Potter encyclopedia battle begins in US court

The battle over the publication of a Harry Potter encyclopaedia will be heard in a New York court today.

The 'Harry Potter Lexicon', based on the internet fan site of the same name, has been delayed until a judge rules on whether the reference book is a violation of author JK Rowling’s intellectual property rights, or the copyright on her novels held by Warner Bros.

Judge Robert Patterson will hold the trial at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan courthouse in the Southern District of New York.

The book, by Steve Vander Ark, was originally set to be published by RDR Books on November 28 last year but the judge issued an order at an earlier hearing banning completion, distribution, marketing or advance sales of the book until further notice.

If the publisher wins, Rowling said she will “find it devastating to contemplate the possibility of such a severe alteration of author-fan relations”.

In documents filed with the court, Rowling said: “If RDR’s position is accepted, it will undoubtedly have a significant, negative impact on the freedoms enjoyed by genuine fans on the internet.

“Authors everywhere will be forced to protect their creations much more rigorously, which could mean denying well-meaning fans permission to pursue legitimate creative activities.”

She went on: “I am deeply troubled by the portrayal of my efforts to protect and preserve the copyrights I have been granted in the Harry Potter books.”

Rowling’s lawsuit, filed on October 31, sought an injunction blocking publication of Mr Vander Ark’s book on the grounds that it was likely to borrow too heavily from her work, and interfere with her plans to eventually publish her own version of an encyclopaedia on the boy wizard’s world.

Rowling has said she takes “no pleasure” in preventing the Lexicon’s publication and added that she feels “sad and disillusioned” that the case has ended up before the courts.

But she said she cannot “approve of ’companion books’ or ’encyclopaedias’ that seek to pre-empt my definitive Potter reference book for their authors’ own personal gain.

“The losers in such a situation would be the charities that I hope, eventually, to benefit.”

The Lexicon’s publisher, Roger Rapoport, described the case as a “David and Goliath battle with an eye toward protecting the rights of readers and writers everywhere”.

Rowling “appears to claim a monopoly on the right to publish literary reference guides, and other non-academic research, relating to her own fiction”, Mr Rapoport said.

He went on: “This is a right no court has ever recognised. It has little to recommend it.

“If accepted, it would dramatically extend the reach of copyright protection, and eliminate an entire genre of literary supplements: third party reference guides to fiction, which for centuries have helped readers to better access, understand and enjoy literary works.

“By extension, it would threaten not just reference guides, but encyclopaedias, glossaries, indexes, and other tools that provide useful information about copyrighted works.

“Ms Rowling’s intellectual property rights simply do not extend so far and, even if they did, she has not shown that the publication of this reference guide poses a sufficient threat of irreparable harm to justify an injunction.”