WSJ also JKR lawsuit

[Carol]

Carol earlier:
> >
> > I hope JKR and WB are happy with the outcome of the lawsuit. I
think the idea that the Lexicon would "irreparably harm her" is
rubbish. As for the fuss being made about the release date, IMO, some
of Harry Potter's ostensibly grown-up fans should learn to act like
grown ups and take delay and disappointment in stride as an inevitable
part of life. Sending venomous e-mails (misspelled into the bargain)
just sets a bad example for the younger generation.
> >
> > Carol, expecting the majority of posters here to (politely)
disagree with her on all counts
> 
Linda added:
> 
>    I agree with you on all counts. Just wanted to add that in there.
Your thoughtful and well-reasoned/researched posts are one of the few
things that has kept me hanging around on the fringes of the Potter
world. Thank you for all the effort you put into your posts. Your
insights and opinions have been well-received (and agreed with) by
some of the silent ones here. <snip>

Carol responds:

Thank you very much and you're welcome. It's some consolation that the
judge ruled against the plaintiffs on some points (for example, they
stated that the Lexicon does serve a transformative *purpose* (despite
too many quotations and close paraphrases) and is unlikely to harm JKR
by serving as a substitute for reading the novels (though they thought
it might harm sales of FB and QTTA, which I find doubtful given the
humorous and specialized nature of those works). I agree, and have
always stated, that the songs and poems should not have been
reproduced without permission. That much clearly was not fair use. But
to argue that publication of the Lexicon will irreparably harm JKr and
pervent her from writing her own encyclopedia is just stupid. The
existence of the Lexicon online, freely available to everybody, didn't
prevent her. Why would the existence of the Lexicon in book form,
which only ardent JKR fans would buy, make any difference? Those same
fans and many others would be at least as willing and probably more so
to buy JKR's own "definitive" encyclopedia, which would include new
material in a completely different arrangement. That argument, as the
kids would say, is "just bogus." And at least the judge assigned the
smallest possible award to the plaintiffs (JKR and WB), $750 per book,
for a grand total of $6,750. That'll buy JKR a new dress and pay the
salary of one or two WB employees for a month. (To me, it would be a
substantial sum. To JKR and WB, it's pocket change. At least, given
his contract with his would-be publisher, Steve Vander Ark won't have
to pay it himself; the publisher will. And, of course, they'll be
denied whatever small profits they would have made from the
"infringing" book.)

Carol, noting that the statement does encourage similar projects and
admit that reference guides serve the public interest, so fair use is
not harmed as substantially as I had feared it would be