Copyright |Copyright History|patents

Harry Potter - An Ambush For Allied Work by a Tertiary Publication

The Plot:

17 years of creative outbursts has propelled J. K. Rowling (author of the Harry Potter novel series fame) to the pinnacle of modern fictional literature. The wizard world of Harry Potter as weaved by J. K. Rowling brought along with it a swarm of 'new words' indicative of the various spells, potions, magical devices, and characters. She has seemingly construed and brought into force, an otherwise nullity of characters (rummage of alphabets) to showcase the realms and happenstances of her surreal world.

A prompt disclaimer forms a pre-cursor to her books; the disclaimer reads thus - "no part of this publication may be reproduced, or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of the publisher".

Enter librarian Steven Vander Ark, a 50 year-old librarian from Michigan, a self-confessed Harry Potter fanatic - the doer promoted and pushed by RDR Books.

What started with a fan-based website (www.hp-lexicon.org), to which the content was provided by the librarian, having comprehensively and continuously researched the books for 8 to 9 years; off which he made $6,500 through advertising between 2000 and 2008, turned into a serious money making business when RDR approached the librarian and struck a deal with him in August 2007 to publish the text of the website and market the same to the public.

This decision stung the nerves of J. K. Rowling who flipped and turned her stance from having praised the web-edition of the Lexicon - even sheepishly admitting that she herself sneaked onto the website whilst writing her book(s), to vehemently arguing against the money-making racket off the print version of the same website and further heading towards mentioning the inaccuracies that this Lexicon reportedly provides.

A first hand look at the website suggests a neat and comprehensive ensemble of the resources referenced and cross-referenced from the plurality of books that comprise the entire Harry Potter series, in that it attempts to archive the various factual derivations from the books.

The Facts:

Verbatim reproductions of statements issued in testimony by:

J. K. Rowling - "..the lexicon is useless because its merely an alphabetical rearrangement of my work, with many inaccuracies to boot...."

Steven Vander Ark - "....Its a reference book to a piece of literature, so naturally it refers back to the source material....There are places where we use phrases that are identical or similar..."

Warner and Rowling's witness: Bruce Harris, a publishing expert to testify the effect of such a companion guide on future publications.

RDR defense witness: Janet Sorenson, a Berkeley English professor and 'expert on lexicons' to historically depict the role of Lexicons.

Steven Vander Ark's attorney:

David Hammer, a solo practitioner in Manhattan, took lead for RDR. He was supported by Lizbeth Hasse, of San Francisco's Creative Industry Law Group, as well as Stanford Law School's Anthony Falzone, a former Bingham McCutcheon litigator and the heir apparent to Lawrence Lessig's Fair Use Project.

The Proceedings:

J. K. Rowling along with Warner Brothers filed a lawsuit at the New York Federal District Court (Judge: MR. Robert Patterson) against RDR Books seeking an injunction against the hard-copy version of the HP Lexicon website compiled by Steve Vander Ark.

The lawsuit states that, "The infringing book is particularly troubling as it is in direct contravention to Ms. Rowling's repeatedly stated intention to publish her own companion books to the series" (Intention or no intention, it is interesting to see whether the purpose of copyright holds its own lawful ground and the extent to which it prohibits infringers against use.)

The Copyright Act of 1976 allows incorporation of copyrighted material "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship or research".

The defense team which includes the Fair Use Project at Stanford University Law School, has replied to the suit arguing:

"In support of her position Ms. Rowling appears to claim a monopoly on the right to publish literary reference guides, and other non-academic research, relating to her own fiction. This is a right no court has ever recognized. It has little to recommend it. If accepted, it would dramatically extend the reach of copyright protection, and eliminate an entire genre of literary supplements: third party reference guides to fiction, which for centuries have helped readers better access, understand and enjoy literary works."

Fair use is a doctrine in the United Stated Copyright Law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders such as use for scholarship, review or classroom use. The blur between copyright infringement and free use is showcased by the Fair Use Project, whose pillars of support form the basis on non-infringement of a copyright material.

The 4 pillars of Fair Use Policy:-

1) Purpose and character:

One must demonstrate how it either advances knowledge or the progress of the arts through the addition of something new. A key consideration is the extent to which the use is interpreted as transformative, as opposed to merely derivative. Derivative use rights ought to be the copyrighter's jurisdiction. RDR's crux pointing towards transformative use takes cue from its admission that the Lexicon is a valuable tool for organizing the vast work of Harry Potter books that are spread over thousands of pages.

2) Nature of the copied work:

Facts and ideas are separate from copyright; only their particular expression or fixation merits such protection. In contrast, a fictional work merits more protection automatically.

3) Amount and Substantiality:

The quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work ought to be looked at.

4) Effect upon work's value:

A measure of the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit her original work. To check whether such use in general, if widespread, would harm the potential marker of the original. Ms. Rowling contests and negates this by her ardent claims of publishing her own lexicon (in future).

The Justice:

Yet to be decided.

Viewpoint:

This case has assumed preposterous peaks because as Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford Law School and one of RDR's lawyers pointed out that, "This is the first time that anybody has argued seriously that folks do not have the right to do that (compile and print Lexicons)" This obviously marks a milestone, then and a precedent in many future similar lawsuits.

Copyright issues in literature arise when one person's creative ability is compromised in order to merely 'lift' an author's symposium of words and orchestrate the same to be a 'derivative faction' of the author's work, in that, the perpetrator believes that it is 'his ingenuity' that has aroused him to spot a specific pattern which is purportedly unknown in the author's own work.

As a fan, I would testify that I would never even contemplate buying cursory books, merely because of the plausible incongruities. Had it been a J. K. Rowling authored publication, I would be tempted to lay my hands on it. That is the kind of profound effect a writer subjects his/her readers to and prompts loyalty for/towards. Any trespassing/departure on/from that front is bound to be seen as derogatory/inflammatory/prejudicial to the author's work.

Labels: Harry Potter - An Ambush For Allied Work by a Tertiary Publication

10 Common Myths About Copyright

a. If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it is not copyrighted

Sort of. After April of 1989, the US dropped the requirement to need a copyright notice to have copyright protection. Items prior to April of 1989 without a copyright notice may have lost protection but it is a very gray area as the Copyright Office allowed for corrections after publication In general, when seeking public domain products, it is best to stay away from gray areas as there is lots more material out there than you can ever use.

b. If I don't charge for it, I'm not violating the copyright

Charging for an item is not a requirement for copyright. I can give away something for free and it is still protected by copyright. And if you choose to give away my works for free, you are committing copyright violation unless I specifically gave you permission to do this.

c. If it is posted on the internet/Usenet, it is in the public domain

Never assume that something posted on the internet is in the public domain. Any newer creations - including posts - are protected by copyright.

d. My use of the materials falls under "fair use"

e. If you don't defend your copyright, you lose its protections

False. The law does not require you to defend your copyright to keep it intact.

f. If I create my own works based on already published works, I can copyright them.

Copyright law is very explicit about something called derivative works. If you wish to create a new work based on a prior author's "universe", you need to get permission.

g. Copyright violation is a small thing and if I get caught, nothing will happen to me

Not so. If you end up going to court, there can be very heavy monetary and jail time for copyright violation. Plus the cost of defending yourself will also be quite high.

h. Using someone else's copyrighted materials is just free advertising for the copyright owner.

That is not your decision to make. If you want to use someone else's copyrighted work, no matter the reason, get their permission. The only exception is "fair use" which is allowed under certain very specific circumstances - like an attributed quote.

i. Someone emailed me the materials so I can use them.

False. Just because someone else emailed you something does not mean that person had the right to do that.

j. This is a government work so it is copyright free.

Sometimes true. All US government work paid for and created by US government employees is in the public domain (but it may have some restrictions - like it is classified or is a government seal.) Works by quasi government entities are copyrighted however. For instance, works by the Smithsonian Institution do claim copyright to their works. Also state governments often claim copyright to their works.

Labels: 10 Common Myths About Copyright

Who Owns the Photo? Copyright and Licensing of Business Portraits

When working with a professional photographer for business portraits and other photography needs, many people think that once they've paid for the services, they can do whatever they want with the photos. However, that's not exactly true.

When the photographer creates an image (even if it is created at your request for a job), the photographer automatically owns a copyright to that image and has full rights to control how it's used. Just because you have the file on your computer or have a physical print of an image, that doesn't mean you have the right to do anything with it. Even without an official copyright notice on the image, the photographer still has the copyright since this formal "notice" isn't required to obtain copyright protection. But that doesn't mean that you are left out in the cold and aren't able to use the images.

Licensed Use Defined
Typically, a professional photographer grants a license to you for certain uses of the image (for a certain period of time). So the photographer keeps the copyright to the image and you get to use the image for specified uses, such as posting it on your company web site, using it in corporate bios, and other business purposes.

Every situation is different, so you need to discuss how you can use your photos with the photographer and iron out the details during your early discussions. It is important to bring up licensing as soon as possible because how you plan to use your photo often impacts the final costs of your project.

So how is the license granted? It can be specified in writing from the photographer (for instance, the photographer might include the license terms on the invoice or estimate/quote). Also, often on digital files, a copyright notice and a grant of license are embedded within the file. This is included in the "metadata" of the file and can be read with certain software.

The photographer doesn't always retain the bulk of the rights to the images, though. In some scenarios, the photographer can transfer either some or all of the rights, such as a broad transfer of rights, a transfer of the actual copyright, or a work-for-hire agreement. And when hiring a corporate photographer, knowing these terms and what they mean for your business can help you avoid potentially costly copyright infringements.

1. Broad Licenses
For a broad transfer of rights, the term "buyout" is often used. However, be careful with this term because different people have varying understandings of what the term means. So instead of using the word "buyout," the precise terms need to be negotiated and specified in the written materials.

The specific terms can vary, but often the photographer keeps the copyright while the client has exclusive and unlimited rights to use the image without any further payments to the photographer. The licensing fees for these very broad licenses are often quite high. It is usually better and more economical to think about how exactly you plan to use the images and discuss with the photographer to obtain a license to only the uses you actually need. This saves you money because you don't pay for the rights that you won't use.

2. Transfer of Copyright
The photographer can also transfer the actual copyright. For this, there must be a written transfer of the copyright and it must be signed. Then the person who received the copyright owns the full rights and can use the photos however they want. Of course, this type of arrangement often increases the licensing fees significantly because the photographer is granting all the rights to the image.

3. Work-for-Hire Agreements
A work-for-hire agreement is a specific way to transfer all rights from the photographer to the client. In this situation, the photographer and the client must sign a written work-for-hire agreement before the work starts. (Note that it must be written and signed before the work starts.) Under this type of agreement, the client actually owns the copyright from the creation and the photographer never gets any rights to the images.

Work-for-hire agreements are typically used in an employer/employee relationship where the photographer is an employee of the company. If the photographer is not an employee of the client, the situations where a work-for-hire agreement can be used are specifically limited by the 1976 Copyright Act (Title 17 of the US Code). In this situation, a work-for-hire agreement can only be used if the work is commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture (or other audiovisual work), as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas. As you can see, the work-for-hire agreement would rarely be allowed for business portraits unless the photographer was the employee of the client.

Labels: Who Owns the Photo? Copyright and Licensing of Business Portraits

Is There Any International Copyright Law?

Since decades it has been a topic of concern regarding the law for international copyright law. But to disclose the amazement, there is no international copyright law. No international copyright law exists that will guard your work in the other parts of the world. Nevertheless, there are specific set of rules offered by different countries which provide security to the foreign works.

Various measures have been taken by worldwide gatherings and pacts to defend proprietors of copyrights in the entire region of the world. Several nations including United States have gathered mutually to find out a standardized copyright law. This law would safeguard their copyright proprietors from filing copyrights separately in different countries.

It is recommended that before working for a foreign country, first always search and determine the manner of security it offers to foreign writers or sources. A number of nations extend little or no security to foreign authors. When working for a foreign nation, try to search and take help from a qualified on foreign copyright law.

All nations have their particular rules and regulations of conceding and defending copyright works. Few nations do not provide any rational possessions privileges whereas various nations provide additional copyright securities.

Hence people who possess copyright works should keep in mind that there are diverse copyright laws in few countries. Despite the fact that the United States has contracted pacts with other countries, but it doesn't assure that your work will remain in other states. Contact a lawyer who is expert in international copyright law to get detailed information on international copyright laws.

Labels: Is There Any International Copyright Law

How to Choose a Literary Agent

Do you want to choose a literary agent to publish your writings? If yes, then you need to be extra careful while selecting one. Literary agent would market your writing, deal with publishers and also keep a track of all the rights you possess for that published material. If we have been talking of things in the past then there was no need for literary agents as there were very limited number of writers and publication houses but in the current scenario every publishing house wants some agent to be involved who would filter the good and bad material.

Moreover, if your published material becomes popular then your literary agent would play a major role in managing and keeping track or your earnings. He or she would also look for your rights and create your contract in a way that is more beneficial for you.

I would always suggest you to do proper research and evaluate your literary agent on the basis of his or her rating online on publisher websites or in various publishing magazines. It is always beneficial to query these literary agents about their work experience and list of publishing houses they deal with. Evaluate the strength and weaknesses of various agents. You should also talk to him or her about the list of clients he or she already works for. You may contact these clients as they would provide you reliable feedback about his or her work. Do remember to query your literary agent about his fee, charges for inland or foreign sales to avoid any problems in the future.

It would be very easy for you to choose and rely upon your literary agent keeping all these points in your mind.

Labels: How to Choose a Literary Agent