Law.com Blog Network

About The Bloggers

Blogroll

Volokh Conspiracy
Wall Street Journal Law Blog
Professor Bainbridge
Ernie the Attorney
SCOTUSblog
Althouse
Dennis Kennedy
Bag and Baggage
Patently-O
Patent Baristas
PrawfsBlawg

Recent Posts

Categories

LegalTech New York 2008



Archive

July 2008

June 2008

May 2008

April 2008

March 2008

February 2008

January 2008

December 2007

November 2007

October 2007

September 2007

August 2007

July 2007

June 2007

May 2007

April 2007

March 2007

February 2007

January 2007

December 2006

November 2006

October 2006

September 2006

August 2006

July 2006

June 2006

May 2006

April 2006

March 2006

February 2006

January 2006

December 2005

November 2005

October 2005

September 2005

August 2005

July 2005

June 2005

May 2005

April 2005

March 2005

February 2005

January 2005

December 2004

November 2004



 

Harry Potter Opens Today!

No, it's not another Harry Potter movie that opens today.  Rather, it's the first day of trial in a copryight infringement suit brought by "Harry Potter" author J.K. Rowling and her publisher, Warner Bros. against RDR Books, publisher of Steve Vander Ark's 400 page reference book, the Harry Potter Lexicon, based on the online version.  Rowling and Warner claim that the Lexicon is a derivative work that infringes Rowling's copyright and interferes with Rowling's plans to write her own Harry Potter encyclopedia. 

Stanford Law School's Fair Use Project is defending RDR books, along with outside counsel, New York attorney, David Hammer.  In a press release issued on the lawsuit, Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project (and also counsel in the case) stated:

The right to create literary reference guides like the Lexicon has remained nearly unquestioned for hundreds of years. The Lexicon is a valuable resource that helps people better understand and enjoy the Harry Potter books. It's exactly what copyright law should encourage, not suppress.

Dan Slater at WSJ Law Blog is observing the trial; his dispatch from this morning's trial proceedings is posted at the WSJ Law Blog. According to Slater, Dale Cendali, who represents Rowling and Warner, emphasized during her opening that the Lexicon "takes too much and does too little."  Cendali's point is that the Lexicon merely copies Rowling's work without any original, value-added content that might qualify as new art.  In response,  Anthony Falzone asserted in his opening statement that the "the public will lose out if publication of the Lexicon is enjoined."

If you're interested in further analysis of some of the issues in the case, check out this lengthy post by copyright guru William Patry and this post by Mike Madison of Madisonian.net.

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on April 14, 2008 at 01:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Comments

Post a comment






 
 
 
About ALM | About law.com | Customer Support
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions