Questions about the Stouffer stuff..(warning-- kind of long)

[Kelley]

No: HPFGUIDX 12822

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., rainy_lilac at y... wrote:
> Just so you know Kelly, a number of us have searched the most 
remote corners of the earth to find ANY existing copy of ANY of 
Stouffers works, or, failing that, hard evidence that these works in 
fact existed in published form. We have come of with nothing. 
> 
> I think I can safely say though that one would have an easier time 
> snorkling in search of the Loch Ness Monster. I have worked as a 
> professional researcher and pride myself on being able to dig up 
> anything. Stouffer's Legend of Rah appears to have left not so much 
as a footprint in the publishing world.
> 
> Obviously the book must have existed or there would be no case. I 
> suspect that Stouffer's Stouffer's works have been self-published-- 
> kind fo like when I was twelve and decided to start my own 
newspaper I wrote the whole thing out by hand, photocopied it, and 
sold "subscriptions" door-to-door in my neighborhood. In Stouffer's 
case, it sounds like she took her self-made copies to her local Rite 
Aid to sell. I think technically under the law, once you put anything 
on paper, it is copyrighted and can be defended as such. Hmmm... But 
this is a Trademark case, which I think makes things different. My 
question is: Hasn't anyone noticed that Rowling isn't using "muggles" 
as a trademark? She is using it as a WORD, like turnip or green. I 
have never heard of anyone reserving a word for their exclusive use.
> 
> Heidi can say more about this part though. 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Suzanne

That is so incredibly bizarre.  Would there perhaps be some reason to 
pull all her works due to the lawsuit?  I wonder how long her works 
were available before?  Very strange, indeed.  Thanks for the info, 
Suzanne...

Kelley