Letters to the Editor
-
Two Additional Points
Most of the posts have already done a very credible job of eviscerating the central thesis of the article (and I find it disappointing that Mr. Manjoo has declined to engage the majority of these thoughtful, substantive arguments, while instead posting a an ill-considered and logically deficient rejoinder).
As virtually everyone has pointed out, Google directs readers to the work. It does not publish the work. That is such a blindingly obvious point that I am astounded that Mr. Manjoo even considered advancing it as a serious argument in favor of suspending copyright law.
This HP Lexicon is a competing work and it is likely to be published -first-. For Harry Potter fans at all interested in ancillary reference books, it is highly likely that they would purchase this. The fact that Ms. Rowling intends to publish an encyclopedia of her own is not something the average book buyer would necessarily be aware of. Why should they? Presumably, a parent goes to a bookstore with his or her kids and those kids, if they love Harry Potter, search for anything about him. Neither parent nor child is going to know or care about whether this is an authorized work.
Rabid fans probably do know about this future work, but some percentage of them are likely to buy the book anyway, because such a useful reference enhances the reading experience.
The HP Lexicon will impact sales of Rowling's own work. This is a practical certainty.
That alone should be reason enough for her to stop its publication, even if the precepts of the Berne Convention did not exist.
The fact that Mr. Manjoo doesn't mind having his work repurposed and sold for a profit is irrelevant and immaterial, although at least intellectually consistent. That he feels comfortable sneering at an author whose success far surpasses his for exercising her own intellectual property rights is unseemly at best, pathetic at worst.
Finally, I find that the article has a resentful tone suffused with ad hominem. A woman creates a work that is so beloved, the sales make her wealthy. Because she is rich, Mr. Manjoo appears to feel that she is no longer entitled to the protections of copyright law. He libels her as greedy and immoral.
But what if she were still on the dole? Do you still feel that a fan has the right to interfere with her livelihood?
Mr. Manjoo has rightly been taken to task for his ignorance of fandom, copyright law, fair use, and plain old logic. The graceful thing to do at this point is to acknowledge that the premise was ill-considered and to issue a heartfelt apology to Ms. Rowling for his misogyny disguised as a think piece.
-
A lexicon is typically fan-written and meant for fans
And like a "Buffy" lexicon or a "Star Trek" lexicon or an "X-Files" lexicon or a "Lost" lexicon etc. typically requires a licensing agreement with the copyright holder.
If the title was more like "The Myths and Rituals of Liminality in Harry Potter" then you could be pretty sure you were in academic analysis territory and no licensing required.
I generally agree with Farhad as other posters have said. But surely there is a distinction to be made here.
Other fictional titles with massive fanbases have drawn that line -- why should it be different for Harry Potter?
-
apples and oranges
I think I see what you're saying, but I can't agree.
The Harry Potter books are universally beloved (well more or less) and have made a huge profit both with books, movies and merchandise. Ask anyone on the street who JKR is, and they'll likely know. Ask anyone who you are, and they won't. No offense, but you aren't a multi-millionaire children's fantasy writer. No one is lining up to make your thoughts into a series of seven movies.
You seriously cannot be comparing this bestselling phenomenon to a blog, however many readers it gets. While nothing should be plagiarized from its author, regardless of form, there's a difference between a lexicon from a work of very famous fiction versus a blog lexicon. Also because traditionally printed books are published according to demand, while anyone can acquire an audience online.
-
She might be worried about being MZBed
http://www.fanworks.org/writersresource/?action=define&authorid=53&tool=fanpolicy
Some details are in slight dispute, but there are a number of descriptions of the incident, and the novel isn't in dispute.
Basically, Marion Zimmer Bradley was kind and allowed fans to play in her "yard" of Darkover. One fan did, and was writing something using the same era as one of MZB's in-progress novels (Contraband). The publisher became aware of this and spiked the publication of the novel. As a result of losing a ton of work and part of her own chronology, she withdrew that permission.
Based on that incident, I know that if *I* were an author planning a work (an announced work at that) and a fan site/writer wanted to publish (for profit) something that was too close to my own work, I would also be hesitant. It would suck to develop something like the Harry Potter universe, then lose the ability to write an encyclopedia on it because a dedicated fan beat me to it...
-
A Valuable Lesson
"Fandoms" are a bit nuts, and more than a little longwinded. At least they haven't taken to calling themselves the fanosphere.
Heh, Mr. Manjoo, I love your columns. And I love that you speak your mind about the pop-culture insanity that has taken over our world. You inspire debate and you argue like a champ. Keep it up.
I for one won't buy the Lexicon OR the Official Harrypedia, because I may be the last adult on the planet to refuse to buy into a children's book heralded as the greatest literature of the 21st century. Just because it sells doesn't make it good. I might buy the Annotated Machinist, though....
*ducks*
-
Analogy
A better anlogy whould perhaps be if I were to create an index of all paintings by any currently living artist. I could describe all his/her paintings, guess about where the painter got his/her inspiration and so on. Compare paintings I could even show fragments of the painting to illustrate details that support my story. This would be perfectly legal. The fact that the painter is also planning on publishing such a book, makes no difference.
JKR, who owes so such to her fan-sites, and is rich beyond imagination should really back down.