beginning, and having read a
number of ultimately manifestly contradictory statements from both SVA
and his publisher, I personally find it hard to have much sympathy for
him--there are emails in the exhibits, that one can read on Justia,
that I cringed reading, and I think I've pieced together motivation
for the entire mess.  But that all starts to get a little bit
personal, unfortunately, so I'll leave it off here.

On another topic:

Lee Kaiwen <leekaiwen at ...> wrote:

> Could it be argued that the lexicon/encyclopedia market is one JKR 
> would "generally develop or license"?

And yes, I think the fourth test falls in JKR's favor: she, after all,
had made public her statements about doing an encyclopedia eventually,
and Steve's own comments of long ago were along the lines of "only she
has the right to do it, but boy howdy would I like to work on that!" 
(See: emails that made me cringe, above.)  To expand it out, I think
there is a kind of reference book that would be very useful yet only
legally possible with the cooperation and permission of the copyright
holder.  The Lexicon does not substitute in the sense of providing a
comparable literary experience, but it does provide all of the
character information/fictional facts of the books, and things which
do that, like Cliffs Notes, have to get permission of the copyright
holder when the work is not in public domain.