J.K.Rowling & The Legend of Rah and the Muggles

[Jim Ferer]

No: HPFGUIDX 14483

Anonymous:"We would all be very stupid to assume that this is a 
coincidence. How can Rowling make up a story about sitting in a train 
and making up the characters, while she took the ideas from Stouffer? 
J.K. Rowling is taking all the credit for characters she did not 
even 'make'!"

B.K.:"From a legal standpoint, Stouffer did not trademark Larry 
Potter, or Lilly Potter or even Muggles when she first used them LONG 
before J.K. Rowling did. I don't even think she used the book 
enough "in commerce" (ie sold as many books as Rowling did) to 
warrant her getting the trademark rights. "

I don't know if there's any minimum use "in commerce" to secure 
trademark rights, but how about this more common-sense argument: Does 
the success of the Harry Potter series, one of the publishing phenoms 
of all time, depend in any way at all on the use of the Potter names, 
the word "muggle", or any other word? If his name was anything else I 
can't imagine it would make any difference.  Between Ms. Stouffer's 
books and the Potter series, the characters aren't alike and the 
plotlines of the books aren't alike. 

B.K.:"how are we to know that Stouffer didn't change her drawings to 
look more like Harry? "

I, like B.K., have my doubts that the "picture" Ms. Stouffer produced 
is original and dates from her original work. Neither Ms. Stouffer 
nor her publisher did the things that are usually done to secure a 
copyright. Not that it matters; once Stouffer used the character, if 
in fact she did, does this means nobody else can have a small kid 
with dark hair in their story? Why would JKR imperil all her original 
work to steal such inconsequential elements?

And is Ms. Stouffer going to sue the Yeomen of the Guard at the Tower 
of London? They have a "Keeper of the Keys" as well: "Who goes 
there?" "The Keys!" "Whose keys?" "Queen Elizabeth's Keys!"