point by point analysis of the Stouffer articles

[heidi.h.tandy.c92 at alumni.upenn.edu]

No: HPFGUIDX 14370

First, 2 notes (so nobody else has to go to her website front page & 
give it "hits"):
1. There's an "excerpt" from the book at 
http://www.realmuggles.com/intro.html
2. This info about the "publisher" is provided: Thurman House LLC, 5 
Park Center Court, Suite 300, Owings Mills, MD 21117, (410)902-9100

Now, comments on the Ananova version of the article:

<<In addition, Ms Stouffer says the Rowling books use similar 
illustrations. At a press conference, Ms Stouffer and her publisher 
distributed illustrations of Larry Potter the author said she 
designed in the 1980s. The pictures show at least a superficial 
resemblance: like Harry Potter, Stouffer's character has oversized 
glasses and wavy dark hair.>>

Superficial is right. The picture shown on the Stouffer site shows a 
grown up man with brown (NOT BLACK) hair and eyes that look to be to 
be brown. What's the similarity here? That they're both male?

<<Ms Stouffer is the author of 13 books, which she said were created 
with the idea of licensing the characters. Her original publisher, 
Ande, went bankrupt in 1987.>>
Of course, the article doesn't say how many of the 13 books were 
published. Also, someone noted yesterday (was it Joywitch?) that the 
Stouffer books are not in the library of congress - in the US, this 
means that any books she wrote after 1979 are protected by copyright, 
but if she didn't do registrations when they were published, she 
doesn't get statutory benefits on the OFF CHANCE she wins her case - 
among those benefits are additional damages & attorney's fees. BTW, 
in the US, NOW, a copyright registration costs under $40, including 
postage. I can't even imagine how cheap it was in the mid-80s... 

<<A Pennsylvania resident, Ms Stouffer filed her lawsuit last March 
in the District Court in Philadelphia. The suit names JK Rowling and 
Scholastic Inc, the US publisher of the Harry Potter books.>>
The Pennsylvania case was dismissed last year on various legal 
grounds. There is, at present, no suit in Pennyslvania between 
Stouffer and anyone relating to the Rowlling books, unless it's been 
reinstituted without coming to my attention (possible, not probable, 
since Stouffer would likely get all publicity-happy about it). 

<<Scholastic, Rowling and Time Warner filed their own lawsuit in 
November, asking a judge to rule that the Harry Potter books do not 
violate Stouffer's trademark and copyright.>>
This implies that it was filed in November 2000, after Stouffer's 
suit. It wasn't. It was filed in November 1999, and some of the 
counterclaims Stouffer filed in this litigation have been dismissed 
already.