My own post was an experimental foray into the issues raised by the Rowling / Vander Ark fight, and I readily admit that my position is still evolving (helped along, I should add, by a parallel debate taking place in my Fan Culture class).

To refine my first comments: I think what’s intriguing about this dispute — leaving aside the transformative/derivative dialectic on which the conversation seems to be getting hung up — is that the HP Lexicon *is* in competition with Rowling’s works, just not in the way she’s claiming. Sure, money’s involved, and that raises the stakes. But more significantly for theorists of media evolution, the competition really boils down to two different presentations of a storyworld, one (Rowling’s) structured as a narrative, the other (Vander Ark’s) structured as, well, a Lexicon — or, to ape Lacan, a language.

We can debate whether or not the activity of paraphrase, summary, selection, and reordering can ever amount to truly transformative labor, with value added thereby. (As one complicating example, I’d draw attention to The Phantom Edit and other fan edits of Lucas’s prequel trilogy, which did nothing but excise material, but arguably resulted in new and original interpretations of the Star Wars texts.)

But if we adhere to the logic of the transmedia argument, all texts and artifacts are equally valid in their function as entry points to a fictional world that is larger than any one text can possibly contain. The Lexicon “gives us” Harry Potter’s world, just as Rowling’s books do. That they do so in different ways, with different effects, and different levels and types of “profit” seems more a matter of aesthetics (and now litigation) than some absolute (and in Derridian terms, metaphysical) distinction between a genuinely authored artwork and an unimaginative catalog.

I’d rather read Rowling’s books than browse through the Lexicon — if I had to choose. But I don’t, and the fact that the two texts complement and deepen each other suggests to me that each should be considered creative labor, providing something the other doesn’t. And is it so hard to imagine some future gamer or roleplayer or, I don’t know, someone who just hates reading stories, for whom the Lexicon will be a more entertaining and informative means of access to the HP universe than Rowling’s books? I never read all the way through the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but the movies, videogames, and Wiki entries have served quite well in conveying me to Middle Earth!

I think the rules of fiction are changing, and this case is a bellwether.

Some shows simply cannot afford to hire “Fact checkers” or simply don’t have the time: fans are essentially doing a FREE service for the staff when they do this. Granted, Rowling’s works are essentially finished, but say for Star Trek, Battlestar, Lost, HeroesWiki, etc….they frequently serve as living updated guides to the TV shows, pointing out things even the writers might not know. This goes back to the “Lurker’s Guide to Babylon 5″ and how it influenced JMS in the show. Of course, the HP Lexicon is trying to make a FOR PROFIT book, without consent. I think the most fans can do is ASK to be able to print something: i.e. with Lord of the Rings, TheOneRing.net created many articles analyzing Middle-earth, then when the trilogy ended, printed them as a book called “The People’s Guide to Middle-earth”. This is as you say “Transformative” and not simply regurgitating material. I utterly disagree with the Lexicon’s attempt to make a book FOR PROFIT WITHOUT the consent of the author (it’s okay to write a book for profit *if you get the consent of the author*, as is the case with many “guide to Star Trek” books, etc.)

So basically…fans are doing a FREE SERVICE for these guys. If they wanted to make THEIR OWN encyclopedia…here’s an idea: the fans are doing it for free and would be happy to help; ask the fans to DONATE theirs, then just edit it to bring it up to your own higher standards. The fans would be happy to just help.

But the thing a lot of people don’t seem to realize is: it is better to work WITH these people instead of against them: getting into a legal battle with Rowling herself doesn’t help at all.

J.K. Rowling’s lawsuit is very founded, given that Vander Ark is trying to profit from her property and her creation without permission. She did create the universe Vander Ark and his people have been documenting, after all. It’s hers. It’s legally Warner Brothers as well.

Initially, the Lexicon was merely free for all to use, since it’s all online. Like most, Rowling didn’t have a problem with that. And I think it’s wonderful that she used it herself when she found herself needing to refresh her memory.

And that’s because it’s *free*. No one was making money off of it, or trying to make money from it at the time.

However, once you start making money off something, particularly off of trademarks that are not owned by you, then expect to be in a world of hurt. That’s the way it has always been.

People like Mike have been attempting to make Rowling out as if she were the bad guy. That’s not the case. She’s merely protecting her work, her creation, and she damned well should. She created that universe, not the fans.

As for the Lexicon itself, it doesn’t seek to analyze the work at all, and is merely just a compilation of facts and figures. There’s some minor analysis here and there, from what I’ve read. (I’m not a fan of Rowlings or her books; I personally thing both are overrated, and needlessly verbose.)

Now chronicling a series you love is not a bad thing, since fans have been doing this in fan clubs, fanzines, and, now, the Internet. Hell I and others do it via Battlestar Wiki, but would I try to make money by selling a rehash of copyrighted material I don’t own?

No.

That’s called “derivative work”. And it is not covered under fair use law.

Now if the book were “Analysis of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter Saga” focusing more on analysis than the encyclopedic rehashing of Rowling’s saga, then I would also join the minor cacophony and say “frak Rowling”. Since critical analysis is covered under the fair use provisions of copyright law.

But that’s not the case here, so Rowling is right. And it is an ethical and legal imperative that she fights against those who wish to profit from her universe without her both her permission and her blessing.

Incidentally, the company that wants to publish the Lexicon is based right here in Muskegon.

Intellectual property is theft!