It's been a couple weeks since we've updated you on the JK Rowling VS RDR court trial. The trial itself occurred from April 14th - 16th, and at this point we are just waiting for the judge's final decision on the copyright infringement claims by JKR/WB.

The Chicago Tribune recently spoke to RDR owner Roger Rapoport, who sheds some new light on their decision to turn the HP Lexicon into a book:

The publisher did not know of Vander Ark's Lexicon Web site until he saw a newspaper profile of the Webmaster last July. A month later, Vander Ark agreed to put together a print version with the help of three of the site's other editors. The plan was to print 10,000 copies.

"I couldn't understand why this book hadn't been published yet," he said. After all, Rowling herself had endorsed the Web site in 2004, giving it an award as "a great site" which, while writing, she occasionally used to check facts from her earlier books. Little did Rapoport envision that, at the trial, Rowling would dismiss the manuscript of the printed Lexicon as "sloppy."

For the full interview, click here! Thanks to Jonathan for the tip!

Complete transcripts from the JK Rowling/Warner Bros. court case against RDR Books/HP Lexicon are now available. Click here for day one (April 14th), here for day two (April 15th), and here for day three (April 16th).

Thanks to Stanford Law School.

On this week’s episode of our Harry Potter podcast we take an in-depth look at the ongoing trial involving J.K. Rowling and RDR Books. Join Eric, Laura, Micah, Elysa and I as we have one of the more serious discussions in our three years of podcasting (but don't worry, we still have fun).

- The trial was very emotional for both Jo and Steve but did it have to get to this point?
- We review testimony given and comments made by both sides and offer our thoughts.
- Breaking down the "fair use" doctrine, we try and get inside the head of Judge Patterson.
- Which of the four categories of fair use would go in Jo or Steve's favor?
- The negative impact this could have on the Harry Potter fandom and the "floodgates" that could open.
- Elysa brings up a few previous court cases that have dealt with the "fair use" doctrine and the precedents set seem to favor J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. (Harper and Roe Publishers vs. Nation Enterprises).
- Make the Music Connection provides some laughter after a very serious episode.

All that and much more discussion can be found on this week’s episode! To download, we recommend subscribing for free through either Apple iTunes (press Subscribe once you're there) or the ZUNE Marketplace. If you are already subscribed, just refresh your feed. You can also find full shownotes and alternate download links at the MuggleCast website.

The second half of today's proceedings ended with a strong closing statement, according to the latest entry from The Wall Street Journal. JK Rowling also took the stand one final time, and it's clearer than ever that Judge Patterson believes each side has a strong case:

Maybe I Need a Reference Guide for This Case: That was Judge Patterson’s commentary at the close of testimony. Again, he urged the parties to consider settlement, reminding them that fair use is a “murky area” of law. Hammer then requested the opportunity to make a closing statement, which was a good call because his co-counsel, Anthony Falzone, delivered a strong one.

The lawyers of JK Rowling and Warner Brothers have sent MuggleNet a statement by the Potter author, commenting on where the case stands:

“The book at the heart of this case has overstepped a boundary so unreasonably that I have been forced, regretfully, to take legal action. Authors have a right to protect their works from misuse. Do I have fewer rights because many people read my books? If this book is published, it will open the floodgates for anyone to lift an author’s work and present it as their own. But if it is not published, that will be a boon not only to all who create original works, but to all who enjoy those works.”

The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog spoke earlier today with Ethan Horwitz, an IP lawyer from King & Spalding on the ongoing Lexicon case. Horwitz tries to further explain the ambiguous concept of "fair use," offering his overall opinion:

"It’s really pretty remarkable, in my opinion. The fair-use test has four factors and each side can find precedent to support it. The case law is really all over the map. And on the facts, too, I think it’s a really close case. It really smacks down right in the middle."

Additionally, he explains the strengths and weaknesses on both sides, but ultimately concludes that this case is "too close to call."

Day 3 of the JK Rowling/Warner Brothers VS RDR Books trial commenced today, and continues to spiral into one big mess of ordeals. Highlights from today, before lunch break:

- Lawyers for JKR/WB and RDR told the judge this morning that they reached a settlement on the false advertising and deceptive trade practices claims. You may remember yesterday that the judge suggested a settlement instead of a lawsuit. A representative for RDR also told the court that they hope to settle on the trademark infringement and unfair competition claims. Once that is out of the way, this just leaves the big copyright infringement claims left.

- Janet Sorensen, a professor of 18th and early 19th century English literature at U.C. Berkeley, was called to the stand today by RDR where she spoke of other fantasy works that also have companion guides to help the reader understand the content of the story.

- Judge Patterson was quoted as saying, "I think this case, with imagination, could be settled....But don't throw anything out because of my desire to move ahead." He suspects the case will be appealed, and that it could go all the way to the Supreme Court, taking years to resolve.

Read much more at The Wall Street Journal and MSNBC. We'll continue to keep you updated!

The following statement was recently released by a spokesperson on behalf of J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. Entertainment after the conclusion of yesterday's court proceedings:

"A fan's affectionate enthusiasm should not obscure acts of plagiarism. The publishers knew what they were doing. The problem remains that the Lexicon takes an enormous amount of Ms. Rowling's work and adds virtually no original commentary of its own. As we've said in court, it takes too much and adds too little. Authors have a duty to prevent the exploitation of their works by people who contribute nothing original, creative or interpretive."

Towards the end of today's cross examination, Judge Robert Patterson stopped the testimony to question the trial as a whole. From the Wall Street Journal:

Judge Patterson removed his glasses and addressed the court. “I’m concerned that this case is more lawyer-driven than it is client-driven,” he lamented. “The fair use people are on one side, and a large company is on the other side. . . . The parties ought to see if there’s not a way to work this out, because there are strong issues in this case and it could come out one way or the other. The fair use doctrine is not clear.”

The Fair Use Doctrine is a United States Law, defined accurately by Wikipedia as allowing "limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review."

You can read more of what happened at today's trial concerning Lexicon author Steve Van Der Ark here. The trial has ended for the day and will continue into tomorrow and Thursday.

The Wall Street Journal has updated their blog again, this time talking about developments that occurred in court this morning.

But the most telling part of Vander Ark’s testimony came at the end of Hammer’s direct examination. Asked whether he still considered himself a part of the Harry Potter fan community — those that, in Vander Ark’s words, devote most of their free time to all things Potter, he choked up, and said, “I did.” But then, when pressed on it, he changed his answer. “I do,” he said, breaking up.

USA today further reports Van Der Ark as saying, "It's been ... it's been," he stammered, choking on his words. "It's been difficult because there has been a lot of criticism, obviously, and that was never the intention. ... This has been an important part of my life for the last nine years or so."

As most of you know by now, JK Rowling and Warner Bros. are currently involved in a court case against RDR Books and the HP Lexicon regarding a print version of the online Lexicon. Some of Jo's main reasons for taking legal action against this book are that she feels it is in breach of copyright of the Harry Potter novels, is not worthwhile to the reader (in that it provides very little commentary, most of which is "derisory" and "facetious"), and that it could detrimentally affect sales of an all-inclusive encyclopedia which she has long expressed a desire to write and from which sales revenue would be donated to charity.

MuggleNet fully supports Jo Rowling in this case. This week will be, without a doubt, difficult and emotional for the author who has spent 17 years creating the series we all love so much. Because of this, we feel that with as much support as possible, this time can be made more bearable for her.

Please feel free to leave any messages of support in the comments, which we will link to from the main page until a verdict on this case is reached. Thank you.

"I really don't want to cry because I'm British. These books, they saved me, not just in the very obvious material sense, although they did do that...I would have to say that there was a time when they saved my sanity." JK Rowling, April 14th

JK Rowling yesterday read a statment outside the court regarding her case against RDR Books/HP Lexicon. A video of this can be seen at the BBC, and what she said in full is below:

"It gives me no pleasure to take legal action, but I am here today because I feel very strongly about an important issue that affects everyone and not just me. If books that plagiarize other works are permitted, authors, fans and readers stand to lose. There are lots of books in many languages that comment on or criticize Harry Potter and that’s fine. But the book in this case is different. It provides no analysis and virtually no commentary. It takes far too much and it offers precious little in return. I would just like to add that I am extremely grateful for the incredible support of Harry Potter fans everywhere."

Some photos of Jo outside court can be seen here.

UPDATE: WSJ has now updated with an overview of all of the developments that occurred today, and noted that tomorrow's defense testimony will be from a publishing expert. We'll continue to update everyone throughout the week with the latest from the courtroom, so stay tuned!

The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog has been updated with a lengthy report of everything that occurred this morning in court prior to lunch. Of particular interest to us was Jo's testimony, which is very heartfelt:

“I don’t want to cry, because I’m British,” said Rowling, breaking down a bit, “but the [Harry Potter books] meant setting aside my children.” If that was a show of weakness on Rowling’s part, to the Law Blog’s sensibilities, it was effective in making her seem sympathetic. It was also a counterpoint to testimony that was otherwise declarative and authoritative.

“This trial has decimated my creative work over the last month,” said Rowling. “You lose the [plot] threads and worry whether you’ll be able to pick them up again.”

“Should my fans be flooded with a surfeit of substandard books — so called lexicons — I’m not sure I’d have the will or heart to continue,” said Rowling, who went on to characterize the H.P. Lexicon as “sloppy,” “lazy,” and “incorrect.”

We'll continue to update you with more developments as they appear. For more, check out the two news posts (1 and 2) below this one.

Author J.K. Rowling testified earlier this morning in a Manhattan Federal courthouse that should The Harry Potter Lexicon be published, she feels "that carte blanche will be given to anybody who wants to make a quick bit of money."

Bloomberg News and BBC News have documented the following quotes from the testimony:

"The idea of my readership parting with their or their parents' hard-earned cash for this is a travesty."

"RDR's book constitutes a Harry Potter rip-off of the type I have spent years trying to prevent."

"If RDR's position is accepted, it will undoubtedly have a significant, negative impact on the freedoms enjoyed by genuine fans on the internet."

"He [Mr. Vander Ark] has simply taken it and copied it. It is sloppy, lazy and it takes my work wholesale."

We will keep you posted as the story develops.

UPDATE: The Guardian has a photo of JK Rowling arriving in court this morning. Also, Newsday has an article from the start of the trial.

UPDATE 2: The New York Times has a new article taking a look at the whole trial, including a quote from MuggleNet staff member Ben Schoen. They also have a picture of Jo entering court, which can be viewed here.

As we told you late last month, the court trial between JK Rowling and RDR Books over The Harry Potter Lexicon will begin Monday morning. The Associated Press has a new article about it and specifically talks about plans for Jo:

Rowling is scheduled to testify Monday in a trial that is sure to generate huge interest among Harry Potter fans and the public. Her lawyer has arranged with the judge to have a private security guard for Rowling in the courtroom and for the author to spend breaks in the seclusion of a jury room — away from any die-hard Potter fans in attendance.

We'll continue to provide updates on the case this week when available. Thanks to Remi for the tip!

We wish Jo the best of luck in court today.