The first storyline patent has been applied for.

[wonky]

@Pochacco

There’s plenty of room for Harry Potter to exist side-by-side with other books about teenage wizards like Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell

[hijack]I can’t remember any teenage wizards in the book. [/hijack]
As for using the names and characters, that’s what fan-fic does. And those who advocate prosecuting fan-fic are doing a disservice to the fans and the author.

[The_Hamster_King]

@jsgoddess

[hijack]I can’t remember any teenage wizards in the book. [/hijack]

Whoops. My bad. I haven’t actually read it and I was under the mistaken impression that it was another of the many Harry Potter look-alikes. Sorry about that.

My main point still stands though: There’s no legal barrier preventing an author from writing stories about teenaged wizards.

As for using the names and characters, that’s what fan-fic does. And those who advocate prosecuting fan-fic are doing a disservice to the fans and the author.

I agree that fan-fic usually shouldn’t be prosecuted. As long as the derivative work remains non-commercial it’s unlikely to seriously impact the capacity of the original author to realize his creative vision. And a healthy, thriving fan-base can do a great job of evangelizing a property.

[wonky]

@Pochacco

Whoops. My bad. I haven’t actually read it and I was under the mistaken impression that it was another of the many Harry Potter look-alikes. Sorry about that.

The only thing to apologize for is the way you scared the hell out of me. I thought I was losing my mind.

Okay, I am losing my mind, but I thought I was losing it faster than previously supposed.

[Ms2001]

@Pochacco

Without this sort of protection it would be virtually impossible for authors to create extended multi-volume works. J. K. Rowling clearly has an epic story that she wants to tell involving Harry Potter, but without copyright protection for the character there would be nothing preventing other people from creating dozens of alternate versions of the Harry Potter storyline that would totally swamp Rowling’s intentions for the character: “Harry Potter’s Hawaiian Vacation”, “Harry Potter’s Battle with the Moonmen”, “Harry Potter’s Bachelor Party”.

So what? The existence of those books wouldn’t change the content of Rowling’s official books or prevent her from writing more, just like the existence of fan fiction stories on the internet doesn’t change the content of the movies and TV shows they’re based on. If J. K. Rowling’s ability to sell books is seriously threatened by “Harry Potter’s Hawaiian Vacation”–if her readers would rather buy a novelty book that doesn’t fit into the storyline and was written by some nobody than the next installment from Rowling herself–then I can only conclude the story she has in mind isn’t all that interesting.

I think it’s definitely in the public interest to give authors the opportunity to explore the characters and worlds they create over the course of multiple books or movies.

I agree… for all authors. If the person who first came up with a character or world doesn’t want to explore certain parts of it, why not let others do it instead?

[Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow]

Could we please get our terms right here? Characters are not copyrighted. They are trademarked. And while both copyright and trademarks are subsets of intellectual property protection, they are not the same thing.

[Ms2001]

@Dewey Cheatem Undhow

Could we please get our terms right here? Characters are not copyrighted. They are trademarked. And while both copyright and trademarks are subsets of intellectual property protection, they are not the same thing.

Well, character names and likenesses can be trademarked… but the suit against The Wind Done Gone was based on copyright, not trademark. They claimed it was a derivative work of GWTW because it contained the same characters, settings, etc.