That case and that book

[Goddlefrood]

> Doddie here:
> Sorry; but this battle is fought here on U.S. territory...this 
> one said court battle falls w/in U.S. law

Goddlefrood:

Thought I hadn't noticed did you? Your point was ...

One thing, the law does not exist in a vacuum. In the USA, 
despite the lay person possibly thinking otherwise, the Court's 
take notice of what happens elsewhere. US Statutes are based on 
other countries' statutes as well as being devised and / or 
adjusted for state and federal considerations. Where there 
might be a gap in precedent - the US has the same Common Law 
system that originated in England - the US Courts take note 
of decided case law from other common law jurisdcitions.

The US is also a signatory to the Berne Convention and part 
of said Convention indicates that each signatory should put 
in place Copyright legislation. The US follows the Convention. 
Where, and if, which is unlikely, the Copyright Act of 1976 
conflicts with the Berne Convention, then it would be the 
Convention that prevailed.

Sorry if you feel the US law is paramount, but I'm afraid in 
this instance it isn't. It is bound to higher things and each 
country that follows the international Convention on copyright 
has more or less the same provisions in their own Copyright 
laws as would the US.

<SNIP>
> Given the other books published over the years...I do not think 
> JKR's case will prevail..

Goddlefrood:

Care to expand on that? Precedent and legal references, s'il vous 
plait.