Interim Ruling in Stouffer v. Rowling

[heidi tandy]

No: HPFGUIDX 8419

You can read a summary of the decision at
http://ipcenter.bna.com/pic/document/1,1103,1_765,00.html
The ruling was a mixed bag for Scholastic/JKR.
In summary, the court held that Stouffer has the right
to present evidence supporting her copyright and
trademark claims but not about her defamation and
tortious interference with contract claims. 

1. The court dismissed Nancy's misrepresentation
claims but allowed her to replead them as false
designation of origin claims (which is identical to
trademark claims). The specific allegations in this
counterclaim do not involve any false representations
per se, but rather allege that the Harry Potter books
misappropriate certain aspects of Stouffer's books.
The counterclaim points to: (1) "Muggles" as the name
of non-magical characters; (2) the "Harry Potter" and
"Lilly Potter" character and names (similar to
Stouffer's "Larry Potter" and "Lilly Potter"
characters); (3) the "Nelville" character and name
(similar to Stouffer's "Nevils" character); (4) the
"Keeper of the Keys" (similar to Stouffer's "Keeper of
the Gardens"); and (5) "Nimbus" for a flying broom
(similar to Stouffer's "Nimbus" for a flying warrior).


2. Judge Schwartz held that Stouffer alleged
sufficient facts to support each of the reverse
palming off elements. Stouffer alleged that each of
the marks, character names, and likenesses were
published in her literary works; that Scholastic used
the works as its own in promoting its services; that
consumers have falsely associated her works with
Scholastic's works; and that she has suffered
irreparable harm and damages.  This doesn't mean that
she proved them or has any evidence to support her
allegations. All it means is, she said "this is this,
and that is that."

3. The court did dismiss Stouffer's claims for
defamation and tortious interference with prospective
business relations as inadequately plead. 

Full text at http://pub.bna.com/ptcj/9911480.htm 



=====
heidi tandy

What Maureen Dowd thinks David Souter was thinking on Monday, December 11, 2000: I know the Bushes are furious at me. That'll teach 'em to assume that a guy living like a monk in an isolated New Hampshire farmhouse is some kind of Live Free or Die nut.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/