We just had a good discussion the other day about JKR at Paris Fashion Week watching the extremely thin model go down the runway. Then I saw a picture from Ralph Lauren with a model so incredibly emaciated it was posted on a website called Photoshop Disasters which inspired the perceptive observation from a blogger on BoingBoing who wrote,
"Dude, her head's bigger than her pelvis."
Actually, poor Olive would need to lose weight for the runway these days.
Great Video Coverage of this by Rachel Maddow
"She sort of looks like she was shrinky-dinked, doesn't she?
Look at the ratio of her torso to her head.
That is not a ratio that exists in nature, at least outside the insect world....
It looks like whoever was in charge...was inspired by a combination of Barbie and those
giant-headed Bratz dolls. Actually those dolls
look more normal and more human than the model."

The picture was circulating around the blogosphere when the House of Lauren decided to do a Rowling and send out a bunch of threatening letters, as documented by BoingBoing:
It's obvious by now that Ralph Lauren *hates* being mocked. They hate being mocked so much that they ordered their attack lawyers to send letters trying to fool ISPs into pulling an "infringing" advertisement featuring a ridiculously skinny model (in fact, our posting of the image was fair use, not infringement; Ralph Lauren's takedown notices are bogus and they should know better).Note: For all these blog links, read the comments ~ priceless!
It's also obvious that the photo of Filippa Hamilton used in the Ralph Lauren advertisement was digitally manipulated. But we still have three questions: 1) who, exactly, gave Ms. Hamilton the Olive Oyl physique? 2) If the photo was manipulated after it appeared in the advertisement, why didn't Ralph Lauren's law firm make mention of that in their silly DMCA takedown notice? and 3) Where's the original advertisement?
( Read more - Threats, Takedown Notices, Excuses,Counterthreats, Mockery, Truth, Etc... )
- Location:Home
- Mood:
busy - Music:"Hungry Eyes"
Page Content
First a definition for "Amicus Brief" from WiseGeek:
The tradition of accepting amicus briefs comes from a larger concept, the amicus curiae, or “friend of the court.” A friend of the court may be interested in a case for various reasons, although he or she is not directly involved. For example, a court might be preparing to try a case related to online file sharing, an issue of great concern to many people. An amicus brief might be filed to discuss the larger ramifications of potential case outcomes, since these ramifications might not be brought up by the prosecution or defense during the course of a trial.In this case several groups have filed amicus briefs due to their concern about J. D. Salinger winning an injunction against a writer who wanted to publish a continuing story of Holden Caufield since Salinger himself has no intention of writing about the character any more. That case is moving to the Court of Appeals now, which is why groups are being compelled to get their ideas into the case to persuade the next Judge to rule differently.
The groups involved see this as a Freedom of Speech question. That reminds me of what Roger Rapoport said during the first week of the Lexicon case for which he was vilified and taunted, but he is in good company obviously.
Techdirt: This is America ~ Why are we Banning Books?
Stanford Law: Confusion Over Copyright Injunctions and Other Restraints of Speech
Briefs Filed ~ PDF format:
On Behalf of the American Library Association (ALA), the Association of Research Libraries, the Association of College and Research Libraries, The Organization of Transformative Works and the Write Right Fund. filed by Anthony Falzone of Stanford University Law School, Jennifer Urban of the University of California at Berkeley Law School, and Rebecca Tushnet of Georgtown Univerisity Law Center.
( Read an Excerpt ).The New York Times, The Associated Press, Gannett Newspapers, and the Tribune Company
( Read an Excerpt )New York Law School and Public Citizen Litigation Group
( Read an Excerpt )
- Location:Fandom Court
- Mood:
geeky - Music:Vanity Fare "Hitchin' a Ride"
Page Content
I saw them HERE. The two musical videos have been taken down now, but you can see the guy who played Harry in a short parody (people are laughing!)called Goin' Back as in "going back to Hogwarts. The soundtrack isn't that great, but it's pretty good. Look fast in case this disappears too.
But what was their evil purpose in creating these videos? They are just fans, and that's not an easy thing to be sometimes.
HP the Musical was written and produced in early 2009 by a bunch of college kids/recent grads through a non-profit student-run theatre company. It was a free show that ran for three nights (five performances) and will never be done again... but luckily we taped it so everyone can get a chance to enjoy its magical silliness. The songs were written by Darren Criss (who plays Harry Potter) and AJ Holmes (who plays piano in the band). The script was written by Matt Lang (who also directed the show), Nick Lang (who assistant directed and made the dragon puppet) and Brian Holden (who was busy working at a real job while the rest of us were making a goofy play).And now they are having to rename their Musical to avoid . . . *whispers* . . . legal issues. They are even asking fans to send in suggestions for a new name to the YouTube account of the creators StarKidPotter.
HP the Musical was a completely non-for-profit unofficial parody show made by Potter-fans for Potter-fans. All of us involved love the books immensely (and strongly encourage everyone to read them if you haven't) and it is with the utmost admiration that we celebrate and poke fun at them with this musical inspired by our very favorite stories.
I wish someone could explain the difference between these videos and what the Wizard Rock kids do? Not to offend any fans ~ especially sorry to
But I think they got the legal message loud and clear. Stay with this next video all the way to the end because I promise you will enjoy it! The song at the end starts about 3:14 minutes. It is priceless!!!
( Read the Lyrics Under the Cut )
- Location:FandomCourt
- Mood:
confused - Music:We Don't Want to Get Sued
Page Content
Willy the Wizard by Adrian Jacobs 1987
The attorneys who brought the lawsuit may have put the website up themselves, I don't know. If you look around there you'll see that it's more like an outline than a real book, and not exactly like Harry Potter except for some of the details, which do seem strange considering this book predated Harry. Wizard Chess? Wizard Chocolate? A GoF-like International Contest? But obviously there is no copyright about wizards riding trains or sitting in bathtubs. So this will probably become just another bizarre piece of HP history.

~~Willy at fourteen was a caring child, an absent-minded dreamer. That’s how it all began because he had been given the Book of Secrets with directions as to his initiation into Wizardry.
~~The great hall of Napoleon’s Castle revealed a dramatic scene. There were wizards everywhere. Willy gulped. There right across the hall just above their cone hats was a large white banner printed in giant letters, ‘IT IS FORBIDDEN TO CAST SPELLS WHILE YOU VISIT THIS CASTLE. THE PENALTY FOR THE THOUGHT...’
There were wizards of all races. Chinese, with massive Mandarin hats beautifully hand painted with peasant scenes. Black and brown wizards from the Ivory Coast and Delhi. Willy wondered. Until now he’d never realised the immensity of the Wizard brotherhood. He was frightened at the power it could muster.
~~Willy had been on Cloud 84 which was for Wizard Chess Players.
These were pullman-like trains made of see-through platinum, and inside the trains were chess rooms. Willie was handicapped 18. There were Wizard Chess Masters who were virtually unbeatable. Willie had made a daring move. He didn’t want to watch his opponent’s response and his mind wandered at the moment that Angel Sandy had tapped violently on the train window....
( More Quotes and Pictures Under the Cut... )
- Location:Fandom
- Mood:
dorky - Music:Rolling Stones "Hey You Get Off My Cloud"
Page Content
This is one for the scrapbook!
Or perhaps the "What goes around comes around X-Files."
The estate of a deceased writer named Adrian Jacobs is claiming that Bloomsbury Publishing and J. K. Rowling stole the plot of his book The Adventures of Willy the Wizard -- No 1 Livid Land.
According to Reuters a statement from Bloomsbury said:
The allegations of plagiarism made today, Monday 15 June 2009, by the Estate of Adrian Jacobs are unfounded, unsubstantiated and untrue,"
The Jacobs estate had earlier issued a statement saying:
"Both Willy and Harry are required to work out the exact nature of the main task of the contest which they both achieve in a bathroom assisted by clues from helpers, in order to discover how to rescue human hostages imprisoned by a community of half-human, half-animal fantasy creatures," the estate statement said.More from The Daily Mail.
"It is alleged that all of these are concepts first created by Adrian Jacobs in Willy the Wizard, some 10 years before J.K. Rowling first published any of the Harry Potter novels and 13 years before Goblet of Fire was published."
According to the statement, Jacobs had sought the services of literary agent Christopher Little who later became Rowling's agent. Jacobs died "penniless" in a London hospice in 1997, it said.
Of course, if they are going to bring up plagiarism about wizards and trains, maybe they should go see Eva Ibbotson who wrote The Secret of Platform 13. Copyright is amazingly November 1, 1999.He allegedly sent the manuscript to Christopher Little, the literary agent at Bloomsbury Publishing who went on to represent Miss Rowling, but it was rejected.
Instead his book was published by a smaller company under the title The Adventures Of Willy The Wizard No 1: Livid Land.
Mr Jacobs, who lost all his money in a stock market crash in 1991, died in 1997, so did not live to see the Harry Potter books' success.
But his estate - which includes his son and grandson - now claims Miss Rowling's fourth book, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire, was plagiarised.
In both books, the boy wizard competes in a magic contest. The lawsuit also notes both have the boys trying to rescue human hostages held by half-human creatures from a bathroom. Shared references to a wizard train and a wizard prison are also part of the allegations.
Legal proceedings have been issued at the High Court against Bloomsbury, and the Jacobs estate also says it will file a lawsuit against Miss Rowling.
The estate is also seeking an injunction to prevent further sales of Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire, and damages or a share in the book's profits.
So what do you predict for this? Will we ever hear about Christopher Little breaking down on the witness stand? Will there be a side-by-side comparison? How about word count and another pie chart of doom, this time from Jacobs Estate?
Or will some sweet moolah make this all go away before it ever gets to court? As exciting as a big court case would be, I think these guys will be hushed up and paid off. They probably want money more than publicity.
- Location:FandomCourt
- Mood:
surprised - Music:Aerosmith "Eat the Rich"
Page Content
My friend
bohemianspirit showed me a developing story over on the Zenhabits blog.
It seems that the blogger, Leo Babauta, had used the phrase "Feel the fear but do it anyway" as the title of a post, and was then served with a Cease and Desist email from the attorneys of a writer who has that phrase trademarked as the title of a book. Unbelievable. He had never heard of her book, nor was he quoting her, but she wanted him to put a trademark symbol beside the words and a disclaimer that she was granting him "permission" under the title.
Zenhabits: Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway or The Privatizaion of the English Language
bohemianspirit and I left comments over there. There are alot of comments, pro and con, but mostly in favor of the blogger.
UPDATE: Lots and Lots of bloggers are picking up this story. Techdirt even gave me credit for sending them the story - wow! I didn't expect that.
Techdirt: Using Trademark To 'Privatize The English Language' from the did-you-(R)-that? dept
Jeanne sent in news of yet another overly aggressive trademark claim, this time on a blogger who just so happened to use the phrase "feel the fear and do it anyway" in a blog post.More Bloggers Chime In:
. . . trademark law is only supposed to apply to use in commerce, and it seems like a stretch to claim the blog post is use in commerce (though, since the blog has ads, the lawyers might disagree). However, the fact that the use of the phrase seems to have absolutely nothing to do with the book again raises questions about how this could possibly be considered confusing or dilutive of the mark. Either way, Barbauta makes a point we've been trying to make here for a long, long time...
Raptitude: Get Up Stand Up
Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway: The Allure of Taking Someone Down
Tararua Library: Feel the Fear and the Lawyers
And some great information here:
Andrew Flusche, Attorney: Trademark Dispute Against My Favorite Author
Andrew writes: ...Susan Jeffers holds a federal trademark registration for “FEEL THE FEAR…AND DO IT ANYWAY.” She actually owns several registration for that precise trademark, for different goods and services.I also came across the Ask Harriete blog written by an artist with a series of enlightening posts about copyright. She talks about an artist who liked to work with candy wrappers that were also trademarked. However, when you see the pictures it's obvious that the artwork is not meant to replace the candy or to resell the wrappers as candy wrappers. And that's the thing. Fair Use allows for creativity, even if the materials are trademarked or copyrighted. The work cannot replace the original, but has to transform it. It's really not rocket science, even though people seem to find this hard to understand.
The main trademark registration at question here is probably registration # 3338961 for these specified services: Education services, namely conducting seminars, workshops and training programs both in person and online, and the production of video and television programs in the field of psychology, spirituality, personal development and self improvement.
But the real question is: How did Leo use the trademark? He wrote a blog post that used the phrase “feel the fear and do it anyway” deep within the content.
Here’s the key: Leo didn’t use the phrase as a trademark. Susan Jeffers doesn’t own the exclusive right to “feel the fear…and do it anyway.” She just owns the right to use that phrase as a trademark on certain goods and services.
Cease and Desist Letters designed to Scare Artists
Understanding Fair Use and Copyright Laws
Finally, more in the long saga of Shepard Fairey and the AP:
Stanford Fair Use Project: AP Issues Statement, Misses Point Entirely
- Location:U.S.A.
- Mood:
determined
Page Content
OK, I just found more stuff about AP that is mind-boggling.
I found this at Bigsole Blogspot. It seems now that AP doesn't even want their own affiliates to embed their YouTube news videos, and sent out a cease and desist to a country music radio station here in Tennessee - WTNQ-FM who was posting their content on a website.
The man you see in this video is Christian Grantham a Nashville television producer. His own post about this topic is HERE.
Erick Schonfeld on Techcrunch writes:
You cannot make this stuff up. Forget for a moment that WTNQ is itself an A.P. affiliate and that the A.P. shouldn’t be harassing its own members. Apparently, nobody told the A.P. executive that the august news organization even has a YouTube channel which the A.P. itself controls, and that someone at the A.P. decided that it is probably a good idea to turn on the video embedding function on so that its videos can spread virally across the Web, along with the ads in the videos.More in Huffington Post:
News Executives Losing Fight Against Law and Technology
Arianna Huffington: The Debate Over Online News - It's the Consumer, Stupid
AP Apologizes to Tennessee Radio Station!
Thursday afternoon, the Associated Press’ radio station representative called Mr. Strovel to apologize saying that they regretted that their initial email sounded like a literal cease-and-desist. Frank said that he was mortified that the news had spread to big-name blogs and media pundits. He stated that “I wasn’t looking for a fight. I was just incredulous at their ‘logic’ of posting their videos on YouTube with embed codes and then slapping people on the wrist for doing just that.”
The AP released a statement on the matter: “There was a misunderstanding of YouTube usage when the Tennessee radio station was contacted by the Associated Press regarding the AP’s more extensive online video services. No cease and desist letter was drafted or sent by AP to the station at any time. The AP was trying to offer the station a superior service for their needs.”
Mr. Strovel said that AP’s legal department found that they were wrong, and that WTNQ-FM can embed their YouTube videos on their website. Mr. Strovel says “I’m hoping it will blow over now but I do want to have it out there that it was resolved and nobody’s suing anybody (never were) and we and the AP are good.”
- Location:U.S. of AP
- Mood:
confused - Music:CCR "Bad Moon Rising"
Page Content
Thanks to
Of course I've written about this several times, including about the AP's lawsuit against Shepard Fairey the Obama Artist. You may also remember in particular the story about Techcrunch Blogger Michael Arrington's fight with the AP when they threatened to charge him by the word for any quotes he used. AP totally backed down from that fight after a huge uproar and boycotting by many bloggers.
Techcrunch Legally Challenges the AP - June 21, 2008
Now for the latest: AP to Take On Web Piracy and Cut Rates
In a crackdown on Web piracy, the AP board of directors said they were launching a "newspaper industry initiative to protect news content from misappropriation online."So here again, we have a big conglomerate calling Fair Use a "misguided legal theory." Sure, OK - have it your way, AP. Meanwhile bloggers are not going to quote any of your stories or link to any newspapers that publish your stories because AP is nearly obsolete so these threats are like desperation. Major newspapers are going under every day in the U.S., which is lost revenue for AP.
"We can no longer stand by and watch others walk off with our work under misguided legal theories," AP chairman Dean Singleton said.
The AP statement said the news agency would work with Internet portals and other partners who legally license content "and would pursue legal and legislative actions against those who don't."
AP president Tom Curley said the news agency will develop "a rights management and tracking system" for text content and "new search pages that point users to the latest and most authoritative sources of breaking news."
The AP did not mention any particular websites in its copyright initiative but many US newspapers have openly criticised aggregators such as Google News, which links to their content without sharing advertising revenue.
As Ars Technica Blog points out:
It's not hard to see why AP is concerned now. According to its annual report (PDF), the combination of subscriber attrition and the lower fees they've had to adopt to keep that dwindling, cash-strapped client base on board "will result in a revenue decline not seen by the company since the Great Depression."
The Internet compounds the problem. The RIAA and MPAA can at least try—however ineffectively—to use copyright law to stanch unauthorized copying of their works. But what AP is selling isn't really the scintillating prose of its writers: it's fast access to the facts of breaking news. Now, though, a writer for any one of a million websites can read an AP story on the site of a subscribing news organization, write up their own paraphrase of the story, and have it posted—and drawing eyeballs from AP subscribers—within an hour of the original's going live.
- Location:U.S.of AP
- Mood:
nerdy
Page Content
A couple of notes about Fair Use.
Anthony Falzone is giving a speech at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. Of course most of you know who he is from the Lexicon case, and now the Obama Poster case.
From Duke University Libraries Blog
Falzone will talk about these cases and the importance of fair use for scholars and universities in a talk at Duke on MARCH 2, 2009 in the Schiciano Auditorium (Fitzpatrick CIEMAS engineering building) at 5 pm. He will emphasis that fair use is vital in higher education not only to prevent copyright from stifling scholarship but also to support free speech and academic freedom.
His lecture is entitled “From James Joyce To Harry Potter And John Lennon: The Impact Of Fair Use On Scholarship And Free Expression.” A reception will follow.
This event is open to the whole Duke community, but it is especially relevant for scholars and teachers who rely on fair use to create their own scholarship or to distribute scholarly works to students and colleagues, as well as to those interested in the role of free speech in the academy.
...Falzone’s lecture will be repeated at UNC Chapel Hill on March 3 at 5:30 pm in the Wilson Library. These events are jointly sponsored by UNC University Library, Duke University Libraries, UNC’s Center for Media Law and Policy, and Triangle Research Libraries Network.
As soon as there is a transcript of the speech, I will definitely post it here.
Second, there is another brouhaha going on in which a writer named Jason Mittel who had problems with ABC Disney over screen captures of some TV shows. The book is called Television and American Culture. The writer admits that he and the editor made a conscious decision to test Fair Use with the pictures:
Fair Use Held Hostage by ABC-Disney
( Read more... )
So what are the lessons to be learned here? Many media companies want to assert their copyright privileges beyond legal limits - not for petty cash, but for petty power. They aim to establish the precedent that they are in control, regardless of their legal standing. I’d guess the last thing ABC-Disney would want is to sue me or OUP over the frame grabs, as a loss in court would firmly establish the limits of their claims (and an unlikely win would yield little in revenue anyway). What they really want is bully power, the ability to make outsiders assume that rights holders also hold all the power. Unfortunately because the book was already in press, we had to yield - if we were able to, both my editor and I wanted to swap out the cover Lost image to avoid having to pay for the frame grabs that we had the right to use, thereby implying that fair use did not apply.
Mr. Mittel brings up an interesting factoid - he believes that screencaptures inside a book are Fair Use, but that those on a book cover are not.
ABC-Disney demanded payment for a picture from the TV show "Lost," and they also demanded payment for pictures inside the book which were probably Fair Use anyway. Oxford University Press had to pay up or lose revenue from a book that had already been printed. It's blackmail, but the alternative is to go to court where the law is murky and the verdict can go either way. Geez - will this ever end?
- Location:A Cold February Night
- Mood:
contemplative - Music:Jackson Browne "The Pretender"
Page Content
Attorneys with the Stanford Fair Use Project were in court today to file a lawsuit against the Associated Press in a preemptive strike because AP was threatening to sue artist Shepard Fairey tomorrow. Once again this is over the use of an AP photograph in the famous Obama pic.
First he pleaded "Not Guilty" to the vandalism charges in Boston:
Boston Herald: Shepard Fairey pleads not guilty to Hub vandalism
Then he appeared in New York District Court:
California Artist Sues AP
Lawyers for Fairey acknowledged that the artist used the photograph. But they said he transformed the literal depiction into a "stunning, abstracted and idealized visual image that creates powerful new meaning and conveys a radically different message."Huff Post: Jonathan Melber: The AP has no case against Shepard Fairey
AP spokesman Paul Colford said the company would have no immediate comment until its lawyers reviewed the lawsuit. The AP had said in a statement last week that it was in discussions with Fairey's attorney and hoped for an amicable solution.
The AP has not taken legal action against Fairley. But the lawsuit noted that the AP had threatened twice to sue Fairey, possibly as early as Tuesday, and that it considered all works that incorporate the imagery of the "Obama Hope" poster to be infringements of its copyrights.
Take, for example, an influential 2006 decision vindicating Jeff Koons. A fashion photographer named Andrea Blanch sued Koons for using a picture of hers in one of his paintings without paying her. Koons had scanned her photograph, which she had taken for a Gucci ad, and cut and pasted it into a digital composition he then painted. The federal appeals court said that Koons didn't need to pay Blanch to do what he did, because of how thoroughly Koons had transformed the photograph.
Markos himself on Daily Kos: AP still having a hard time with "fair use" concept
How the AP can argue that use of this picture hasn't been transformed by Fairey to offer "new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understandings" is beyond comprehension. Perhaps they are feeling the pinch of newspapers abandoning their product -- they've been dropped by Dow Jones, Tribune, NY Daily News, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Spokane Spokesman-Review, while newspapers in New York and Ohio have banded together to create competing networks to rid themselves of the AP blight.People commenting on Lawrence Lessig's blog call it Plagiarism! (How predictable is that?) I will add links as I find them - this is an interesting case about transformative works and Fair Use. I'm sure the legal bloggers are going to knock themselves out on this, plus the art bloggers.
Throw in the newspapers that are simply going out of business, and apparently the AP's new business model is to legally intimidate artists basing their artwork at least partly on AP images. Like going after small bloggers for blockquoting material from their news stories, It's morally bankrupt, legally questionable (at best), and a direct assault on the very notion of intellectual property fair use. The day the AP finally shutters its doors can't come soon enough.
- Location:Courthouse Steps
- Mood:
working - Music:Paul Simon "Kodachrome"
Page Content

I'm not condoning Graffiti, which is a a type of vandalism. It's a problem everywhere, and costly. But the timing of this arrest is just a bit odd since it happens to be the very week that he is having his art show in Boston, which includes the controversial Obama Poster. I think the outcome of this will be that his reputation will only grow, and he'll become an outlaw martyr for the art world. Just an opinion.
( Read more... )Reminds me of this song ~
- Location:Home
- Mood:
surprised - Music:Simon and Garfunkel
Page Content
Here are two Copyright stories to discuss:
The first comes to me via
AP Alleges Copyright Infringement of Obama Image
This one is about that famous poster of Obama that was made by artist Shepard Fairey, whose attorney in this case just happens to be Anthony Falzone of Lexicon Trial fame.

This reminds me of the essay I wrote about Andy Warhol's art prints early last year. He also copied famous photographs from the news to use as artwork, and he didn't face lawsuits for it. There was also the controversy last year when the AP tried to force bloggers to pay them by the word when quoting a story. I wrote two posts about that Here The AP probably held off suing Fairey until after the election because of the way bloggers attacked them about that issue.
The second tale of copyright woe is between the band Coldplay and guitarist Joe Satriani, who says the band ripped him off with the tune to "Viva La Vida," the title track to their last hit album (and one of my favorites!).
( Read more... )
- Location:U.S.A.
- Mood:
contemplative - Music:Viva La Vida (or Whatever)
Page Content
- Location:Fandom Court
- Mood:
happy - Music:Semisonic "Closing Time"
Page Content
Was it really only a year ago that J. K. Rowling and Warner Bros. sued RDR Books over the Harry Potter Lexicon on Halloween?
It seems more like an eternity, and alot of phrases come to mind. Dark night of the soul. Sold their soul to the company store. In League with the Devil. The Twilight Zone. Through the Looking-Glass. Down the Rabbit Hole. Down the Drain. Boiled in Oil. Keelhauled. Run Amok. Attacked by Harpies. Between Scylla and Charybdis. Nibbled by Geese. Drawn and Quartered. Chastised. Burned at the stake. Run out of Dodge.
But that's really giving the "other side" too much credit. They never actually chased us away, or kept us from writing one word we wanted to write. Of course, people have truly been hurt and reputations have been smeared by lies and innuendoes, and I don't think anyone understands the damage that their constant barrage of negativity has done to people. However, they never really had the big "gotcha" moment in which RDR and Steve Vander Ark were turned penniless out into the street, no matter how many times that was discussed with glee and longing. Many times things didn't turn out the way the Lexicon Haters thought it would - or should I say, every time. And sometimes things became so absurd we had to laugh at the nonsense.
Speaking of which, and in honor of this auspicious date, David English on Leaky Cauldron has made the following colorful suggestion:
It might be nice if the Potter Puppet Pals did a reenactment of the case with Snape as SVA, Hermione as Jo, Fudge as RDR, McGonagall as Dale Cendali, Lucius Malfoy as Falzone/Hammer, and Dumbledore as Judge Patterson. "What's that ticking sound? Oh, it's a Cease & Desist letter. Just ignore it and it'll go away." *BOOM*
Well, I think we can do better than that ~ what are your suggestions? How about Snape as Hammer, for one thing? *evil* I seem to recall a bit of snark from him. And Cendali is not the stoical McGonagall - I can think of a few other characters who fit her persona alot better. Please give your suggestions and have fun with it!
- Location:Fandom Court
- Mood:
mischievous - Music:Allman Brothers "Wasted Words"
Page Content
Steve Vander Ark's new book In Search of Harry Potter is now available on AmazonUK. The release date is now October 23 in the UK. When we get the U.S. release date, of course you'll see it here.
John Granger has a new book, The Deathly Hallows Lectures: The Hogwarts Professor Explains the Final Harry Potter Adventure (Paperback) and it's now available in the U.S., and getting some good reviews there. You can hear an interview with John on the Hog's Head Podcast. And of course, you can read many more of his insights and those of his circle of friends on his blog Hogwarts Professor.
One recent discussion about "sight" in DH there caught my "eye," since I love all the mirror/eye/reflection imagery in Deathly Hallows. Great read if you have the time.
And here are the "Legalese" articles of the day.
Assoc. of Research Librarians ~ How Fair Use Prevailed in the Lexicon Case - pdf
Lawrence Lessig ~ In Defense of Piracy - Good discussion of the Dancing Baby Youtube Case.
Also see my friend
- Location:Fandom
- Mood:
busy - Music:Clannad "Soul Searcher"
Page Content
The Stanford Fair Use Project, those intrepid attorneys who represented RDR Books in the Harry Potter Lexicon Case, have won a victory of sorts in the case of Lennon vs. Premise Media.
Yoko Ono has decided to withdraw her claim of copyright infringement. This comes months after a Judge's decision to deny an injunction against the use of John Lennon's song "Imagine" in the documentary "Expelled".
This is unfortunately a hollow victory, because the documentary had already been edited because the DVD distributor feared more lawsuits. So the song was not even used in the film. Whether it will ever be restored to the original is unclear. Anthony Falzone of FUP sees this as a victory all the same:
Expelled is Absolved : ...so the film goes out on DVD on October 21 in censored form, illustrating the damage that even an unproved and unsupported infringement claim can do. At the same time, the result here -- great but imperfect -- is a fantastic lesson in how we might start to solve the fair use dilemma.Cyndy Aleo-Carreira of The Industry Standard wonders: Is Fair Use decided by who has the most money?
If a film with Hollywood producers has trouble using media clips, what hope does an average citizen have of using something without worrying about huge legal expenses that could result? . . . Legal protection is nothing but words on paper if the de facto law is that whoever has the most money decides what constitutes fair use.Whenever I read about a case like this, I visualize a big pair of oversized clipping shears hacking at a piece of film or a book. Or maybe a better analogy would be a corporate Cookie Monster eating someone else's book. For Example:
- Location:FandomCourt
- Mood:
geeky - Music:Rain on the Roof
Page Content
I wrote about this case before:
Hari Puttar: A Comedy of Terrors
Now today, it seems that an Indian Court ruled against WB, who didn't prove their intellectual property case.
Court Frees Indian Film from Harry Potter Spell
By Vipul Tripathi
NEW DELHI (Reuters) - An Indian court has cleared a Bollywood film accused of plagiarising the "Harry Potter" brand, saying viewers would not confuse the international film and book series with "Hari Puttar: A Comedy of Terrors."
Dismissing the plea against the Hindi-language film, Delhi High Court said Warner Bros., which owns the rights to Harry Potter movies, had made "belated attempt to trip up" the film.
"Viewed from any angle, the plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie case for the grant of an ad interim injunction," Justice Reva Khetrapal said in an order on Monday obtained by Reuters.
. . . "Justice Reva Khetrapal said the class of viewers was such that they would not get confused with the title of the film," Pratibha Singh, the defence counsel, told Reuters.
"A Hindi-speaking, rural child would not have heard of Harry Potter, while the English-speaking, urban viewer would be so well versed with Harry Potter that there would be no reason for them to be confused," Singh quoted the judge as saying.
( Read more... )
- Location:Fandom Court
- Mood:
impressed - Music:Molly Hatchet "Flirtin' With Disaster"
Page Content
JKR, The Lexicon, and Oz .
His latest is a rather long entry on his blog forum, so go to the link and scroll down to read it:
Orson Scott Card Speaks Out about the Lexicon Verdict
( Read An Excerpt Under the Cut... )Secondly, here is one I overlooked ~ Ken Jennings who originally wrote opinions of the Lexicon Case Here and Here.
To Azkaban With You!
( Read An Excerpt Here . . . )
- Location:FandomCourt
- Mood:
busy - Music:Beatles "Money"
Page Content
Praetorianguard: HAI, JUDGE PATTERSON!
Derek Bambauer: Rowling 1, Lexicon 0
Foresthouse: Conclusions of Law
&
Foresthouse: Harry Potter ~ One More Thing
Dustbunny105: Go, JKR!
Liz B.: Top Eight Things To Know About the Lexicon Ruling
Quidawn: Aaah, The Sweet Taste of Justice Like Chocolate!
- Location:FandomCourt
- Mood:
creative - Music:Duran Duran "The Union of the Snake"
Page Content
I'm just going to list blogs about the Lexicon Ruling here, and I will update when something new comes along.
Again here is Judge Patterson's Decision
( Read What the Bloggers are Saying Here... )
Steve Vander Ark has also been busy since yesterday, doing interviews and talking about his new travel book coming in October: In Search of Harry Potter.
( Links to Articles and Quotes from Steve Under Here )
- Location:FandomCourt
- Mood:
working - Music:Stevie Nicks "Think About It"
Page Content

