the "Muggle" lawsuit

[Jim Ferer]

No: HPFGUIDX 4761

--- In HPforGrownups at egroups.com, Amanda Lewanski <editor at t...> wrote:
"Can somebody either fill me in on this, or point me to where I can 
see what went on? Apparently this little-known wannabe happened to 
think of the term "Muggle" as well, and says JKR can't use it? If 
none of her books are in print, where does she think JKR could have 
seen it? Is this the essence of it? And was this loon harassing web 
groups?"
> 
> --Amanda

Nancy Stouffer wrote a children's book called "The Legend of Rah and 
Muggles".  It was distributed in some Rite Aid drugstores and grocery 
stores in the Northeast.  She sued JK Rowling for infringement of the 
name "muggles", and because, Stouffer says, she had a character 
named "Larry Potter" and "Lilly Potter". This is a direct quote from 
her complaint:
=========================================
Stouffer filed trademark applications in the United States Patent and 
Trademark Office on February 22, 2000, for the mark MUGGLE in 
onnection with decorative magnets in International Class 9; 
ornamental novelty buttons in International Class 26; and playthings, 
namely dolls; novelty toys, namely "worry stones" in International 
Class 28 and for the mark MUGGLES in connection with printed 
materials, namely a series of children's fiction books, storybooks, 
coloring books, activity books, and sticker books in International 
Class 16 and with pre-recorded audio-cassette tapes in International 
Class 9.  As stated in the trademark applications, Stouffer began 
using her trademarks on all of these goods "at least as early 
as 1987."  See Exhibits 7 and 8. 
================================================= 
I'm sure you noticed that Stouffer didn't file for her trademark 
until after the Harry Potter books were on the shelves. this isn't 
necessarily fatal, though.

The muggles in Stouffer's book are little potato-headed creatures 
that take care of other creatures in a post-nuclear holocaust world.

Stouffer has at least contacted Jenna of the Unofficial Harry Potter 
Fan Club site about using the word "muggle". Jenna's site 
(http://www.harrypotterfans.net) has a lot of information on the 
suit, including the complaint I quoted from above, a link to 
Stouffer's site, and an interesting area called "muggle sightings" 
full of prior use of terms like muggle.

This case is really weak.  It leaves the impression Ms. Stouffer is 
looking for Scholastic and Rowling to "buy their peace" (a genuine 
legal term), but I think there's more.  This is the chance for Ms. 
Stouffer's fifteen minutes of fame that the merits of her work are 
unlikely to provide.  I get the notion Ms. Stouffer can't wait for 
the interviews she'll give on the courthouse steps and for her role 
as an aggrieved "little person".  

I know an intellectual property lawyer who tells me that one reason 
that moving the case to New York is a defeat for Stouffer is that the 
US District Court for the Southern District of New York is 
sophisticated about this type of case and not likely to be impressed 
with Ms. Stouffer's claims.

this kind of thing goes on all the time with successful works. 
Rowling should not spend five minutes worrying about it.  Let the 
lawyers handle it.