ooh rite here! im on! anypne else? cheesecakians come oout!!

str8_up_lee, you're a cheescakian too? Same here. :)

*sigh* Anyone else notice that JKR's been suing a LOT of people in the past couple of years? If she weren't so rich, you'd think she'd be doing it for the money.

I don't BELIEVE there are people here who think Jo is being stupid. RabidSphinx, if you hate Jo so much then why are you even here?! Jo has all the right to sue someone who she thinks unappropriate to publish an encylcopaedia! And, if you think about it, Jo actually (GASP!) has a point there. This is not a fan publication really. They are doing an encyclopaedia to the entire HP World, which is not a review about the books, or a compilation of fan letters, or theory discussion, e.g.What WIll Happen in HP 7, or anything. This information was fine on the Internet; because the Internet is FREE and to publish something like an encyclopaedia would mean the authors/publishers would EARN MONEY. Encyclopaedias are usually all 'facts' taken from sources, e.g. history...etc. So, Jo has all the right to sue them because the source is HER BOOKS. From HER WORLD. Which she CREATED. HERSELF. Good luck, Jo, and you definitely do not deserve to be run down by a bus.

Several posts have come across as rather snippy regarding Jo's proprietary feelings and rights about Harry Potter and the entire Wizarding World ... calling her a self-deitified "god" or having a "god-complex" ...Hey folks ... it is HER creation. She created this World that we have been blessed to enjoy for the past 10+ years. She has every right to HER masterpiece of creation. And she is honour bound to protect it! Small, trivial, supposed "fans" like SVA that have attempted to STEAL her creative property for their own personnal gain are an abomination! And for those that say it is not SVA but RDR books that are causing trouble .... Hello? Reality check here ... IF Steve had not started this and not fenced his stolen goods to RDR ... this would not be an issue. Jo has graciously allowed and yes even encouraged the creative endearvors by her true fans as long as they conformed to the well established copyright laws and have not been generated purely for personnal profit. I site as examples: MuggleNet, The Leaky Cauldron, Fanfiction, FanArt, and the many "analsis" books that litter the bookshelves. IMO...Not ing that Jo is a teacher, I am sure that she is very proud of the creative expressions that have been inspired by her work. As well as the increased interest that her creation has incited in reading world wide. My heart felt and eternal THANKS to Jo for sharing Harry and his world with us! And she deserves much better than this dreck!

LaurenB you said: >sigh* Anyone else notice that JKR's been suing a LOT of people in the past couple of years? If she weren't so rich, you'd think she'd be doing it for the money.,< That is truly a short-sighted comment! Do you think that money is the ONLY motivating factor in law suits? Obviously not in this case ... Why do you think she is having to do it? ... So she can take valuable time away from her family or penning her latest tome in a cafe. She is definitely NOT doing it for the fun! JKR is defending her creation from people that want to profit from her creation because they don't have any imagination of their own! She has deep respect and love for of Harry and the whole Wizarding World (HER creation) and has a vested interest in keeping the integrity of it. That is not being respected (legally or ethically) by others. They are (as in SVA's case) and have, tried to profit from another's work (JKRs) ... and THAT is not only ethically WRONG it is ILLEGAL! Haven't you ever cared enough about something that you created to defend it?

IrishCat, you forgot to mention that if Jo wins all the money she would gain go to charity(its somewhere in the legal documents forgot which). I agreee with you on all points. Jo's Haters Off the Site!

I think she is quite right to sue when they are trying to do the same thing she had plans for. Who says they didn't copy her idea? And that person with the really long post who apparently despises Jo, it's painfully clear you're not on the right website for you.

to RabidShpinx- "She is a terrible person, hiding behind a publicist created facade of charming English once-single mother". OK, have you met JKR urself? because if you ever do, let us know if you find out that she really is not charming, not English, and not a once-single mother. how exactly would you know all this? i think it's pretty clear that you've never met her. (i haven't, but if i never meet her, i'll just assume that she's not a bad person based on what i know about her). AND since nobody has actually READ this book, we don't know if they've written something that shouldn't go in there or not. i think most people on here like the harry potter books... just because you don't is no reason to go attacking her. JKR has her reasons for suing, and so does RDR. lets let them work it out in court instead of trying to say that we all know what we're talking about, because i dont think any of us have all of the facts except for the judges and laywers.

@ tiassa, wether or not KJR donated her earning to charity, the pope or a foundation that want to toetag the Outer Hebrides to the tropics is not a legal topic in this trial at all, the topic is if she is violating the rules of copyright. @ others, One other thing, loving the books of an author does not automaticly imply that one has to love the author in person too. There are enough exemples in literature that brillant books are written by complete jerks of writers. I don't know if JKR is one of the jerkier class of people, never met her in the flesh, but I do know that I starting to dislike her actions more and more. I don't like it one bit that right now she is speaking about her depression after the failed Portuguese marriage, so close to the trial it brings out a lot of tears and sympathy.... for something that is really old news. Unless it is not old news and she is actually referring to a depression right now. She has produced a major literiary child but has been in labour for it for 17 years, the post natal depression could be as grand.

if steve vander ark were truly a potter fan than he would respect jo's wishes and not try to publish the encyclopedia.... booooo steve vander ark!! We love you Jo and will NOT support or buy this imposter's encyclopedia!!

Gee, it's so very sweet that Steve's ickle friends from LJ have come all the way over to Mugglenet to defend him and smear JK. I've not seen you over at TLC since you were outed over there as an HPL sock puppet. *waves to Kamion* Your bile spewing is so much sophistry dear. It's so much easier to blame JK and others for this horrible turn of events rather than accepting that your friend is wholly responsible for this fandom fallout. The book is illegally fringing on Rowling's copyrighted materials. Hey, if the guys here at Mugglenet could quash their own proposed book when contacted by Rowling's reps, then most assuredly Steve could have done the same. Instead he refused to even man up and talk to Rowling's reps and plowed on full steam ahead and now finds himself lip deep in sheep dung. I especially like how he intended to use links via the Floo Network to make massive profits off of book orders and most especially the fact that he didn't even BOTHER to inform the other Floo Network webmasters about it. No. They had to learn of it via court filings in January 2008, 6 months AFTER he'd signed his book contract. Nice, huh? No, really it's not. It's shameful and pathetic and so very like BNF SVA. But hey, I guess you heard that the Floo Network has been dissolved now. TLC has had enough of Steve's BS to last them a lifetime. So have I. frankly.

starlette804.....with fans like you JKR realy don't need enemies anymore. and dresden-fan yip you haven't seen me at the Leaky Cauldron anymore since I posted a reference to the article about copyright by Harry Wu... outing as not being crawling JKR sycophant and trying to keep my head clean was obvious a deadly sin in the "objective' eyes of TLC. hence tte consequences of being blocked. I cannot remember what I said that pissed off Melissa but it must have been something. And yess I know Steve from personal contact and know he was a JKR fan probably already before most of the contributers here were even born. I also know he does not need sock puppets on fansite, he is a far better writer then I am. But I guess you "number one " JKR fans nou never consult a fact or check out a timeline or what ever entry at the Lexicon site anymore because it's conterminated area

@ Kamion: Sorry, check your dictionary again. Sycophant is the term most applicable to yourself with your continued villification of Rowling & a jaw-droppingly lack of comprehension of copyright law, all to show your continued brown-nosing support of your friend, BNF Vander Ark. If Steve feels like he needs defending, he can just come on over and do it for himself, can't he, instead of his ickle puppet? Melissa doesn't block unless you cross the line and it must be really profane. So just what did you do? I do remember your ridiculous comment about how Steve didn't infringe and then backed it up by posting someone else's copyrighted work, in its entirety, to prove your point. Silly, that, and just goes to prove you don't understand copyrights. I've certainly had my posts deleted over there yet I'm still posting up a storm. So ickle Steviekins was a fan before I and others were born? O Rly? *yawns at that absurdity* Listen, sock, I owned the Philosopher's Stone BEFORE it was printed in the US under the title of Sorcerer's Stone as well as owning the Chamber of Secrets before it too was published in the US. Did little American Steve? No...didn't think so. 'That's right, I owned two HP books before they were even published in the US, before there was an ickle gleam of greed in Steviekins eyes. Nuff said. As for Wu, he gave his very skewed opinion, his platform is all for tolerant infringement...he gave that skewed opinion on January 10th, so he didn't even know what the heck he was mumbleing on about as he'd not had the opportunity to READ the court documents and see for himself how wrong he was. The article he wrote is total hackish bunk. I'm so excited that the trial is finally upon us and can't wait for the courts to uphold the law and Rowling's copyrights.

I think that those who support JKR in this matter should refrain from going to the Lexicon until either this whole matter is dropped because Steve decides to not go ahead and publish the book or this whole ordeal is fully settled. That way we can discourage and protest such behavior in a peaceful manner. There are other places we could look facts about Harry Potter they might not be as convent but they aren

EDIT: (Sorry, I realized part of my post was missing from when I cut and pasted it from my word program to spell check it and there were errors as well.) I think that those who support JKR in this matter should refrain from going to the Lexicon until either this whole matter is dropped because Steve decides to not go ahead and publish the book or this whole ordeal is fully settled. That way we can discourage and protest such behavior in a peaceful manner. There are other places we could look up facts about Harry Potter they might not be as convenient but they aren

Sorry about one more post this is continuing the last one it keeps cutting off the last few words for some reason. :

@ dresden_fan, JKR must be so pleased to have an ardent fan like you, but me it reminds me of two things from the world literature: 1) All are equal, but some are more equal then others ( Animal Farm, Orwell) 2) I am you're number one fan (Misery, Stephen King) There are just two sides of vieuw and thruth when two parties go to court, but when only one voicing is allowed it starts to look like Annie Wilkes is playing Napoleon on the animal farm.

Kamion: Vieuw and thruth? Well, gee, I assume you mean 'view and truth' here. There is truth and then there is Steve's lies. Listen, sock, I've never met Rowling, never gotten an autograph, never talked with her attorneys, and certainly never been to any event that she's attended. I have met Steve though and he's a pedantic stuffed shirt BNF with a huge case of fan entitlement and jealous of the success of others. "I'm a 49 year old man, not a teenager with a website."..."Other sites have made enormous amounts of money, look at 'Emerson' and 'Melissa'"...of course he fails to comprehend or acknowledge that they made their money legatimately and NOT by selling Rowling's copyrighted contents off of their sites. *rolleyes* As for the case, I do know the law. Have you even bothered to inform yourself of it? I support JK because of the law. Why do you blindly support Steve? You've said it yourself, because he's your personal friend, whom you've met and liked and continue to be on good terms with. Who's the sycophant here? The fawning, parasitic toady? Not I. You just keep villifying Rowling, WB, TLC, Melissa, myself and other Rowling supporters for Steve's mistakes while decrying what a stand-up guy SVA is and how we're being unfair, mean, and picking on him AND you do this all without identifying yourself as Steve's friend...Yeh, you're a sockpuppet, all right. You want to toss about literature? How about I include a few quotes that aptly represent Steve and all of his 'socks', shall I?........"He walks like an idiot, he talks like an idiot, but don't let that fool you, he IS an idiot!" Groucho Marx. "Only two things are infinite: the Universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein. "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt." Mark Twain.

The difference between the Lexicon and other "Unofficial" guides is that the Lexicon has been offered as a free service since its publication. It seems wrong-minded of its creator and owner to suddenly decide to try capitolizing on it. It makes him considerably different from those people who enjoy Rowling's kindness toward the creativity of fans who DON'T try to make money off of her product.

dresden_fan ,,,, thanks for calling me a sock. now when one goes missing in the laundery I just have to look in the mirror to find it back....... and thank you for such mature arguments. They really show the concentrated wisdom of the combined fandom.

@ Kamion: Sockpuppet is a legitimate term and the appellation is entirely appropriate in regards to someone {you} who defends one side of an argument while hiding the fact that they're a personal friend of the one being defending {SVA}. I know that my posts were quite mature and intelligent and that they will continue to be so. I'm more than happy to bring another perspective other than villifying Rowling or other fans simply because they disagree with Steve's illegally infringing Rowling's copyright materials.