dear JK...

[cocob3an-xx]

dear JK,

• why write a new book and not let anyone but very few read it? everyone wants to read it as you're such a established writer. shame...
• what's it like going anywhere and knowing people know you're name?
• what's it like going to a bookshop and seeing your books everywhere? must be a great honour to have your name known all over the world.
• whos books do you read? (a bit of an FAQ im guessing...)

thanks, Coco x

[Teresa Edgerton]

Hi, cocob3an-xx, and welcome to the Chronicles.

This is not an official J. K. Rowling forum in any way, simply part of a larger site of readers and fans. So far as I know, J. K. Rowling has never visited this site -- certainly she has never posted here -- nor does anyone have any expectation that she will. (Although, naturally, many of our members would be thrilled if she did.)

If your questions are rhetorical, I'm sure you will find other fans here willing to speculate on her reasons, also some willing to share what they have learned about her from other sources. But for answers straight from Rowling herself, I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere.

[PTeppic]

I'd be surprised if she hasn't answered #4 at some point in an interview... if not something to the effect of #2 and #3.

[alexx]

As for the first question, I too was quite disappointed by the limited release of Tales of Beedle the Bard. I think that perhaps she was considering releasing it to the public with the encyclopedia that she's said she's going to do of the wizarding world and the goings-on in the series. Or it might be published later on for the public with proceeds going to charity like the Comic Relief books. Hopefully it does come out in some form for the rest of us though.

[PTeppic]

According to a BBC piece on the current copyright proceedings in America, the case is making her rethink her own plans to compile an encyclopaedia...

[Teresa Edgerton]

There have been a lot of guides of that sort to other authors' works. I don't think she is going to win this one in court, but she may influence her fans not to read the book in question. Especially considering the weepy tone of her remarks.

I do think she has a perfect right to be indignant about this -- I've often wondered how people get away with these unauthorized guides -- but somehow she's never seemed to me like the kind of person who could be so easily "decimated."

Anyway, at a creativity level of ninety percent, she's probably remained reasonably prolific.

[PTeppic]

The case in question did seem to refer to the author having copied her work for use in his manuscript. I'm neither an author nor a reader of his original site, on which the book is based, but if the encyclopaedia is verbatim chunks of the book, with no re-writing or paraphrasing then it does seem to be a valid challenge.

On the other hand, as you say, if he's worded everything himself, simply being based on her canon material, then it's a different kettle of fish.

[pyan]

Doesn't sound as if Mr Vander Ark has altered that much....about 16%....

Comparing almost identical passages of Mr Vander Ark’s Lexicon with her own work, she denounced his “constant pilfering” and “utter laziness”. “I believe this book constitutes wholesale theft of 17 years of my hard work,” she said. “It adds little if anything by way of commentary; the quality of that commentary is derisory; and it debases what I worked so hard to create.
“What particularly galls me is the lack of quotation marks. If Mr Vander Ark had put quotation marks around everything he had lifted, most of the lexicon would be in quotation marks.”

...her lawyers call the lexicon a “rip-off” that lifts 2,034 of its 2,437 entries straight from her work

Times Online

[Teresa Edgerton]

But her lawyers call the lexicon a “rip-off” that lifts 2,034 of its 2,437 entries straight from her work. “These things have no existence except in my words, so he has taken my creation,” she said.

That second sentence is rather interesting, as it sounds more like he is copying her ideas than using her exact words. Although elsewhere it says he uses direct quotations without acknowledging them as such (which is reprehensible if true) the number of times he does that may not correspond to the number of entries referenced above.

“It adds little if anything by way of commentary; the quality of that commentary is derisory..."

That's certainly adding insult to injury, and I would imagine is more galling than anything else he has done.

[McMurphy]

I, too, have always been a little surprised by the legal status of "unauthorized guides" of famous works. It certainly is not a new occurance, nor is it exclusive to Rowling's work.

That said, I have read that the court didn't take particularly long to side with the Lexicon. That, however, was not surprising. While I applaud her effort, she had to have known that she would lose. I realize the following is based purely on interviews, which can be misrepresenting at times, but she does come across as if she feels as if not only the industry should bend to her wishes but legal systems should be reconsidered for her sake due to her incredible success. For her to claim that floodgates of sorts shall be swung open suggests, to me, that she is not taking into account that such guides are currently existing for other works on a regular basis without creating the doomsday scenerio that she forewarns.

The law, whether we should agree with it or not, is the law, and this is the not the first time (nor will it be the last time), authors will challenge it....most likely with little success.

That said, there must be a legitimate reason as to why these unauthorized publications are protected by law. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can elaborate?

[pyan]

That link seems to be down, McMurphy...I get:

You tried to access the address http://http//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...ter_lawsuit_35, which is currently unavailable

Ah...I think there's one too many http://s in it......

[McMurphy]

Good catch...fixing now.


(patience, please)

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think the reasoning is that these guides, authorized or not, count as literary criticism or analysis.

But what constitutes Fair Use is always decided on a case by case basis, once it comes to a suit in court. The law remains murky.


Let's see if the link works now:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080417/...ter_lawsuit_35

No. I'll try something else.

Still didn't work.

[McMurphy]

Ohhh, I get it. Thanks for the elaboration.

(It would appear that yahoo articles are being less than supportive.)

[Teresa Edgerton]

NY judge urges settlement in lawsuit over Harry Potter guide - Yahoo! News

Well, I've got a working link. Is this the right article, McMurphy?