[HPforGrownups] Re: Now Rowling's control, was Less than 1000 posts

[k12listmomma]

No: HPFGUIDX 180288

> Jim Ferer:
> The notion that JKR is stifling discussion of her work is grossly
> overstated.

I'm not saying, nor have I ever said that she is stifling discussion. My 
line of thought was merely about control, and a lawsuit clearly exercises 
that control and show of power. Many smaller authors don't have the capital 
(money) to defend their works, but Rowling does and she had exercised that 
show of force through not only this lawsuit, but others when her works were 
released early in bookstores and in online media word-for-word.

> Jim Ferer:
> The Lexicon is far more doubtful.  You speak of it as if the copyright
> issues were hornbook law, but they aren't. This copyright is going to
> have to be settled or tried. I hope it's settled.

I am well aware that copyright issues are settled in court, and that court 
precedence becomes the law. I am under no delusion that they are hornbook 
law, as you called it. Heck, I wrote papers on in college, showing how 
companies use lawsuits and the threat of lawsuits as a way to bully around 
their competition. You don't have to physically be a monopoly to exercise 
monopoly powers if you have the power of well placed lawsuits to intimidate. 
Lawsuits are a way to exercise power over a smaller opponent. It's very 
clear that to defend a copyright, you must sue, you must go after the person 
you think is infringing upon it. That is an exercise in power and control, 
plain and simple. If you don't have a means of power and control, you can't 
exercise your rights, now can you? It's not a matter of right or wrong, of 
criticizing Rowling for doing it or not doing it; again, I was merely 
talking about this lawsuit as a solid evidence that Rowling is maintaining 
and asserting control over future Harry Potter material. She didn't sue any 
other author who wrote about her works before this final book, but she's 
taken a different direction and suing now. That backs up my original 
assertion that she seems to have a harder time now letting go of the Harry 
Potter world now that this series is done. I said it feels like she's 
already writing another book, plotting it in her mind, and she doesn't want 
another person's book to trump hers, or be published before she even gets to 
put her pen to the page.

Steve's lexicon wouldn't threaten Rowling's lexicon. They'd simply be two 
separate analysises on the same material- one from an outside prospective, 
and Rowling's with all the extra goodies that only an author herself could 
add in. They wouldn't even look the same! On the legal side, though, most of 
Steve's lexicon has already been published on the internet, and thus 
Rowling's lawyers would have to assert (because they haven't previously 
defended that the lexicon(s) on the internet violated their copyright) that 
a lexicon in print would be different from having one on the internet. I 
don't think they have a legal leg to stand on, since the authors and 
publishers of the ones on the net can show even where she referred to them 
on her web page (showing previous approval even), and that the existence of 
lexicons so far have not hurt any of her book sales to date. (You have to 
prove monetary loss in the lawsuit.) Thus, I think if Steve can muster the 
strength to fight against this monopoly-giant Rowling, they will clearly win 
in court. But, they have to be willing to step up to this giant to fight the 
intimidation she's now demonstrating. Clearly, a lawsuit is a hostile move 
against this fan of hers, one that I feel shows disrespect toward all her 
fans.

I'm going to pull out a line from a previous post from someone else to help 
illustrate what I feel Rowling is doing now:
Carol responds:
" I just wish she would realize that her characters and the WW are no longer 
within her control. She's like a person who gives a Christmas present and 
then claims it as her own because she bought or made it. Wrong. The books 
belong to the readers, to interpret as they will (preferably in accordance 
with what's on the page)."

That's how I feel. We own Dumbledore as we read him through 7 books. He 
became ours in our heads. But I feel like she still wants to write about 
him, to finish creating him as a character, as if she was planning another 
book when she intends to show a gay Dumbledore. But, this is Rowling- even 
as she was writing the series, she kept changing her mind. She mislead fans 
when she said there would be a character who does magic later in life, 
because she didn't end up writing the books that way. She was free to 
correct us when she had another book in line, for she knew what was coming 
up. But, now that the last book is done, I don't feel she has that same 
right to tell us how to interpret the books so far. She didn't write 
Dumbledore as gay, and to tell people that is now is just her mind plotting 
another book for the future where she intends to show it to us, or show how 
that revelation is relevant to the story. To me, any interview that she 
gives now will only be relevant for a future book. I think she's misleading 
us again- she isn't done. There will be another book. She just hasn't 
planned it all out yet, and so any revelation is kind of like that line 
about a character who does magic later in life- it may change, or she may 
keep it. She's still free to make up her mind, but in the process, I think 
she's unfairly toying with her fans. Much better to actually write the book 
than to write in out in musings in interviews where she can make up anything 
on the spot and have it not turn out to be true once she actually sits down 
to flesh out the story. That's why I think any interview is not canon.