Oi!

[ivyblossom]

Well, this just makes me sad:

Rowling acknowledged she once bestowed an award on Vander Ark's Web site because, she said, she wanted to encourage a very enthusiastic fan.

But she said she "almost choked on my coffee" one morning when she realized Vander Ark had warned others not to copy portions of his Web site. She said she now has second thoughts about all the encouragement she has given to online discussions and Web sites devoted to her books.

"I never censored it or wanted to censor it," she said, adding that if she loses the lawsuit, she will conclude she essentially gave away her copyrights by encouraging the Web sites.

"Other authors will say, `I need to exercise more control. She was an idiot. She let it all go,'" Rowling said.

Comments

[ashkitty.livejournal.com]

Is okay, I know you have! I just didn't want to repeat territory you'd already been over. Short version, it's been going on for quite a few months now. The argument on one side is that compiling lists of facts about someone else's work does not constitute a new work, and also that JKR wants to reserve the right to do an encyclopaedia of her own for charity, like she did the beasts and quidditch books. The other side says that it's the same as the essay books that have been published about Harry up till now.

[ivyblossom.livejournal.com]

Personally I wish they weren't trying to publish it, I hardly see the point and I wouldn't do it if I were him, but the quotes from that article...are surreal. Feels like there's more going on here. Thanks for the update. :)

[ashkitty.livejournal.com]

There's definitely more going on! I think the Leaky Cauldron has a whole archive on it. <3

[ivyblossom.livejournal.com]

Sweet, thanks. :)