May 1, 2008
John
Willinsky
Harry Potter and the Scholar’s Fair Use
by John Willinsky
May 1, 2008
As academics might be said to live and thrive by consideration of fair use, we need to perk up when this vital legality goes to court, and all the more so when it is a good knock-down case of goliath celebrity taking on struggling Davidesque scholar. As most readers will know, with works of “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research,” to use the example of the U.S. legal system, authors can in the name of fair use reasonably cite others’ published work without violating copyright.
Fair use, in this sense, represents the larger society’s recognition that learning and criticism have a special contribution to make to the public good, which warrants the researcher and reviewer trespassing on property’s otherwise scared ground. Yet what is no less fair about this use of another’s work is how it allows the words of the one being cited to stand up to the criticism. The fairness permitted by fair use enables readers to judge for themselves, at least to a degree. That is, the law not only protects the scholar citing others’ work, but encourages the scholar to be fair and, in that sense, a better scholar.
But what about the courtroom warring of celebrated author against learned violator? In a Lower Manhattan courtroom on April 14th, J.K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter franchise, testified that Steven Jan Vander Ark’s planned Harry Potter Lexicon violated her copyright, leading her and Warner Brothers to sue the intended publisher RDR Books. Turning to a fair-use defense, according to the New York Times review of the court filings, the publisher claimed that Mr. Vander Ark’s book “provides a significant amount of original analysis and commentary.” One of the publisher’s lawyers, Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford Law School pointed out that “for hundreds of years everybody has agreed that folks are free to write companion guides.” The Times did have a bit of fun with it all, and rightly so, what with tears and near-tears on the witness stand from the two principals in the case, as well as apologies for naming characters in the Harry Potter books whose name should not be spoken.
But the case also gave off a bit of a chill over the fair use issue. The Times noted that “in a number of cases, Ms. Rowling and Warner Brothers have pushed publishers of other planned Harry Potter reference books in the United States to withdraw them from the market, though without filing suit.” The chill lies in the “though.” It suggests that the fair use defense is being ignored by Ms. Rowling and Warner Brothers, and that publishers are just saying no to what would otherwise be an entirely legal response to one of the major literary phenomenon of the age, and one that could only foster an interest not only in this literary work, but the value and pleasure of scholarly inquiry.
If Harry Potter leixcons seem far removed from the real work of scholars and researchers, it has to be said that Mr. Vander Ark, a librarian and as such the scholar’s ultimate colleague, is fighting the good fight, our fight, in taking the stand in defense of fair use. And kudos, must go, as well, to RDR Books for not rolling over in the face of the suit.
Now I also have to say that as a former school teacher and professor of education, I will forever remain indebted to Ms. Rowling for rekindling literature’s spark among the young worldwide. Still, I am distressed by her failure to realize the vital relationship between the pleasure of reading and scholarly inquiry. Actually, Rowling was fine with it, when Vander Ark’s The Harry Potter Lexicon was no more than a freely available website. She used the website herself, and only came to object when the lexicon was about to be published. I am also delighted, then, by Ms. Rowling’s respect for open access to research. But this celebrity endorsement of open access apart, fair use is necessary for scholars in all mediums and price points.
And this is why we must await the ruling to be issued by Judge Robert B. Patterson on the Rowling v. RDR Books case with all the anticipation that readers of Ms. Rowling’s books have shown toward each installment of the Harry Potter series. It is only a bit of an exaggeration to say that our future, as opposed to Harry’s, hangs on the outcome.
As academics might be said to live and thrive by consideration of fair use, we need to perk up when this vital legality goes to court, and all the more so when it is a good knock-down case of goliath celebrity taking on struggling Davidesque scholar. As most readers will know, with works of “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research,” to use the example of the U.S. legal system, authors can in the name of fair use reasonably cite others’ published work without violating copyright.
Fair use, in this sense, represents the larger society’s recognition that learning and criticism have a special contribution to make to the public good, which warrants the researcher and reviewer trespassing on property’s otherwise scared ground. Yet what is no less fair about this use of another’s work is how it allows the words of the one being cited to stand up to the criticism. The fairness permitted by fair use enables readers to judge for themselves, at least to a degree. That is, the law not only protects the scholar citing others’ work, but encourages the scholar to be fair and, in that sense, a better scholar.
But what about the courtroom warring of celebrated author against learned violator? In a Lower Manhattan courtroom on April 14th, J.K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter franchise, testified that Steven Jan Vander Ark’s planned Harry Potter Lexicon violated her copyright, leading her and Warner Brothers to sue the intended publisher RDR Books. Turning to a fair-use defense, according to the New York Times review of the court filings, the publisher claimed that Mr. Vander Ark’s book “provides a significant amount of original analysis and commentary.” One of the publisher’s lawyers, Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford Law School pointed out that “for hundreds of years everybody has agreed that folks are free to write companion guides.” The Times did have a bit of fun with it all, and rightly so, what with tears and near-tears on the witness stand from the two principals in the case, as well as apologies for naming characters in the Harry Potter books whose name should not be spoken.
But the case also gave off a bit of a chill over the fair use issue. The Times noted that “in a number of cases, Ms. Rowling and Warner Brothers have pushed publishers of other planned Harry Potter reference books in the United States to withdraw them from the market, though without filing suit.” The chill lies in the “though.” It suggests that the fair use defense is being ignored by Ms. Rowling and Warner Brothers, and that publishers are just saying no to what would otherwise be an entirely legal response to one of the major literary phenomenon of the age, and one that could only foster an interest not only in this literary work, but the value and pleasure of scholarly inquiry.
If Harry Potter leixcons seem far removed from the real work of scholars and researchers, it has to be said that Mr. Vander Ark, a librarian and as such the scholar’s ultimate colleague, is fighting the good fight, our fight, in taking the stand in defense of fair use. And kudos, must go, as well, to RDR Books for not rolling over in the face of the suit.
Now I also have to say that as a former school teacher and professor of education, I will forever remain indebted to Ms. Rowling for rekindling literature’s spark among the young worldwide. Still, I am distressed by her failure to realize the vital relationship between the pleasure of reading and scholarly inquiry. Actually, Rowling was fine with it, when Vander Ark’s The Harry Potter Lexicon was no more than a freely available website. She used the website herself, and only came to object when the lexicon was about to be published. I am also delighted, then, by Ms. Rowling’s respect for open access to research. But this celebrity endorsement of open access apart, fair use is necessary for scholars in all mediums and price points.
And this is why we must await the ruling to be issued by Judge Robert B. Patterson on the Rowling v. RDR Books case with all the anticipation that readers of Ms. Rowling’s books have shown toward each installment of the Harry Potter series. It is only a bit of an exaggeration to say that our future, as opposed to Harry’s, hangs on the outcome.
Respond: make a comment
Share: Email | Save as PDF | Print
| Bookmark & Share |
| 
More columns on Columns: Legal Publishing | from John Willinsky
|
the count:
8231 posts | 11419 comments
recent comments  
Max Amsterdam once said: “Business is the art of extracting money from another man’s pocket without resorting to violence.” The purpose of having a written agreement between all … »»Practice There is good leagal content that doesn’t necessarily come in the neat packages that we usually look in. Though our commercial legal database subscriptions have linked, vetted, edited, and easily. […] »»Research When you need to collaborate on a document displayed on your screen, it’s great to have a colleague from down the hall come into your office and look over your … »»Technology
-
Available online today are four new chapters of the publication Women in Canada: A Gender-based Statistical Report, which explores the socio-demographic and economic circumstances of Canadian women in general.
-
The bill amends the Constitution Act, 1867 by readjusting the number of members and the representation of the provinces in the House of Commons.
-
-
Blueseed plans to buy a ship and turn it into a floating incubator anchored in international waters off the coast of California.
-
Under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the flow of information out of Ottawa has slowed to a trickle.
-
-
"…the IPC has exclusive jurisdiction to decide whether a record is in the custody or control of a university in the context of an access request…"
-
-
John J.L. Hunter, Q.C. of Vancouver has been elected President for 2011-2012
-
Detailed results from 321 members.
These summaries of selected recent cases are provided each week to Slaw by Maritime Law Book.
More information.
-
Banks and Banking - Liability of banks to third parties - Negligence - General
The plaintiffs were the former shareholders of a company that failed. They sued the defendant bank alleging that it breached its contract with the company and the plaintiffs and breached a duty ...
-
Actions - Cause of action - General principles - New or extended cause of action - Opening of floodgates
The plaintiff and defendant worked at different branches of the same bank. The defendant’s common-law husband was the plaintiff’s ex-husband. Over a four year period, the defendant ...
-
Aliens - Definitions and general principles - Immigration consultants
The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) had been designated as the sole regulatory body of immigration consultants in Canada from 2004 until June 2011. On June 30, 2011, Bill C-35 came into force, which significantly amended ...
-
Criminal Law - Sexual offences, public morals and disorderly conduct - Public morals - Obscenity - Possession of child pornography
The accused was convicted of making child pornography available and two counts of possession of child pornography (see [2010] Sask.R. Uned. 197). Subsequently, he was sentenced ...
-
Criminal Law - Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Directions regarding pleas or evidence of witnesses, co-accused and accomplices
Rowe was convicted by a jury of five offences. He appealed.
The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed ...
-
Narcotic Control - Offences - Possession - General
The accused wished to access marijuana for medicinal purposes but did not have an authorization to possess marijuana issued under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations. He was notified that a package of marihuana addressed to him had been ...
-
Narcotic Control - General - Legislation - Exemptions - Medicinal marijuana
McCrady, who had an application pending under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR) to possess and grow marijuana, was convicted of possession of marijuana (Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA), s. 4(1)). Hearn pleaded guilty ...
-
Criminal Law - Sentence - Trafficking in hashish or marijuana (incl. possession for purposes of trafficking)
The accused pleaded guilty to one count of possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. He was sentenced to 30 days’ imprisonment to be served intermittently and 11 months’ ...
-
Municipal Law - Powers of municipalities - Particular powers - Imposition and collection of taxes or fees
Catalyst Paper Corp. operated a paper mill in the District of North Cowichan. Catalyst objected to the tax rate that it paid compared to residential ratepayers. In 2009, the ...
This is a listing of a few upcoming events in Canada of interest to lawyers, law students, legal librarians, and others involved in the practice of law.
Clicking on any event in the list below will give you access to more information and to links allowing you to see the full entry and to add the event to your own calendar.
Click this link for a fuller version of the TalkLaw/ParLoi calendar of events and for instructions as to how to add events and calendars to your own calendar.
|
