![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
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.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-15 02:04 am (UTC)RDR claims that they made changes only after JKR and WB protested, but a working relationship was already damaged by that time. Once the manuscript was handed over for review, they found that the amount of quotes without properly formated as quotes took up more of the content that was legally thought of as fair use. There's not enough critical analysis or new ideas to pass even a college class as a scholarly paper.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-15 02:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-15 02:14 am (UTC)