Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, along with Warners Brothers, recently brought a copyright lawsuit against RDR Books, a Michigan-based publisher. RDR has plans to publish The Harry Potter Lexicon by Steven Vander Ark. The book is based on the website of the same name and, according to the site, aims at creating a “catalog in a user-friendly way [with] all the information J .K .Rowling has given us about the world she has created, the universe of Harry Potter.”

According to a court transcript, Rowling claims that this is a “wholesale theft of 17 years of my hard work.” She says the book has “little in the way of commentary” and that, even when it does, “that commentary is derisory.” She also claims this book could hurt sales of the book she says is currently in development; her Harry Potter encyclopedia.

The trial, which is currently taking place, raises important copyright questions. Is RDR making a profit from Rowling’s scraps? To what extent can Rowling’s intellectual property be used as free game? Rowling praised the site, bestowing it with a fan award in 2004, but she now calls the lexicon “lazy” and a “travesty.” Does Vander Ark have copyright culpability or is Rowling clinging a little too hard to her HP success? If the court decides in favor of RDR and Vander Ark, it could open doors for not only an abundance of Harry Potter spin-offs, but it will set a precedent for re-workings of other books as well.

Views from an Industry Insider:

Has the world of Harry Potter become so large that it lies outside Rowling’s grasp? Can and should intellectual property remain in the hands of its creator or become free game once it hits the global mainstream?

There are two ways to look at what’s happening here. One is to focus on the positive: the lexicon RDR plans to publish will create yet another marketing push for Potter derivatives…including an “official,” Rowling-written version of the lexicon. Two is negative: it’s a product that will take money away from the author and the publishers that made Potter such a success.

No matter what the outcome, the fact that Rowling went to court boils down to a lot of free press for a series that is now defunct and in its final money-making throes. From that standpoint alone, her move is brilliant.

How will the outcome of this suit affect copyright questions within fiction publishing?

Cleary, intellectual property should always remain in the hands of the creator. It’s one of the few clear-cut ways to keep things fair in an industry that so often puts unfair burdens on authors. However, in terms of whether it falls under the fair use doctrine, it pretty clearly takes much more of the original text than the doctrine ever anticipated. Additionally, Rowling has repeatedly pointed out the errors in Vander Ark’s version. In an ideal world, this alone should be enough to quash his version. But since the world isn’t fair, the judge will have to interpret the law. Since judges don’t create the law, it won’t have any long-term impact on copyrights.

For Thought:

Whether Rowling is in it for the publicity of her new book, the money, or the protection of rights, it is clear that this suit will set an interesting precedent for years to come.