But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. – Matthew 6:20
A Note from the Editor:
I commissioned this article from staff writer Matthew Kinne when news broke that J.K. Rowling’s copyright infringement lawsuit against The Harry Potter Lexicon had gone to court here in the
As an educator, pastor, editor, and small-time publisher, I’ve dealt with copyright law and fair-use exemptions on a near-daily basis for years, and am very familiar with the ways in which copyright law both protects what I do and complicates (even hampers) what I do. As a writer and cultural philosopher, I’ve got my own ideas about copyright law, and how it ought to be revamped in order to encourage greater creativity. As a quasi-insider in the entertainment industry, I’ve even made a point of acquiring some intriguing direct knowledge of the technical ins-and-outs of evaluating potential copyright infringement with high-profile properties like The Lord of the Rings and Michael Clayton. A two-plus-hour chat with a Warner Bros. script-clearance attorney on a flight to
In the weeks leading up to initiation of the Rowling hearing, I had been following (with a great measure of interest) legal rumblings associated with the Ben Stein film Expelled. Just several days before Rowling appeared in court to argue her case, an animation firm issued a cease-and-desist letter to Expelled’s producers; and the day after Rowling’s case was first brought before the bench, Expelled’s producers responded to the cease-and-desist request by asking a
Copyright law is big news in the entertainment world right now. Mr. Kinne and I hope that you find this article both educational and entertaining, and convicting.
—Greg Wright
In the year 2000, when electric file sharing was just hitting its stride, the heavy-metal band Metallica filed a lawsuit against file-sharing website Napster for illegally and freely distributing the band’s copyrighted material without the band’s consent. Since then, arguments and issues of copyright and fair use have continued to plague
Confusion remains because questions remain. When can fan fiction and fan appreciation turn into a threat to the original creator? How much citation of a text is too much? When does sharing become stealing? The answer to these questions are best answered by legal minds; but the broader implications of ownership, use, and sharing of intellectual property are worth exploration.
The notions of “fair use” go beyond our courtrooms and legal offices. Our authors, musicians, and other artists are barometers of our times: what they do and how we consume what they do set the moral and social tone for our culture.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:14 am
Some resources (I haven’t had the time to look through them yet) on Fair Use are available at http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/resources/fair_use
May 1st, 2008 at 11:14 am
Good resource, Darrel. I wonder if the makers of Expelled are aware of this organization? It sure seems that appealing to this statement of best practice would be adequate defense of Ono’s lawsuit.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Just off the newswire: “The Fair Use Project of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society today announced that it is signing on to defend Premise Media’s right to use a clip of John Lennon’s song “Imagine” in its documentary, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” [www.expelledthemovie.com] for the purposes of commentary and criticism.”
And this is a Stanford press release, not a Premise press release.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Update: the judge in the case dismisses Ono’s claim. Ono pursues appeal.
September 9th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
The judge in the Harry Potter case ruled Monday in favor of JK Rowling. From an AP article (quoting the judge): “While the lexicon, in its current state, is not a fair use of the Harry Potter works, reference works that share the lexicon’s purpose of aiding readers of literature generally should be encouraged rather than stifled… [However, this] Lexicon appropriates too much of Rowling’s creative work for its purposes as a reference guide.”
September 9th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
A copy of the Harry Potter ruling is online, hosted by the News York Times online. Click here (PDF format). Here is a quote of interest from the document:
March 20th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
The nature of Rowling’s allegations of plagiarism invokes the disgusting scenario or a bunch of people gutting intentionally and with premeditated greed and malice the work of another. Unthinkable I know by way beyond the paramaters of what is here presumed to be the cosy nature of plagiarism in general.