Writing is a struggle against silence. ~Carlos Fuentes

Is Steve a Hogsmeade member?

*notes this is probably info Tati can't give out*

From:

raven-feathers.livejournal.com

not in an "official" capacity. i believe his username is "lexicon steve" or something. HPLexicon? anyway.

From:

leenielou.livejournal.com

Apparently there's some kind of clause that says that because it's not affecting the series in any way and is instead a reference, a how-to, then it's legal.

But, yeah. It's kinda...hmm. Did you hear JKR's latest comments about it? They were all kinds of awesome.

From:

taperoo2k.livejournal.com

I was quite livid about this until the full facts came out.
All he's doing is publishing the Lexicon with no academic stuff at all. So i now think Rowling has the moral right to sue his backside off. I'd rather wait for Rowling's book on the Harry Potter world, as it'll be the definitive version.

It's a shame though, the lexicon is a very good resource for Harry Potter facts when in a pinch.

From:

You mean this? “If RDR’s position is accepted, it will undoubtedly have a significant, negative impact on the freedoms enjoyed by genuine fans on the internet,” she said.

“Authors everywhere will be forced to protect their creations much more rigorously, which could mean denying well-meaning fans permission to pursue legitimate creative activities.”

She added: “I find it devastating to contemplate the possibility of such a severe alteration of author-fan relations.”

From:

raven-feathers.livejournal.com

how did you miss this?? it's been swirling for months. god, i'm sick of it! a quick google should give you 2340980238420384203975092385023985023 resources. basically, steve vander ark, creater of the HP lexicon, the one that rowling herself used as a reference while writing, decided he was going to cash in on the series. i believe he first approached rowlings' handlers to collaborate on her encyclopedia, but was snubbed, so decided he was going to publish on his own. rowling's machine went nuts and they've been embroiled ever since in a "yes i can"/"no you can't" battle.

fandom wank is probably the premiere place to get amusing information on this kerfuffle.

From:

*is unsure why it has hit a point this morning as he has seen it many times before, but is completely amused by the term "fandom wank"*

From:

raven-feathers.livejournal.com

fandom wank (http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_wank/). :)

From:

Hehehehehehehe, Thanks :D

From:

Steve talks about it here (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/whats_new.php) under the heading, setting things straight if you want to read what he has to say about it.

I would have to say that I feel very similarly to Raven's sentiments on the matter, however. :D

Edited Date: 2008-02-29 04:54 pm (UTC)

From:

eumelkeks.livejournal.com

Where have you been the last months? :p

From:

Not on CoS :P

I remember this coming up at one point- I was sorta turned off by all the whining because, I'm sorry, I think Vander Ark is a giant ass for saying how much he adores Rowling and then, basically, ignoring her wishes- but I got turned off by the around and around of the arguing.

I wasn't thinking much of it, really, until it showed up on Today. It's one thing to have this all going on online, but that's pretty close to it being an RL thing.

Edited Date: 2008-02-29 07:30 pm (UTC)

From:

Lemme see ... okay, you can read all about it on Fandom_Wank but that'll take you about 30 hours. I'm just warning you.

The important facts of the case, so far as I can tell:

a) Steve Van Der Ark is not actually named in it, the suit is against his publisher. If they lose, he won't actually have to pay money or anything.

b) JKR has said in the past that she will publish an encyclopedia sort of thing of Harry Potter, and give her royalties to charity. (Note that the publisher hasn't said that they'd give their profits to charity, at least not as I know.) One of JKR's arguments is that people are going to mistakingly buy the Harry Potter Lexicon instead of her book which she actually hasn't written yet, therefore de-moneying a charity and cheating her out of her hard-earned cash, etc.

It should be noted, though, that JKR said her encyclopedia would have new original content in it, so that's not exactly the same thing as the Lexicon.

c) I don't think Steve's profit is the biggest deal here; he's had ads and other money-raising things on his site for a while now, and plenty of people make a ton of money off Harry Potter fansites, wizard rock, etc. JKR's argument was that she didn't mind the Lexicon while it was free for other fans to use.

From:

d) The publisher of the Lexicon is called RDR and their lawyer appears to be a real jerk.

e) The cover - or maybe the preliminary mock-up of the cover, I can't tell - looks a lot like the British Harry Potter books. JKR/WB argues that it's trademark infringing.

f) Lawyers representing JKR found out about the book before it was published and asked for them to stop printing the book and for an advance copy of it. RDR refused to give them one. That right there is probably why a lawsuit was made.

g) Despite what most fantards will tell you, there have been plenty of encyclopedia-ish guides things of copyright books published, and it appears to be fair use if you go by what has been published before. This guy from Salon.com has some examples. (http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2007/11/13/harry_potter/) There's also been a lot of Harry Potter guides (http://rattlesnakeroot.livejournal.com/20960.html#cutid1) published in the past. "Harry Potter A-Z" is especially interesting because most people agree it was plagiarized from the Lexicon website (the wording is really close). The question basically is, why does Rowling object to the Lexicon and not to the other books?

h) There's the issue of the timeline on the CoS DVD. Steve was the first to point out that it duplicated a typo he had made in his timeline on the Lexicon site. Most people agree that the WB plagiarized it from his site, so ... there's that.

i) I think part of RDR's argument is going to be that JK Rowling has said before that she used the site as a reference when she was writing the newer Harry Potter books, and that likewise Steve got an email from Scholastic thanking him for keeping the website, because they found it helpful in the editing process. It's like h) - the official publishers were using Steve's work for free.

k) RDR's argument is that the Lexicon is "transformative" and scholarly, JKR's side hasn't proved that anyone would by the Lexicon instead of the phantom encyclopedia that may or may not be in the works, that the work is all in all fair use, and that JKR is a big meanie.

From:

kala-way.livejournal.com

*wow* thanks redcoast! I've been kind of baffled by the whole thing, because there's obviously been tons of books out there about Potter. It's not like they're adding any additional info to the books, like publishing fanfiction would be, so I thought it was all a bit dumb. I guess it has more to do with stepping on toes and money (big surprise!) I've always loved the Lexicon, they do a great job of keeping everything organized and clear. *sigh*
but I absolutely adore your icons :)

From:

but I absolutely adore your icons :)

Thanks!

I have to admit I'm really on the Lexicon's side in this case, so - bias that way, you know.

From:

I have to admit I'm really on the Lexicon's side in this case, so - bias that way, you know.

Couldn't tell ;)

It's funny, but something about this rubs me the wrong way. I think because it just sounds unfair to Rowling- yes, I realize that "fair" is an outdated concept and that the woman now has more money than she knows what to do with, but I hardly think that Vander Ark should be allowed to benefit from her work. Yes, he asked if he could help with the encyclopedia and he was told no, but that's Rowling's prerogative and hardly qualifies as an open invitation to take this to the next level. It still gets me that Vander Ark has this affectionate open letter to Rowling on his site, and yet he went and did this anyway. Makes no sense to me at all.

To me, it's almost as if RDR'd broken into Rowling's house and started selling off her furniture without her permission- that's the sticking point for me. If she'd authorized it, it would be one thing, but it's totally competing with her interests in releasing a similar book.

Edited Date: 2008-02-29 07:53 pm (UTC)

From:

Well, for one thing Steve might have been pissed that the WB put his timeline on their DVDs. And that "Harry Potter A-Z" plagiarized the Lexicon (anyway, Rowling didn't mind that one being published). I do think Steve still likes J.K. Rowling, he's said that he thinks if he could sit down and talk with her, they could work it out. *shrug* Steve probably had no reason to think that his encyclopedia would compete with JK Rowling's at all.

You know, the guy who runs the Mugglenet site says he makes a 6-figure income from it. Melissa from TLC makes money off the site, I don't know how much.

From:

I'm putting my final word first: if they put the word UNAUTHORIZED across the cover then they can do what they want, in my opinion.

Well, for one thing Steve might have been pissed that the WB put his timeline on their DVDs...

So? He should take that up with them rather than taking it out on Rowling.

Steve probably had no reason to think that his encyclopedia would compete with JK Rowling's at all.

I really don't believe that at all. I may not know much about this case, but the lexicon is pretty good and you're not the only one to say "DAMN THE MAN!" on this one. The way RDR is going at this (I read the brief and it's ludicrous (http://www.rdrbooks.com/pdf/oppn_to_rowlings_PI_mtn.pdf) it sounds to me like he's bitter about his offer of help being snubbed and took that note from her publisher as license to do what he wants with property that really isn't his. He may still like Rowling, but he sure as hell doesn't seem to have a lot of respect for the woman.

You know, the guy who runs the Mugglenet site says he makes a 6-figure income from it. Melissa from TLC makes money off the site, I don't know how much.

You know, I've been checking all over Google and everywhere it says "allegedly" in regards to the "six figure income" (which, by dint of being in quotes, says volumes as well).

As Kim says, I think Rowling should have the first crack at writing a "definitive" encyclopedia, since it's her work that it's being written about.

Edited Date: 2008-02-29 08:28 pm (UTC)

From:

whoa html

From:

Fixed it. :)

From:

Okay good now!

I didn't make that six-figure thing up. That's what Emerson said:

Although worried that his image as a businessman could tarnish his Potterhead status, Spartz tells BusinessWeek he pulls in "a six-figure income." (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2007/db20070622_592856.htm?campaign_id=rss_tech)

From: