JK Rowling faces (another) Plagiarism suit

[DaemonSeid]

Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling is again facing plagiarism charges. Her name has now been added as a defendant in a lawsuit against her publishers. The suit, being brought in a London court by the estate of the English children's author Adrian Jacobs, alleges that she lifted concepts – wizard contests, wizard prisons, wizard hospitals, and wizard colleges – from his 1987 book "The Adventures of Willy the Wizard: No. 1 Livid Land" and used them in writing "Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire."
The lawsuit was originally brought against Rowling's publisher, Bloomsbury Publishing, and her agent, Christopher Little (who was also Jacobs's agent). The Jacobs estate apparently had thought it was too late to sue Rowling, as "Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire" was published in 2000. But now, they say, they have discovered "legal cause of action against [Rowling] within the last six years."

The Jacobs estate is calling the lawsuit "a billion-dollar case."

It's not the first time that Rowling, estimated to be the world's wealthiest author, has had to defend herself against charges of plagiarism. One prominent case involved a 2002 suit brought by American author Nancy Stouffer who claimed that her character "Larry Potter" bore a striking resemblance to Rowling's "Harry Potter." Stouffer lost her case and an appeal three years later.


link

Gotta love how people wait until AFTER the money is made to come up with this.

[christiangirl]

HPatGoF was published a decade ago. He's just suing now?

ETA: Okay never mind, I just read that properly. But really, that's ridiculous. So only one person can have those ideas? Unless both books had an "Azkaban" and a "St. Mungo's," he's not going to get very far.

[ASUADPi]

I think these are people just jealous that their works weren't as successful as the HP series and want justification for their crap, so they insist on sueing, to make themselves feel better.

[DDDlady]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

The suit, being brought in a London court by the estate of the English children's author Adrian Jacobs, alleges that she lifted concepts – wizard contests, wizard prisons, wizard hospitals, and wizard colleges – from his 1987 book "The Adventures of Willy the Wizard: No. 1 Livid Land" and used them in writing "Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire."

Because the idea of wizards having schools, contests, and a hospital like regular people is a novel concept? This just sounds like a group of heirs looking to add to their inheritance a bit.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DDDlady

Because the idea of wizards having schools, contests, and a hospital like regular people is a novel concept?

If it's so unoriginal, surely you can name others (than the litigants here), right?

[psusue]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

If it's so unoriginal, surely you can name others (than the litigants here), right?

I don't think that she's saying here that there are x number of books which have the exact same concepts of wizard schools, contests, and hospitals. What I think she's saying here is that wizards = humans. Humans go to schools, hold contests, and require hospitals. They are simply human concepts that are also found in the "wizarding world". Most sci-fi novels are this way. That's all I think that she was saying.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by psusue

I don't think that she's saying here that there are x number of books which have the exact same concepts of wizard schools, contests, and hospitals. What I think she's saying here is that wizards = humans. Humans go to schools, hold contests, and require hospitals. They are simply human concepts that are also found in the "wizarding world". Most sci-fi novels are this way. That's all I think that she was saying.

And, again - if that idea was so self-evident, and had the potential to become a multi-billion-dollar industry as it obviously did (so there's proof of success), then surely you would expect it to be available in the wild, even in less-successful form, right?

Obvious in hindsight does not equal obvious in practice.

[Little32]

I have seen quite a few school-centric, fantasy novels published for adolescents, since HP. Growing up, I don't remember reading so many of those. I think Rowling actually heavily shaped the genre in that way.

To the accusations: one or two similarities, maybe. However, I think it is the amalgamation of all of those things together that would suggest plagiarism. Also, if there is a game like Quidditch in Willy the Wizard, Rowling has some explaining to do.

HP always seemed to lean a little heavily on LOTR to me, but that would be more of a "conventions of the genre" set of circumstances.

It would be great if this were all just a ploy to get HP readers to buy WW to "see for themselves" if there was plagiarism. That would be a gold mine.

[rhoyaltempest]

True or not, the "Larry Potter" character in the other book is quite the coincidence even just the name.

[Low C Sharp]

If it's so unoriginal, surely you can name others (than the litigants here), right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Worst_Witch

I read this series back in the 80s. A boarding school for witches, surrounding a heroine and her two close friends, a snotty aristocratic enemy from a prominent magical family, Potions class, etc.

If I'd written the series, I probably would have at least tried suing JK for giggles...but I suppose she's already pretty rich. And I'm a pretty big HP fan.
________
CUSTOM BOWL

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

And, again - if that idea was so self-evident, and had the potential to become a multi-billion-dollar industry as it obviously did (so there's proof of success), then surely you would expect it to be available in the wild, even in less-successful form, right?

Obvious in hindsight does not equal obvious in practice.

Plus, even tiny tweaks to ideas can be novel ideas on their own, and can make all the difference when it comes to marketability, etc.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

If it's so unoriginal, surely you can name others (than the litigants here), right?

I think "originality" is something of a red herring here. There are precious few books (or movies), I think, that can claim to be truly "original." (Depending on whom you read, there are only between 7 and 20 basic plots out there.)

Rowling was drawing on some specific genres -- fantasy/quest, the coming-of-age novel (Bildungsroman) and its subgenre -- the British boarding school novel (a la Thomas Hardy and others) -- and others. It's no slam on her at all to note that she was not the first author to do so in fashioning stories about magical kids at school, nor is it plagerism to work within the conventions of a genre and even to be influenced by earlier authors. Nobody can lay claim to stuff like "it's set in a school."

What makes a work of fiction "original" is how the author takes those elements, conventions and influences and creates something that is more than just derivitive, that works in a fresh way. How the story is told matters as much if not more than what the story is.

[srmom]

I think "originality" is something of a red herring here. There are precious few books (or movies), I think, that can claim to be truly "original." (Depending on whom you read, there are only between 7 and 20 basic plots out there.)

Exactly.

If this case wins though - I would encourage the heirs of the writers of "Dark Shadows" (anybody remember that? Barnabas Collins and crew ) to sue the Twilight writer Stephanie Meyer. And while they're at it - Charlene Harris, the writer of the "True Blood" books (and HBO). Because, clearly they came up with the Vampires living among us concept first (oh wait, Bram Stoker's heirs might have first dibs).

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by srmom

If this case wins though - I would encourage the heirs of the writers of "Dark Shadows" (anybody remember that? Barnabas Collins and crew ) to sue the Twilight writer Stephanie Meyer.

So funny you mention that. We were playing Table Talk with the kids at supper a few nights ago. The card my son pulled described how The Guiding Light was the longest running TV show (heh) and why soap operas came to be called soap operas. The question for everyone to answer was: If you created a soap opera, what would it be about?

Son, thinking he was being oh-so-funny and original (see -- still on topic), said it would be about "vampires and other undead."

"Been done already," I laughed. Then I filled him in on Barnabas Collins and crew.

[PM_Mama00]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Worst_Witch

I read this series back in the 80s. A boarding school for witches, surrounding a heroine and her two close friends, a snotty aristocratic enemy from a prominent magical family, Potions class, etc.

If I'd written the series, I probably would have at least tried suing JK for giggles...but I suppose she's already pretty rich. And I'm a pretty big HP fan.

I remember that movie. I think Fairuza Balk was in it?

eta: yes she was! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092239/