AN INTERESTING CASE FOR COPYRIGHT
I am taking a keen interest in the Warner Bros./J.K. Rowling versus RDR Books case that is currently ongoing in the United States. Its principles appear very similar to what I have been talking about in recent weeks regarding how much of an original work can be used without it being considered a copyright infringement.
The case revolves around a Harry Potter encyclopedia which RDR Books published using J.K. Rowling's work. RDR's defense appears to be fair use.
What do you think? How much of an original work should be used before it is considered a copyright infringement? Do you think J.K. Rowling is right to take action?
2 comments:
There are several "potter" lexicons out on the market. At issue with this particular one was the amount of original content. What this guy has done through the years is post stuff verbatim from the potter world on his website. As the website was a fansite, and was not charging for access, there was no problem, but when he took the information he had collected, plopped it into a book and charged for it, then there was an issue.
It comes down to how much original thought and effort is put into the publication.
David. That's exactly my point about word-for-word copies of English original stories into Thai. A significant skill is required and that could easily legally mean a Thai translation of an English story is permitted under Thai copyright laws. That skill and effort adds something, even though nothing has been changed or added from the original English story. And that is a huge possible loophole in Thai copyright law.
Post a Comment