What are we to make of JK Rowling’s impassioned plea on behalf of authors’ copyright?
The creator of the Harry Potter books objects to the publication of “The Harry Potter Lexicon”, an encyclopaedia of wizardry compiled by Steven Vander Ark. Vander Ark, 50, is a devoted Harry Potter fan and has produced the encyclopaedia from a website, which he has operated for several years. The website goes by the same name as his putative book, but Rowling is asking a New York court to impose an injunction preventing its publication.
Vander Ark shed a tear or two in the witness box when asked about his commitment to “the Harry Potter fan club community”, but his emotional disquiet cut no ice with Rowling. Yesterday, as the Telegraph reports, she became rather emotional herself, calling for the court to restrain publication of the lexicon so as not merely to protect her own copyright, but that of authors the world over.
“I believe the flood gates will open,” she is reported to have said, adding, in a rising voice: “Are we the owners of our own work?”
Blade knows one or two writers, and a straw poll of their thoughts suggests that the literati’s sympathy lies with Rowling. But one scribe is worryingly weary.
“It’s OK for Rowling,” she says. “She’s probably a billionaire by now and can afford to hire lawyers to look after her interests. For the average writer, even if their copyright has been infringed going to law is too expensive. And in a few years time, will the Web 2.0 world make policing copyright easier, or harder? It’s going to be a lot harder.”
Is she right? Here are three literary luminaries with their thoughts on a related issue – Google’s quest to digitise every book in the world:
Tracy Chevalier, author of A Girl with A Pearl Earring, says “I’m one of the few writers who would buy a well designed electronic reader. But accessing digitised books online is a very cold way of reading. People also believe that information on the internet should be free, which cheapens our view of knowledge and erodes the value of books.”
Mark Le Fanu, General Secretary of the Society of Authors, perhaps has Dr Johnson’s famous assertion that ‘No man ever wrote, but for money’ in mind when he opines that “Most authors are fretful but excited about the digitising of books. On one level they are worried their texts will be so accessible they will be devalued and their copyright won’t be properly protected. On the other, they like the idea of their books being made more readily available, so long as there is a payment mechanism that rewards them fairly.”But Clare Alexander, president of the Association of Authors’ Agents, says: “Key issues include the royalties authors should be paid and the retrieval of rights once a book is no longer published. We don’t want a world where, just by having a book on a website, a major publishing house can hang onto an enormous cupboard of rights.”
You pays your money and you takes your choice. The verdict in the Rowling case is due in a few weeks. As seems to be the case with her decolletage whenever it is subject to the media glare, it could go either way.
- Written by admin
- Filed under Legal Business
- Leave a comment
