Blogs

C CHRISTIAN

Clare Christian is managing director and publishing director of The Friday Project, the web-to-book publisher she co-founded in 2005. She blogs at tfpsgirlfriday.blogspot.com.

Harry Potter and goblet of writs

07.11.07

Some time ago I made passing reference to being sued by JK Rowling. We had received a letter from her solicitors attempting to prevent us from publishing our A-Z of Harry Potter (yes, the one that clearly states 'An Unofficial Guide' on the cover) on the grounds of passing off.

It was a pretty standard letter, doubtless similar in tone to the one received by RDR Books in the US who Rowling is apparently suing for their inappropriate use of the Harry Potter characters in their forthcoming unofficial encyclopaedia. Rowling’s solicitors say the book ‘infringes copyright’ and ‘attempts to cash in on the successful brand’. Well heaven forbid.

RDR books have responded saying that the book is based on the author’s fan site, one that Rowling has called ‘a great site’. Apparently Rowling’s chief concern is that as she is planning to write the definitive Harry Potter Encyclopaedia and will donate all the proceeds to charity, she cannot therefore approve of unofficial books that seek to pre-empt her definitive guide where ‘the losers in such a situation would be the charities’.

They trotted out exactly the same tosh in the solicitor’s letter I received and I’m sorry but I think it is ridiculous. To suggest that there is a single person on this planet who will not buy JK Rowling’s definitive guide (which she says will include all the material that never made it into the books) because they have bought small independent publisher RDR Books unofficial encyclopaedia, or because they have bought TFP’s little unofficial guide is absolutely laughable.

I understand the need to protect copyright but to dress up unsubstantiated claims of passing off with emotive allegations of taking money from the pockets of charities is underhand to say the very least. Luckily for Rowling and Warner Bros who have filed the lawsuit, they have enough money to pursue the claim until tiny RDR simply run out of the cash they need to defend themselves. The winner will be the one with the deepest pockets and we know who that is.

When we received the letter with these spurious claims I opposed them and eventually, with a compromise from us (a disclaimer on the cover of the book) the lawyers conceded that there was no grounds for them to pursue this claim. It cost us to defend ourselves but the nature of the claim made my blood boil. Why should small publishers cave into the bully boy tactics of those with stacks of cash and no reasonable case? I desperately hope that RDR Books can afford to keep going until Rowling/Warner Bros back down and thereby prove a point for all of us.

Add comment

By posting on this website you agree to the Bookseller Comments Policy. Comments go direct to live, please be relevant, brief and definitely not abusive. Report any "unsuitable" comments by clicking the links.

Name

Comment

Email

Comments on this article

By M. William Anderson

Frankly, I'm with the lawyers on this one. Why should you or any other publisher or author produce such a derogatory book, based completely on copying characters and situations from the Harry Potter books, in the hope the fans will buy said book (and you know full well they will). This isn't your property to exploit in the first place so you should be ashamed you even tried such a bare-faced endeavor to profit from another author's ideas and stories. That's really what this action is about and your article comes across as self-righteous anger because a) you've been found out, and b) that you've been told off. I applaud Bloomsbury and Ms Rowling for trying to protect the intellectual property they have worked hard to create and sell. If I was them I would be furious with you!

07 Nov 07 14:12

Unsuitable?

By Paul Greaves

I'm afraid that comment makes you sound like a rabid Potter fan who, frankly, doesn't understand the book trade. This book is an Unoffcial Guide to... And there are plenty of those about. You don't see the BBC cracking down on every publisher releasing an unofficial book on Doctor Who, or Warner Brothers or Fox penalising the many publishers of unofficial Buffy the Vampire Slayer and 24 books. They view it all as good publicity, knowing full well that the fans will ALWAYS buy the official product regardless of the unofficial releases. I'm sorry to say that all this is simply Bloomsbury's continual hyping of the Potter franchise. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Potter fans won't buy Rowling's book when it comes out? I also think you're doing Potter fans a disservice by implying they're too stupid to tell the difference between a book by Rowling and book by someone else! I also don't see you complaining about "The Hidden Myths in Harry Potter: Spellbinding Map and Book of Secrets" published by St Martins Press, or "The Magical Worlds of Harry Potter: A Treasury of Myths, Legends and Fascinating Facts" published by Michael O'Mara, or "The Psychology of Harry Potter: An Unauthorized Examination of the Boy Who Lived" by Benbella Books, or "The Harry Potter Quiz Book" from Buster Books, or "The End of Harry Potter?" published by Gollancz! None of which are official and several have been around since 2004! There are endless unofficial guides to every major event out there. Even George Lucas allows unofficial Star Wars books - and his franchise is arguably bigger than Potter. I think most people in the industry will agree that, despite the many good things HP has brought to the book trade - it has also brought many problems. The 'protection' of the franchise being one of them.

08 Nov 07 07:56

Unsuitable?

By Philip

Clare has responded to these comments on her blog: "My point again for the benefit of the hard of reading was that any lawyer, protecting any property should have a valid case before sending threatening letters out."

08 Nov 07 11:42

Unsuitable?

By Paul Greaves

One other point I meant to raise earlier to M William Anderson's post was: How do you know its a derogatory book? Have you read it? I suspect not as you doubtless wouldn't want to line the coffers of the Friday Project purchasing such a filthy rip-off, so you really can't comment on its merits. And if you HAVE bought it then that opens up a whole other can of worms, doesn't it? For all you know this may actually be a really good book that all Potter fans will enjoy! Rather than throw around rude accusations about the quality of a book you haven't read, perhaps you should just let people make their own choice on whether or not to buy it? I hardly think the 'loss' of earnings will keep JKR awake at night. Not with all those other unofficial books to worry about...

08 Nov 07 12:03

Unsuitable?

By Simon Henry

I certainly agree that the lawyer should have had a valid case, and passing off wasn't it, but I'm not so sure they couldn't have raised other objections. Ironically, according to a lawyer's piece referenced on RDR's website, Rowling's case against the Lexicon is weakened by earlier not enforcing her copyright over the website version! Clare, I wonder could you say what your defence was?

08 Nov 07 12:06

Unsuitable?

By Emily Stone

Outside the field of law, Outside the subject of publishing, But as a human who sometimes thinks with her soul -- I find the whole notion of 'Oh, you mustn't make a book today because MY favourite charity might, perchance, suffer in the future when perhaps I may wish to decide to charge my fans for a book I haven't yet written', comes off as ridiculous. And greedy. Protect your copyright if you need to, but please don't blame it on starving children.

09 Nov 07 13:09

Unsuitable?

By Phelim McIntyre

As someone who is both a Harry Potter fan and someone who has worked in the book trade I believe J K Rowling and her lawyers are completely out of order. Both Rowling and Warner Bros have used the Lexicon for their own purposes in the past, in WB case without recognition of source. The action refused to recognise the independent research and essays put in by the Lexicon members. But Mr Van De Ark is a major speaker in the fan fiction world so he is a nice high profile target to go for. Yes he and RDR made mistakes but Miss Rowling is acting like Rita Skeeter from her own books.

21 Apr 08 13:32

Unsuitable?

See Also