From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Nov  1 12:18:29 2007
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:18:29 -0000
Subject: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
Message-ID: <fgcg6l+5qbv@...>

No doubt people who can face the Leaky Cauldron's diabolical interface 
already know all this, but see 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7072086.stm

You've got to hand it to JKR:  "Here's the book and, no, you aren't 
going to be able to read it."  Unless she also gives the copyright to 
her charity, too.

In fcat, there's a story there... one copy known, six in mystery 
locations, our (paparazzi) hero's task to find one and scan it...

Meanwhile, Lexicon WTF?  How did it get this far?

David




From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Thu Nov  1 13:01:16 2007
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (Annemehr)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:01:16 -0000
Subject: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
In-Reply-To: <fgcg6l+5qbv@...>
Message-ID: <fgcims+fm93@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at ...> 
wrote:
>
> No doubt people who can face the Leaky Cauldron's diabolical 
interface 
> already know all this, but see 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7072086.stm
> 
> You've got to hand it to JKR:  "Here's the book and, no, you aren't 
> going to be able to read it."  Unless she also gives the copyright to 
> her charity, too.

Anne:
Fat chance of that.  The value of the auctioned copy is going to be 
tied to its exclusivity.  The people receiving the gift copies are no 
doubt sworn to secrecy.  It could be decades before a copy is leaked.

I do wonder why she chose to go about fundraising by auction, again, 
especially with something like this, which I'm sure would raise at 
least as much money if published as a cheap little paperback, even if 
the publishers and printers were paid this time.  The handwritten 
copies would still make nice gift for her friends.


Dave:
 
> Meanwhile, Lexicon WTF?  How did it get this far?
> 

Anne:
Well, apparently the publisher has ignored numerous cease and desist 
orders.  I'd be more interested in how it got started in the first 
place, but that'd be for Steve to say.

But I wonder if JKR *really* thinks a printed Lexicon would compete 
with her promised-some-day encyclopedia.  I mean, she *was* planning on 
publishing never-before-revealed details, wasn't she?  I can respect 
her objection to the sale of such material by others for "their own 
personal gain," however. (Quote taken from JKR's news item on her site.)

Anne

P.S.
I've just been at JKR's site to doublecheck the news item re the 
encyclopedia, and there's a newer item (behind the dark mark) about the 
Tales of Beedle the Bard and how the auctioned one came to be.  It says 
that one will be on public display for a time beforehand -- does that 
mean people WILL get to see inside?  I can't imagine the public will be 
allowed to handle it, though, so maybe it'll be just the cover, or open 
to one page, and behind glass.

Time will tell.







From ewetoo at ewe2_au.yahoo.invalid  Thu Nov  1 23:39:30 2007
From: ewetoo at ewe2_au.yahoo.invalid (ewe2)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 10:39:30 +1100
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
In-Reply-To: <fgcims+fm93@...>
References: <fgcg6l+5qbv@...> <fgcims+fm93@...>
Message-ID: <91d14f320711011639r10a8343fj733aecb58b6fe628@...>

On Nov 2, 2007 12:01 AM, Annemehr <annemehr at ...> wrote:

> Well, apparently the publisher has ignored numerous cease and desist
> orders.  I'd be more interested in how it got started in the first
> place, but that'd be for Steve to say.

They're entitled to ignore such c&d's under fair use. And there are
other arguments cf. below.

> But I wonder if JKR *really* thinks a printed Lexicon would compete
> with her promised-some-day encyclopedia.  I mean, she *was* planning on
> publishing never-before-revealed details, wasn't she?  I can respect
> her objection to the sale of such material by others for "their own
> personal gain," however. (Quote taken from JKR's news item on her site.)

I don't see much difference between books that talk about the HP
series (which have had no barrier to publication) and books that are
essentially lists of canon which is essentially what the Lexicon is.
The only problem I can see here is that the Lexicon might actually
compete with JKR enterprises who didn't think of it first. If you can
draw correlations between HP and myth and publish it, then the Lexicon
publishers have a stab at a prior art defence, or at least that's how
my tiny brain sees it.

ewe2

-- 
Emacs vs. Vi flamewars are a pointless waste of time. Vi is the best



From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov  2 01:37:05 2007
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (Annemehr)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 01:37:05 -0000
Subject: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
In-Reply-To: <91d14f320711011639r10a8343fj733aecb58b6fe628@...>
Message-ID: <fgdv01+bqg5@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, ewe2 <ewetoo at ...> wrote:

> They're entitled to ignore such c&d's under fair use. And there are
> other arguments cf. below.
> <snip>
> I don't see much difference between books that talk about the HP
> series (which have had no barrier to publication) and books that are
> essentially lists of canon which is essentially what the Lexicon is.
> The only problem I can see here is that the Lexicon might actually
> compete with JKR enterprises who didn't think of it first. If you can
> draw correlations between HP and myth and publish it, then the Lexicon
> publishers have a stab at a prior art defence, or at least that's how
> my tiny brain sees it.
> 

Nah, it could be way different.  Fair use allows you to quote smallish 
amounts of stuff (those are technical law terms) in order to talk 
*about* it.  But IF the RDR book is to reproduce the information in the 
Lexicon in printed form, it would in huge part be a repackaging for 
sale of vast amounts of copyrighted material, potentially including 
text and illustrations taken from HP books, playing and trading cards, 
games, movies, and JKR's Lightmaker site.  (And the BBC article that 
Dave linked to calls it "a book version of a popular website dedicated 
to the boy wizard," though I don't know how they know that.)

Of course, nobody knows for sure what the book is planned to contain, 
because RDR won't show anyone.  So JKR's people and WB have no choice 
but to press ahead with their suit to keep their rights protected, 
right?

Anne





From elfundeb at elfundeb2.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov  2 02:06:51 2007
From: elfundeb at elfundeb2.yahoo.invalid (elfundeb)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 22:06:51 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
In-Reply-To: <fgdv01+bqg5@...>
References: <91d14f320711011639r10a8343fj733aecb58b6fe628@...>
	 <fgdv01+bqg5@...>
Message-ID: <80f25c3a0711011906q378bad32mc684b087aa144724@...>

Annemehr:
> Nah, it could be way different. Fair use allows you to quote smallish
> amounts of stuff (those are technical law terms) in order to talk
> *about* it. But IF the RDR book is to reproduce the information in the
> Lexicon in printed form, it would in huge part be a repackaging for
> sale of vast amounts of copyrighted material, potentially including
> text and illustrations taken from HP books, playing and trading cards,
> games, movies, and JKR's Lightmaker site. (And the BBC article that
> Dave linked to calls it "a book version of a popular website dedicated
> to the boy wizard," though I don't know how they know that.)
>
> Of course, nobody knows for sure what the book is planned to contain,
> because RDR won't show anyone. So JKR's people and WB have no choice
> but to press ahead with their suit to keep their rights protected,
> right?

Debbie:
I read the synopsis of the complaint on the Leaky Cauldron and have to
say that most of it sounds really whiny and petty.  I don't know
enough about the scope of fair use, but it seems to me that the
Lexicon is full of information that does not merely regurgitate the
books.The argument that the Lexicon book could preempt JKR's
encyclopedia is specious, IMO.  The truth is that JKR has proved
herself so bad at remembering details and at making her details cohere
that the only value of her encyclopedia (if it is ever written) will
derive from her unique insights into her characters and what, if any,
new information it contains.  I certainly would *never* attempt to use
it as a reference.

I wonder who was the driver in this lawsuit - JKR or WB.  IIRC, it's
WB that's been most aggressive with c&ds, but they don't seem to have
that big a stake in this dispute.

Debbie
who also can't fathom why JKR wants to auction off Beedle the Bard



From nrenka at nrenka.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov  2 03:20:18 2007
From: nrenka at nrenka.yahoo.invalid (nrenka)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 03:20:18 -0000
Subject: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
In-Reply-To: <fgcims+fm93@...>
Message-ID: <fge51i+86gb@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" <annemehr at ...> wrote:

> I can respect her objection to the sale of such material by others 
> for "their own personal gain," however. (Quote taken from JKR's news 
> item on her site.)

Not to mention, what all from the Lexicon was going to be published
and who was going to get the profits?  Steve didn't write everything
on there himself, after all, especially the many varied and
interesting essays.

-Nora has no energy tonight for a witty tagline





From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov  2 10:32:35 2007
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:32:35 -0000
Subject: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0711011906q378bad32mc684b087aa144724@...>
Message-ID: <fgeuc3+hf6c@...>

> Debbie:
> I read the synopsis of the complaint on the Leaky Cauldron and have to
> say that most of it sounds really whiny and petty.  

Yeah.  I'm sure both sides think they have a defence for their 
position - the point is, how did the relationships break down this 
far?  JKR's statement on her website reeks of upsetness with Steve, and 
the fact that nobody had heard of this book until the lawsuit erupted 
is, frankly, bizarre.

David




From jferer at jferer.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 11 14:25:26 2007
From: jferer at jferer.yahoo.invalid (Jim Ferer)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 14:25:26 -0000
Subject: Beedle the Bard; Lexicon
In-Reply-To: <fgdv01+bqg5@...>
Message-ID: <fh73cm+vdgu@...>

Anne: "Nah, it could be way different. Fair use allows you to quote
smallish amounts of stuff (those are technical law terms) in order to
talk *about* it. But IF the RDR book is to reproduce the information
in the Lexicon in printed form, it would in huge part be a repackaging
for sale of vast amounts of copyrighted material, potentially
including text and illustrations taken from HP books, playing and
trading cards, games, movies, and JKR's Lightmaker site. (And the BBC
article that Dave linked to calls it "a book version of a popular
website dedicated to the boy wizard," though I don't know how they
know that.)

Of course, nobody knows for sure what the book is planned to contain,
because RDR won't show anyone. So JKR's people and WB have no choice
but to press ahead with their suit to keep their rights protected, right?"

The problem is we don't know how much of that material the Lexicon
book will contain. Steve's a smart guy and ought to understand the
criticism and parody issues and fair use. He ought to be smart enough
to get advice on those issues where he needs it.

Everybody has handled this badly. RDR's secrecy is one of the causes
of this litigation. Steve should have told JKR what he was doing; the
best possible result would have been [i]The Harry Potter
Encyclopedia[/I], by J. K. Rowling and Steve van der Ark, where Steve
would contribute the vast amount of factual material he and his team
have compiled and JKR her insight and final rulings. The synergy would
be amazing, the ultimate dialogue between author and fan. 

There's been many companion volumes and guides over the years (I have
two relating to the Patrick O'Brian novels, written by Dean King), and
the Harry Potter universe cries out for several. 

It's not too late. A settlement could take this form and benefit JKR,
Steve, and us. 

Jim Ferer




From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Wed Nov 14 17:17:30 2007
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:17:30 -0000
Subject: And we thought she was joking about Aberforth
Message-ID: <fhfaja+9ov0@...>



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6623895.stm