I was pretty surprised by this result. I've been reading coverage all day, and while I will say that this opinion is a little disappointing, it's not as bad as it may have been. For one thing, the judge explicitly defends the genre, saying that this example just happens to be infringement. Also, looking at the bright side, Anthony Falzone (of the Fair Use Project, and one of the lawyers for RDR) said, "We have a decision that's a very useful guide to show people what they can do in the future as far as creating companion guides." So at least there's that.
Also, it took me a while to find the (68 page) ruling, so if you're interested, it can be found on this page: http://www.likelihoodofconfusion.com/?p=1641 /parker On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Rob Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://www.theage.com.au/world/jk-rowling-wins-battle-to-block-fans-lexicon-20080909-4cet.html > > "The magic still works for author J.K. Rowling, who has won her US > court battle to block publication of an unauthorised Harry Potter > encyclopedia." > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
