J.K. Rowling Panties Bunched

Popular author J.K. Rowling has her panties in a bunch after she realized she could have made an additional fortune based on the Harry Potter books. Over the years, Rowling has become beyond wealthy, and has spurred interest in reading to thousands of children and adults alike, during a time where electronic media thrives. The lady has done good in her life.

Based on the popular children’s books, which encompass thousands of pages, a librarian by the name of Steven Vander Ark has compiled together a dictionary, “The Harry Potter Lexicon.” The book has exact passage from the novels, and is some 400+ pages long, including references to obscure characters even the most die-hard readers might not remember.

However, Rowling feels like Vander Ark is stealing 15 years of her life. Who’s to blame? Is Vander Ark committing copyright infringement, or is Rowling just being a bitch? I feel the issue here is Fair Use.

Fair use is the most common defense in copyright infringement. Let’s take a look and see if this encyclopedia can be classified as fair use.

The first factor of Fair Use is Purpose or Character. The first factor is about whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only “supersede the objects” of the original for reasons of personal profit. Of course this guy is looking for personal profit. Fair Use in this instance does not cover the lexicon.

The second factor is the Nature of the Copyrighted Work. This factor aims to prevent private ownership of material that should rightfully belong to the public. Time magazine purchased the Zapruder film of the assassination of President Kennedy. However, courts ruled that this is material that should belong to the public, and overturned Time’s copyright. Again, this does not apply to this case.

Next there is Amount and Substitutability. The third factor assesses the quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work. This is where thing start to turn in favor of Vander Ark. There are 4224 pages in the entire Harry Potter series. The Lexicon is slated at around 400 pages, less than 10% of the entire series. Of this 10%, only a small percentage of that can be considered direct quoting.

In Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters, the use of less than 400 words from President Ford’s memoir by a political opinion magazine was interpreted as infringement because those few words represented “the heart of the book” and were, as such, substantial. Can we consider the quoting of passages used to describe certain people, places or things substantial to the heart of the Harry Potter series? I think hardly. One cannot grasp story ideas or plot lines by simply reading about who John X. is, or where the Magic Place in the Sky is.

Lastly is the effect upon the author’s work’s value. The fourth factor measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner’s ability to exploit his original work. The main question here is whether or not the claimed infringing work can harm the original owner’s market value. This is quite possibly the most important factor of fair use, and in fact the Supreme Court has labeled this factor “the single most important element of fair use.”

So the question is whether the Harry Potter encyclopedia affects the market value of the Harry Potter books. I must side with Vander Ark on this. In fact, I believe that the lexicon INCREASES the value of the books. I can foresee people going back to reread books with the reference along side to better understand the subjects and plot. I can see this increasing awareness for the few people who have not already read the books. This book is essentially notes to let a reader further enjoy a series of books they might not be able to read fast enough. Is there a character one doesn’t remember? That’s fine, there is a desktop reference to find out what they did in Book 1.

In my humble opinion, there is no copyright infringement, as Vander Ark’s work falls under the case of fair use. The only worthy thing Rowling has to say is that she was planning on writing an encyclopedia, but has been too busy. Well…sorry. Put out an “official” lexicon when you get around to it, but until then, there will be reference for people who want it. No one is going to sit down and read the damn encyclopedia without having your book first. This doesn’t steal from your 15 years of work, it flatters your work in a way that will allow more people to enjoy your life’s work.

Chill out bitch.