Accidental Blogger

The long awaited resolution to the hotly contested Hari/Harry Puttar/Potter suit has emerged, in Hari’s favor. Well, not really long awaited, and probably not all that hotly contested. In fact, this case, like the recent suit resulting in an injunction prohibiting the publication of a Harry Potter lexicon, pretty much points out the imbecility of some areas of so-called intellectual so-called property law. Rowling’s publisher won that suit, so I’m happy to see Warner Bros.’s claims rejected here. The notion that Hari might "confuse" consumers into thinking he’s Harry is absurd. The lexicon case may be a closer call, but I find myself among a slim minority who believe the probably badly-executed lexicon shouldn’t have been held to infringe on Rowling’s (or the publisher’s) copyright, despite what the judge found to be copious copying from Rowling’s works. It was nothing more nor less than a reference work focused on the text of the series. There is no other sensible way to produce a useful lexicon. One must copy and paraphrase another’s so-called original text.