Harry Potter and Web Copyright

Issues of intellectual property is central to a recent court case involving J. K. Rowling, author of the “Harry Potter” series. Rowling is suing Steven Vander Ark, one of her biggest fans, the creator of a fan website with a lexicon of Harry Potter terminology, and, most recently, the author of The Harry Potter Lexicon in published book form. It is the publication of the website material in a for-profit book that is the cause of the lawsuit.

Much of the material in the book was identical to the web copy, and yet Rowling had no problem allowing him to publish it online. She even gave the website an award. The real reason that she is suing is that Vander Ark’s lexicon would be in direct competition with the lexicon that she plans to release.

I find Rowling’s distinction between web and print publication disturbing. The implication of her case is that the web is a free-for-all where anything goes.

Plagiarism is plagiarism, no matter what form of publication it comes in or what level of profit it yields. It is convenient for Rowling to make these distinctions, but the same ideas may be harmful to others. What about a photographer whose clients pay for an image to use on their website? If other people infringe on the photographer’s copyright by publishing it on their own websites, even if it is not for profit, the value of the photograph may lessen in the eyes of the original clients.

Vander Ark was certainly wrong to plagiarize, but Rowling’s case is being argued in a way that could be harmful to other writers and artists. The internet is not some parallel universe, regulated by different laws. Let’s support our artists and writers by treating their intellectual property with respect, online as much as in print.