Rawling sues "darling boy" fansite author

by **gdeangel** on Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:46 am

It is clear that Rawling is not so much successful for her writing exploits, but for her business & marketting savy. I found this news appalling: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080420/ap_en_bu/harry_potter_lawsuit_7. Here's a fan who was encouraged when his efforts were promoting products that funnelled money into Rawlings personal Potter empire. Now that he's going to make a go of selling something, its "idea theft". Face it... the guy probably did a better job of the author herself... :lol:

Can you believe Rawling is the speaker at this year's Harvard commencement! They might as well invite Ron Popiel :roll:

!

by **MeDeFe** on Sun Apr 20, 2008 4:47 pm

Her name is Rowling.

But yeah, she really comes across as an arsehole there.

by **Snorri1234** on Sun Apr 20, 2008 4:54 pm

Harry Potter is still awesome.

by **AndrewLC** on Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:21 pm

CRUCIO

by **greenoaks** on Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:35 pm

that's only part of the story.

that guy initially knocked back an offer to turn his website into a book because he believed it violated her rights. he later changed his mind about doing the publication when he was able to get the publisher to put in the contract that they, the publisher would pay for any legal costs and damages arising out of any potential lawsuits.

so the reality is that she is having a go at a rival book publisher, not a die-hard fan.

by **PLAYER57832** on Wed Apr 23, 2008 3:36 pm

Also, in the publishing world, there is a difference between the internet grey areas and the print medium. I only know this case from your link, but I know from other cases that the internet is still only partially regulated. You can let people copy your material in print without infringing on print copyrights. In many cases have no choice but to allow it (though that is changing). However, once in "regular" print, the laws are much tighter. Usually if you allow one person to use your material in print, without permission, you open a floodgate to others.

I suspect her publishers gave her little choice in the matter, but the judges will decide, I guess.

(and, given the previous post, it is even slightly possible that this was partially set up as a "test case" with all parties involved knowing it would go to court ... I have no facts at all, but maybe?)

by **hwhrhett** on Wed Apr 23, 2008 3:44 pm

the only reason that she is angry about it, is because she was in the process of making a book that is the same thing for charity. and he was trying to rush to undercut her. and he shouldnt mistake his love of harry potter over his greed. every potter fan knows about the hplexicon and they all have read it. why is a book from him even neccessary? shes said for years that she intended to make a reference book about it.