Warner Says Harry Potter Dinner Infringes Copyright
Written by enigmax on October 26, 2009A woman who operates the so-called Underground Restaurant from her London home has had a surprise threat from a movie company. The host of the party, known as Ms Marmite Lover, had arranged a Halloween party with a Harry Potter theme, but Warner Bros. took exception and sent their lawyers to turn her evening into a newt.
“Since I started The Underground Restaurant in London nine months ago, pop-up or home restaurants have increased in popularity up and down the country,” wrote Ms Marmite Lover in a Guardian article in October. “My initial idea was simple: provide well-cooked food in intimate surroundings at a reasonable price, with an element of punk rebellion and a do it yourself attitude which sprung from my background in a political samba band and cooking at anti-G8 camps. I wanted to stick it to the Man.”
Now, it seems, the Man has stuck it to both her and her not-for-profit events.
Ms Lover had arranged a couple of Halloween meals to take place in her house (’somewhere’ in Kilburn, North London) for this coming Friday and Saturday, with a seemingly-appropriate Harry Potter theme.
Rather than just sit-down-and-eat, Ms Lover had some elaborate plans for diners. Following a journey down Diagon Alley, a password would be given to the Fat Lady to gain entrance. Then how about some lovely Butterbeer along with Dumbledore’s favorite sweets, lemon sherbets and mint humbugs, and a nice starter of pumpkin soup with Witches hat pumpkin pasties?
Or would the whole thing be more creative with the addition of Lord Voldemort lawyers from the movie industry?
In a letter addressed to Ms Marmite Lover (yes Warner, of course that’s her real name), the company’s European Legal and Business Affairs division explains that although the company is “delighted” that she is such a fan of the Harry Potter series, “unfortunately your proposed use of the Harry Potter Properties…without our consent would amount to an infringement of Warner’s rights.”
The lawyers then asked Ms Lover to confirm that the nights were now canceled, although noting that they had no problem if she held a “generic wizard” night.
“I’ve written back, saying that I’ve changed the title of the event to Generic Wizard night,” writes Ms Lover. “But I added that J.K. Rowling herself, having at one time been a struggling single parent, and having donated to the National Council of One Parent Families, would probably approve of a single mother being entrepreneurial and creative.”
Do Warner own the rights. Yes. Can they do this legally? Of course. Should they? Absolutely, as long as they don’t mind coming over as petty, trivial and small minded, with a penchant for stifling creativity.
Previously: EZTV Suffers Downtime Due to Server Troubles
Next: Top 10 Most Pirated Movies on BitTorrent
152 Responses
Surprised? No…
Wanker Bros more like it
they are truly pathetic, and the funny thing is all they are really doing is putting people off from their crappy films anyways
besides the idea of the copyright is so that other people don’t use your popularity to get money that you would otherwise have/deserve, can they possibly have lost profit from this small venture?
i think not…
The money went a long way. From our pocket to Waner Bros and ended up in the pockets of fricking lawyers.
Since when does WB has copyright on Potter? I thought they only have movie rights and JK Rowling has the copyright to Potter as such…
But it is stupid… Maybe next year they will sue Comic Con or something.. :D
Themed party in private house, rather than commercial premises = “fair use”. She didn’t want the hassle of defending it, I think.
Probably because it would openly publicise the address of her illegal “restaurant” operation (styled as guest-nights for strangers at £25pp).
Stupid lawyers, though. This would be akin to going along to children’s parties and forcing them to pay for a PRS licence for the music. The only thing they gain is bad publicity.
It’s the best advertisement this has ever gotten…
How did they find out she was having a harry potter night?? still though shit, come on how far can this seriously go, this is just petty!! Damn Warner Bros
serves them right for being harry potter nerds. that little turd… as conan o’brien would say ‘i point at thee! i point at thee!’
tools…
lol that probably makes our school’s yearly harry potter camp for the 5th years illegal too
Wonder how long it will take them to find us out…
about time that harry potter crap got some stick..
Seriously though, why is the entertainment industry set on alienating it’s client base with petty shite like this.
*Sigh*
Chasing people who create copies for profit, sure. People who keep large “For profit” event, o well. But sending lawyers to a minor not for profit night? Seriously.
Whats next? Suing the 1000’s of kids who have a harry potter themed birthday party? (I guess saying you have a HP themed party would be great if you really want a police theme – a real authentic SWAT team checking for copyright isn’t something everyone has!)
In all seriousness, what would they lose from allowing this event? I think they only prevented the creation of potential book buying fans, and created yet another PR disaster.
WARNER: We Already Rant, Never Ever Realistic.
Welp, off to ILLEGALLY download all the Harry Potter movies and seed for a few weeks. Thanks ‘Wanker Brothers’! I will NEVER EVER BUY or pay for anything YOU are behind.
Is this really true?
@2
Epic Fail bro
Just another reason…………
“Generic Wizard” theme? Now this should be exploited!
I’m scared…I’m wearing a Harry Potter underwear. Will they sue me ??
http://Pirlog.com
more asshole behavior from the bigwigs.this doesnot surprise me.soon you won’t be able to wspeak a movie title out loud as it will infringe on their damn rights.
boycott all new movies from these assholes.i am and i am serious.i have not bought a new hollywood film in at least 6 months.i will only buy them used so fuck off hollywood you wont be getting a dime out of me.
How cheap can you get? Just remember this when you plan your own private Halloween party. Don’t give them money by buying their plates,napkins,etc.
To bad Ms Marmite Lover couldn’t have just asked the author directly. Surely J.K. Rowling would be more open minded than those cold blooded executives and lawyers working for the movie industry.
Besides, isn’t there a loophole here? Couldn’t she claim that the party’s theme was based on the Harry Potter “books” and NOT the “movies”? All she would have to do is make sure nothing from the movie was present (e.g. the actors’ portraits, whatever was added specifically for the films, etc).
actually they have addressed the birthday issue. at least disney has. The local fred meyers here has a giant sign next to the bakery, DO NOT USE ANY DISNEY CHARACTERS ON THE CAKES. THEY ARE COPYRIGHTED, YOU ARE COMMITING COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. yes, no more snow white and the 7 dwarf cakes. Thanks SO much disney =D!
goshes, i cant wait to give my child a generic disneycharacter knockoff that isnt allowed to be itself because they didnt give disney an extra 2cents. =(!
I’ve recently changed my name to harry potter! I’m ok tho,They are not bright enough to look me up in the phone book.seriously tho,you would think they would see this as good publicity? But no,all they can see is money lost some-how?.Why do corporation’s try to put a price on everything on this earth. They are truly the scum of this earth.Yet another reason why we will NEVER conform. Oh & i wont be buying anything to do with w@nker bros for my young relation’s this xmas or anytime come to think of it.Yet another epic fail!
Definition Of Hollywood Lawyers:
“Dementors are among the foulest creatures that walk this earth. They infest the darkest, filthiest places, they glory in decay and despair, they drain peace, hope, and happiness out of the air around them… Get too near a Dementor and every good feeling, every happy memory will be sucked out of you. If it can, the Dementor will feed on you long enough to reduce you to something like itself…soul-less and evil. You will be left with nothing but the worst experiences of your life.”
@22
when will the copyrights of Disney’s stupid rats and ducks be abolished? Ain’t Disney has died about fifty years ago?
Oh whats that Warner? Cant hear you over all the media im downloading..
Let me know when its not morally right to download anymore.. until then.. we have a company to destroy.
This just goes to show – we should start consuming only free culture – the kind of culture that is not controlled by uptight, money grubbing old men.
If you do not like this reality – stop participating in corporate culture. That’s the only solution.
Warning torrentfreak, you’re using Harry Potter words in your article. Lawyers are coming.
Warning Torrentfreak, you’re using words that are in the dictionary, lawyers are coming.
FFS, now they wanna ruin Halloween? So dress your kids as Casper or whatever and you’re infriging on copyright?
This is getting way too far. It’s time to chop some heads.
I think my bullshit detector just exploded. This is fucking unreal.
@7:
I’m fairly certain that they have already done this. Sick f**ks.
I can understand then coming after us, but after a woman hosting a not-for-profit party? They must be getting desperate.
I’m having a Harry Potter party on Friday, everyone invited £25 entry (so I should make loads of money), the address is:
10 Downing Street,
London,
SW1A 2AA
I hope to see you on the night providing I don’t get any nasty letters.
Ta
@7, @29
You’re right, more or less…
http://torrentfreak.com/uk-copyright-cops-target-kids-schools-community-centers-081015/
http://torrentfreak.com/hollywood-enforcers-illegally-demand-money-from-kindergartens-081005/
ughhh when will these companys fall!
http://piratesagainstpedos.co.cc/
Was she charging an admission for the event? I don’t see anywhere where it says this was not-for-profit. If it was a commercial restaurant then they are well within their rights. She has no right to profit from their IP. But if this was a “party” where no charge was being levied to the guests then it is pretty stupid. Fair Use should cover all not for profit scenarios.
Heh, these companies really are disgusting.
The sooner these companies go into liquidadation the better.
If any person valued money over human life, they’d be slated for it. “The next Hitler” or whatever…
Why do these companies get away with this shit?
@14 – im with you dood!
I hate Harry Potter, but im queuing up the movies now in order to seed em ;)
So is this a copyright case or trademark?
I think it would be the later rather than copyright. Or is my understanding wrong?
If it’s for private use would they have a case?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Wrongful_or_groundless_threats_of_infringement
@1
if you’re in England
A just another example of the corporate greed culture and why, sooner or later all Corporation must go…. People must come first…. what’s good for the people is what must govern Corporate bad will…..
Geez, I wonder if people calling me a Harry-Potter lookalike also amounts to copyright infringement….totally not under my control.
In any case, I was born years earlier than the franchise came into existence….
So, what about all those parents who made their kids a home brew Harry Potter Halloween costume?
They gonna get sued too?
Even a theme is copyrighted. Next thing you know, profanities are copyrighted for use by only a few people.
Yer MM9 were watchin you.the minute you put on that wizard costume you bought from poundland were furkin avin you my sunshine.
@No-name
Yeah, dude that’s exactly what I was thinking , this is getting too far.
I’ll make new email harrypotter@whatever.com and see if they’re going to sue me.
This bullshit is just ridiculous.
#39 – So, what about all those parents who made their kids a home brew Harry Potter Halloween costume?
They gonna get sued too?”"
If you “buy” the constume its probably “ok” but if you make it at home(which allot of the time comes out better than any lame store-bought version)you’re a criminal..
A question was asked “Where will it stop?” and you really have to wonder, especially with holloween here on our doorstep Reproduction of any TV/Movie/Game character is breaking the law…
It’s ridiculous, asinine and starting to piss me off as it should piss off any/everybody…
What a bunch of pricks they are, who the fuck do they think they are telling people what they can do and what they cannot do, they should be fucking shot the lot of them.
Simple – just turn it into a parody of Harry Potter (if only for naming and advert purposes) and then claim Fair Use.
WB… What a Bunch of Morons…
Will this evil ever stop :(
What is this world becoming
Maybe someone should dress up in suits with MAFIAA badges for halloween. They seem to be the monsters of the modern age.
So where’s “Harry Potter and the Corporate-Totalitarian Menace” when we need it ?
I get tired of seeing these articles. Yes, it’s douchery for WB to do something like this. But do they have a *choice*? NO! The legal rules are such that if they don’t defend their copyrights from infringement then they set a precedent on the ways that they are allowed to be used and then potentially forfeit their right to sue when someone actually is blatantly infringing upon them.
C’mon guys, do you really think that they want to ruin this lady’s party just because they can? Of course not…it’s really bad PR. If you don’t like this story, blame it on the legal system.
What is this world coming to.
Things are becoming more pathetic by the minute.
This is certainly a wrongful threat and it is not supported by the current law. Either the story is false or it got something wrong or (which is more likely) the lawyers at Warner just misinterpreted the law.
Bullshit!
JK Rowling probably didn’t go around infringing on someone else’s copyrighted work to accomplish this. And if she feels that stongly about it – and took all that time to make the plans for her party – then why not attempt to contact JK Rowling in the first place for permission?
@enigmax -
How does this relate to Torrents?
heh, reminds me of an episode of the simpsons, where disney-lawyers are threatening skinner, just because he used the “happiest place in the world”-claim
@48
I completely disagree… Their actions on this matter are driven purely by greed, this lady’s party would have done absolutely no harm to anybodies copyrights, and it would have been a great memory/experience for true fans of HP (im not Btw, LoL, dont care for any HP at all, but that is NOT the issue here)
I have to laugh because something that has been going on for decades all of a sudden may be on “the table” Im talking about the numerous “Star Trek” conventions that take place..I have never attended one (and will never atttend one, LoL but I am a fan of Star Trek)but it seems to me that one of those events would be a “infringement smorgasbord” LMAO..
Back to my point – F-ing greedy bastards are the cause of WB’s actions…
Seems to me that many people are getting this entirely backwards. She’s wrong, and Warner is right.
Look, she’s running a business here. “The Underground Restaurant” may be at her home, but she’s still charging people. Heck, she was selling tickets to the dinners.
It’s one thing if they got on her for having a theme party. However, when you start a business enterprise and sell tickets and such and then rip off somebody else’s ideas to do it, then you’re in the wrong. It’s that simple.
Not to mention sending DMCA letters to innocent people claiming that they pirated their idiotic movie. Good god, fuck them!
The RIAA must be purged like the small minded, greedy little cunt they are. Stiffling creativity for a quick buck. I wonder who they think buys they’re merchandice and watch their movies…the fans thats who! And Punishing them for liking the movie enough to want to just have a party theme, not pirate the movie mind you, is just wrong and petty. I say, screw IP rights, it promotes greed and stiffles creativity. Down with the RIAA.
there is only one way to describe how pathetic this is.
*sad music from beavis and butthead episode bad dog plays*
also no more money for you wanker brothers. your going to learn to appreciate what you have.
I think that JKR has borrowed a great deal from pre-existing literature to create Harry Potter including some of the creatures, references, names of places, characters and objects.
That’s fine because nothing is really new, it is all grown from the creativity and efforts of the past.
If Ms Marmite was selling her tickets as if it were an official HP event and not inventing and creating food and a new experience from the books and films then perhaps fair enough to pursue her with Lawyers.
JKR has hit out at fan sites before with legal teams and got very upset that people sell or steal ‘her world’.
I think it a tad small of Warners and JKR given the financial status they both enjoy and short sighted.
@#55/Otto
Problem is where you draw the border line of Warner rights. Examples: I wouldn’t see any problem in Warner suing her if she copied HP movies on DVD and sold them. I would see a problem if Warner was suing her for xeroxing HP books and selling them, but in that same case if JKR (or her book publisher) sued her – I’d approve.
Warner has rights on movies they made. Not to the whole “HP concept” in any and every aspect. Example above: they have absolutely no rights over the books themselves.
In this particular case only possible suing party is author herself. Indirect concepts used in for-profit party in question are hers and hers alone. (Neither movies nor books were used or sold, hence no rights for Warner or book publishers). Problem here is that company with limited rights on the work is behaving as legal owner of anything and everything remotely HP related. They are not.
I haven’t seen any evidence that JKR wants to sue this women or have any problem with her …
55-
Don’t judge The Underground Restaurant before you’ve been there, she only sells tickets because otherwise there are no shows and she DOESN’T make any profit. She is charging people, but it’s to cover the costs, I mean do you know the price of dry ice and the Miraculin stuff she’s going to serve?
@52 billy bob
That’s what I was thinking. This isn’t related to net neutrality, torrent, p2p, technology etc.
I think enigmax should change the about page of this blog and he can make this a general purpose blog.
@61 (and all the other “thick” individuals)
This topic deals with infringement As in “Copyright” which makes it more than relative here..
Besides the fact that TF can/will “blog,post,discuss” anything they care to given that it is THEIR board…
It’s real simple, if you dont care for the topic, STFU and move on to the next one that you are INTERESTED in and quit F-ing whining about whats being related to those of us that are interested…
Warner bros makes me sick. Go around youtube removing the WHOLE shoundtrack off clips even if it contains less than 3 seconds of their music.
They ruin the rest of the films because that one little tiny part wasn’t paid for.
I am not surprised over this.
When Barnes and Nobles was selling one of the Harry Potter books they were informed that their pre-release parties could not use the name Harry Potter or images of Harry Potter.
Publicity for the very books they wanted to sell was considered copyright infringement.
I really do believe that Warner this time has made a mistake. Shes not showing any HP movies, shes organising a HP look-alike evening with dinner, inspired by JK Rowlins books. And thats it. It has nothing to do with WB movies.. The hell takes these bastards….
well, I’ve just been convinced to sneak into the next movie I go so
Come on. This isn’t even copyrighted material nor is it any sort of a commodity. If she was selling bootlegged Harry Potter movies out of her basement, then ok sure, but this is just party theme.
reason #76 why people should NOT support warner bros.
how petty can a company get, oh wait…..
Right up there with Disney’s demand in 1998 that a kindergarten’s wall mural with Mickey, Minnie, Goofy, other characters be removed.
first
Warner Bros. keep suing some people for just harry potter stuff ok do it then lot of ppl will do it anyway i will pirate lot of your stuff and don’t f**k people. these people are my families under God Creation and you r likely devil worshopper bastard.
We all will get all harry potter movie if you keep worry about harry potter it is not like everyone’s pirate movie. there’s over billions of people buy dvds and why worry about half million of ppl pirated? *sigh* so keep doing what u have to do then we will always pirate stuff. well u gonna have to work on reasonable prices or otherwise lot of movies gonna be online…
@2: Hah, fail.
Anyways, this is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard, it isn’t like they’re losing any damn money from her actions, and if they are so what? They can’t spare a few dollars as they sit their on their gold plated toilets?
These guys are pathetic.
And there we go. There is no end to their idiocy.
The lady was not enabling or promoting piracy. She was not profitting from it. She wasn’t intentionaly out to rip off WB’s or hurt the image or sales of Harry Potter. Yes, WB has the right to tell her to stop it, but in the end this creates bad publicity that harms the image of WB and HP turning of paying customers and future customers forever.
Geez this sounds all too familiar. The music and movie industry wonders why piracy is rampant. They never blame themselves for creating negative publicity sending the curious to see what the big fuss is and quickly learning that they can get any song and movie that they want for free.
Amazing stuff. Anyways back to my HD .mkv movie downloads. I’m preparing for a Harry Potter party in which I intend to give a way HD rips of HP that I’ve downloaded for free on the net.
I hope JK Rowling sues WB for this.
She won’t, she agrees with the corporates since she didn’t want eBooks distributed in the first place. She started out poor and sided with the poor. Now she’s wealthy and will side with the rich. She even shut down a Harry Potter themed parade in India when suspecting that they were trying to profit.
dicks
I thought warners gonna sue JKR!
She writes about HP and as per the WB layers They hold the right of Potter.
Ok, time to be “that guy” again.
If she was merely having a party, no harm done. She’s running a business, and was going to use copyrighted trade marks to get customers, who would pay her.
simply as that, that’s how copyright is supposed to work, if you stand to profit from using copyrighted material, you are breaking the law.
Is this asstarded? Yes, should they have just left the poor woman alone? YES. Shouldn’t they be pandering to the fans instead of threatening them YES.
but strictly following the code of law, she was breaking copyright.
If she’s smart, she’ll rename as she did, but keep the harry potter theme, just not advertise it as a harry potter party.
Think about it. Gonna have a Halloween bash and charge cover for the keg of beer? Better not tell anyone it’s a star wars party, or harry potter for that matter.
sad but true.
This isn’t quite as bad as suing a little old lady for singing, but it’s rather close
It would be right to say that The Great Architect of the Universe has all the copyrights.
get out of there #2 post, you’re a #2 post, not a #1 post. your not even in proper order there
What’s also sad about this is that J.K. Rowling no longer owns the rights to Harry Potter but it’s Warner Brothers. Another example of a creator having to give up his or her rights to something that they’ve created.
@2: http://www.funnyphotos.net.au/images/epic-failure-pole-dancer1.jpg
Another Harry Potter Fan Bites The Dust!..
@ 81
She didn’t have to give up her rights. She sold them for a vast amount of money!!
/quote
Do Warner own the rights. Yes.
/quote
And that sums up what is wrong in the modern world
All the Harry potter films I’ve seen are shit. Some douchbag with a stick, about as exciting as getting AIDs
What’s the “creativity” used by Ms. Marmite Lover? JK Rowling’s? Not her own? That’s pretty much the definition of copyright infringement–and if copyright holders do not enforce their rights, they’re treated as public domain. Warner is acting reasonably!
Simple solution… step 1. Buy Harry Potter party banner (http://images.birthdayinabox.com/biab125/501407Banner.jpg) take your advertising picture in front of it.
2. Buy Harry Potter invitations (http://images.birthdayinabox.com/biab125/501407Inv.jpg) and mail them or post them around town. Perfectly legal and fairly cheap.
i believe that this is a new low for them am i right? Pretty soon there going to start suing people for just saying “Harry Potter” out in the streets, unless of coarse it starts with “buy Harry Potter products”. I hope J. K. Rowling has somthing to say about this.
So ridiculous. Copyrights were not intended to do things like this! They’re supposed to protect the intellectual property of the creator so they won’t be ripped off. But this isn’t ripping off the creator- if anything, it’s paying a huge homage to Rowling and spreading word of her novels! If this woman would like to offer free advertising for Harry Potter, I say she should be allowed to do so. She’s not even profiting off it!
I hope they sent the letter to her before the guests started buying “authorized Harry Potter” merchandise (toys) so they won’t make any money from it. (A “theme” usually involves some toys to make it look like the theme)
I wonder who has the rights to
“Generic Wizard” (even sounds stupid) or “Western” (the Italians ofcourse).
Still a lot of money and effort to stop someone from having a halloween party in a single private home. These parasite lawyers must be running out of targets to keep the appearance that they are needed.
If you don’t know the law then you need to shut up about how people deal with legal matters. WB has no concern about losing profits or being ripped off by charity groups. There sole reason for these letters is to protect their rights. Here is the thing about these matters. If you become aware of someone using something you own and fail to protect you are in the eyes of the law giving others the right to use your property. Which meanss if you go to court when it matter because someone is trying to rip you off they use those examples of your failure to enforce your rights as defence that you hadn’t said no to others so why them. Remember people common sense and the law have very little in common. Triple that for copyright and patent law.
Dear Not Yours,
i could think of a list to show you why this is wrong but that would just start a big ugly fight so instead.
STFU & GTFO (plz)
Dear Not Yours #92,
i could think of a list to show you why this is wrong but that would just start a big ugly fight so instead.
STFU & GTFO (plz)
Ms. Lover says, “my attitude which sprung from my background in a political samba band and cooking at anti-G8 camps. I wanted to stick it to the Man.”
It appears that she was the instigating ‘TWIT’ and got bested by Warner’s!
The main movie studios are in so much debt over their heads they’re at the point of bankruptcy. MGM is close to 4 billion in debt and the others are not far behind. http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article6863730.ece#
Some copyright and patent is a good thing, it encourages innovation. Too much stifles it and culture, as patent trolling and the lunacy of this article demonstrates. These laws only favour big corporate entities, which can keep copyright and trademarks going practically in perpetuity, locking up ideas from widespread free development the way an individual’s copyright gets pushed into public domain.
Then you get cases like politically influential corporations like Disney pushing the “millenium digial copyright act” otherwise known as the “mickey mouse protection act” which was enacted explicitly after sponsorship and a full court press by Disney to extend its copyrights on Mickey Mouse and associates another 20 or so years after they had hit the 70 year mark and were about to expire into the public domain. It is inexcusable and was a clear case of corporations using their lobbying power and influence to manipulate and change laws for their sole benefit at the clear expense to the public (exactly why should a single corporation keep exclusive rights to a cartoon character beyond the 70 years of already exclusive profits, except because they want it).
An example of an artistic work that only thrived and became widely viewed (and lots of money made off of) AFTER its copyright expired is the “It’s a Wonderful Life” shown at Christmas. It was hardly seen, and almost no money made by anyone, after its short theater run, but when no one renewed copyright, it was then picked up by EVERYONE and shown frequently at Christmas, digitally remastered and colourized versions were made, etc, and now it is a popular, profitable, much loved classic. It should be noted that it is but one example of how copyright actually impeded money being made and the public enjoying a product.
In an era of digital transmissions and storage and copying, the only thing stopping massive availability and print on demand and ebooks and such all becoming massively affordable is the old tech companies jealously trying (and succeeding) in enforcing old fashioned “intellectual property” rights on everything. Books that sell for 8 dollars (or pounds in UK) to lots more could be bought online in PDF for a fraction of that (say 2 dollars), with most of that going to the author, which is more than they get in traditional royalties. Anyone could get anybook, anywhere, all of the time, and print on demand (espresso book machine, ondemandbooks.com) for about 4-6 dollars for a basic paperback if they wanted a hard copy.
In the end, the only people that stand to lose are the publishing companies, who act as gatekeepers stopping or channeling who can and will get published, often enforcing slave labour like conditions on new authors as a condition of acceptance.
In the end, if not in the USA, or UK, but in and around the world, we will see almost all of the world’s published works freely available on google or cheaply on amazon, using technical readers, but it will take some time for the “intellectual property” old school defenders to be overcome and for the manifesto of old time cyberpunks to become real (information wants to be free). In the meanwhile, we suffer a decade or more behind what technology would easily allow, and obsolete companies maintain outmoded technologies and rights to keep windfall exclusive profits and collect “economic rents” as economists say. In the end, it won’t stand, and people will be “criminals” for simply sharing information and files and books digitally (and many companies would love every reader of a book to pay a royalty, killing the concept of lending library by the way). New business models are needed, and with a rational pricing model (at least 80-90 percent cheaper for music and books digitally transmitted), artists will make more money, there will be less editorial control and censorship/shaping, and cheap prices for genuine digital products will act as a bulwark against pirating (and functionally, pirating will allow those that can’t or won’t spend the money to access material, which is usually temporary until they become well off enough to be customers).
Sorry it was long. I got on a rant, and actually have better developed ideas than that, which I won’t claim are original entirely, but do make sense.
Seems petty, but due diligence requires Warner to issue this kind of enforcement letter in order to maintain their copyright.
cold, heartless machine.
The problem for companies like Warner is that if they don’t “defend their copyright” other companies can make the claim that it has become de facto “public domain.” Thus, in order to prevent some low down snake from stealing your legitimate copyright, you have to be a low down snake yourself and stomp on little people who aren’t really doing you any damage.
What they really should do is offer a “fair use” license which acknowledges the copyright. Then everyone could be kept happy and legal, but they are too busy hissing at everyone in their best snakish manner to “defend their copyright.”
A little petty to say the least.
Copyright law abuse at its finest?
Just my opinion of course
wow this is so fking sad. warner bros are greedy idiots.
So she is being unimaginative, stealing other people’s property, and then attempting to profit from it (she was quoted in the article as saying that J.K. Rowling was once a struggling single parent and would appreciate her entrepenurial (profit making) spirit). So of course she checked with Ms. Rowling, right? Sorry that doesn’t appear anywhere in the article. Boo F’ing Hoo. She can’t even be original enough to come up with her own alternative theme. Warner Bros. had to provide her with that as well. Maybe if she is really nice they’ll help her with the menu.
It’s so sad that they think they’ve got the right to bully people by writing letters backed up by the law.
I’ve had the same experience myself.
It’s hard to know whether to agree for the sake of a quiet life, tell them to sod off for the sake of your rights or ignore them.
http://www.xbomber.co.uk
I was reading last week about a young man in the UK whose real name is Harry Potter, who isn’t thrilled in the least with what JK Rowlings books have done to his life.
Why doesn’t Ms. Marmalite Lover invite him to a Halloween party in his honor, that way she can have her ‘Harry Potter Halloween Party’, and Warner Bros. can go fuck themselves? ;)
Funny, I didn’t know WB even had a legal department. Thought the studio was on the verge of Bankruptcy with the abymissal films they put out each year. Last I saw, Warner Execs were busy dumpster diving looking for table scraps!
Total scumbags – you can buy Harry Potter merchandise practically everywhere, so it can’t be the money. What’s a little dinner party going to hurt.
There is a much better solution where everybody wins. Warner can give Ms Marmite Lover a license for a token sum ($1, for example), in exchange for her mentioning the generosity of Warner at the party or even in the press.
Ms Marmite Lover gets to have her harry potter party. Warner exercise their rights and get good publicity.
that ought to teach that hardbitten criminal scum, copying of any sort is ILLEGAL AND PUNISHABLE BY DEATH , stone the pirate
She should have just ignored the letter, as it was addressed to someone who does not legally exist.
YOU WOULDN’T DOWNLOAD A HOT MEAL!
Warner Bros. took appropriate action.
Halloween has gotten completely out of hand. Every year, thousands of children dress as Frankenstein or Dracula without paying royalties to Mary Shelley or Bram Stoker. Clearly, this blatant theft cannot continue unanswered. Eventually, these poor authors could starve to death and we’ll have nothing to read. Civilization and the entire net as we know it will cease to exist. And all because this insolent dame had the audacity to throw a themed party…
She should have replied inviting the lawyers to the party!!! Because they belong to a magic universe for sure…
107 Oct 27, 2009 at 01:50 by Jigsy
YOU WOULDN’T DOWNLOAD A HOT MEAL!
Well at least not until they do invent those nifty food replicators they used on Star Trek, then, I would probable DL a HOT MEAL, whats on the menu?..
LoL
they have no choice. If they fail to uphold their rights, they can actually legally lose them.
@ 111
Do you live in the same planet as me? Do you really consider that someone could take away warner bros the rights even from their toilet paper?
What’s next? Santa and the easter bunny?
I don’t see any copyright infringed like everyone else does. There is nothing she copied except the name and the only protection would be a trademark. She wouldn’t be able to name a movie Harry Potter. But Harry Potter restaurant would be possible as long as there is no trademark already in same line of business.
And how else would you call a Harry Potter theme party/dinner except for “Harry Potter theme party/dinner” ?
Like reasoned retard likes to say “the law is the law” and as such no copyrighted (everything has copyright) material goes automatically into public domain because they are not defending their copyright with an army of lawyers. If there is a real reason to go to court they can still do that without searching for victims (otherwise everything is public domain by default for everyone else without an army).
And if it were covered under copyright law (maybe in UK?): Are we allowed to type “Harry Potter” here, are we allowed to even say it or think it ?
@ 113 Whatever
No, you are not allowed to type “Harry Potter” or even allowed to say or think it. If you do, you are stealing and the universe will collapse. This is why we have copyright laws – to protect us from implosion. I thought everybody knew that.
lulz @ pirating Reasoned Mind’s name on forums
She wasn’t even playing the movie anything? This is outrageous!
I can’t even pretend to understand what they had to lose or gain from her having a “Harry Potter themed” party. If anything, they stood to gain from the free advertising!
Unbelievable! Boycott Warner for life. Done and done.
Copyright law has taken on a life of its own. It’s like an out of control robot, causing human casualties.
It’s time to put this beast down for good.
Out of interest, is this woman gonna be sued RIAA style?
$150,000 for every meal she prepared/was eaten/was requested?
Next, it will be just for speaking two words,”Harry Potter”!
How much greedier and dumber can they get?
This has PR nightmare written all over it.
Add +100 XP to your epic troll counter, move 2 sliders in the direction of “world copyright domination”, pick up “staff of infinite evil +3″.
Looks like the industry’s PR agencies are still roooooolling that dice.
“Bullshit!
JK Rowling probably didn’t go around infringing on someone else’s copyrighted work to accomplish this.”
Bullshit back at you!
http://www.geocities.com/sayswamp/worst.htm
As for Ms.Rowling, here’s what famed author Orson Scott Card thinks of her aggressive pro-copyright stance.
http://www.linearpublishing.com/RhinoStory.html
@21
this can’t be true, since snowwhite and such are traditional characters…
I think they should focus more on the movies, the last one was really lame compared to the book.
She is just hosting a private party. CAN’T YOU CORPORATE CUNTS LEAVE HER ALONE?????
It’s not Warner Brothers — it’s WANKER Brothers. They and their ilk do this sort of thing all the time.
i’m not buying the dvd this time. Transmission here i come. :)
It’s not a private party, its a commercial venture. WB has every right to ask her to take it down.
I do agree though that they were being sensitive assholes, but this is the company that tried to shut down fansites a while back, so its expected.
WB has the rights to Potter in regards to copyright. JKR sold it to them, however her wishes are still honored because she is the “underlying creator” or the series.
Good
@128 you are totally correct
hahahaha omg what a load of s**t they just pick on the little people cos they can. like another post said they shud concentrate more on making the films decent not just money spinners cos im not expecting much from the next 2 as the last was too hyped up for what it really was
wanker brothers are not losing profit theyre infact gaining from this
It wasn’t a `not for profit’ night!
She was not running a `privtae party!
She runs the opperation as a business and advertises it as such!
Its the same as if she’d been selling bootlegged t-shirts or DVDs, a clear and simple case of theft of intellectual property.
Should Warner Brothers have to do a audit on everyone who infringes their copyright to see how much money the person is making and only issue notices to those who are turning a arbitary `significant’ profit? Talk about wasting money on lawyers!
Copyright law (since the reforms) have been written as cut-and-dry as possible to keep things simple and cut down on the need for litegation and such, Wanrer Bros wouldnt have to have issued the notice if the woman had have just respected copyright law in the first place.
We’re not talking essential items here; she didnt steel food or squat in a building for shelter, she tried to make money out of the popularity of someone else’s work!
@108, 113 (Reasoned Mind):
Obvious troll is obvious. But well written. 78/100.
WAlter – Copyright protects something if it’s written, or other wise published. This party did not infringe copyright at any time, or point. She was not reproducing any part of the book, or the movies, thus there’s nothing about copyright applicable
It was claimed that she violated their TRADEMARK, which is a very nebulous area of law. In fact, trademark law is anything BUT cut-and-dried. Now, Trademark law tends to work in the way that a registered trademark can’t be used to advertise someone elses product. BUT there are limits depending on how outside the product class it is, and how notable the trademark is. Warner has not, and never has done parties, so they lose that aspect, but then again, Harry potter is a very specific and well known trademark, and the link to the well-known trademarked items are intentional (unlike, for instance, Monster energy and Vermonster) so she’d lose ont hat aspect.
however, she’d ‘lose’ anyway, because it would cost more in legal fees than the event would ever bring in, and even if it wouldn’t, they’d apply for a temporary injunction until the case, which would be after the party date, thus nixing it anyway. It’s part of the great abuse of the civil law system, that means the stronger prevail.
to 134 great post :)
Im fairly sure J.K. Rowling still owns the copyright on Harry Potter but licensed the rights to Warner Bros. for the movies but Warner Bros. would still have copyright on the movies. As 134 put it this is not a copyright issue and very questionable trademark issue. This is about corporations using the laws to control and maximize profits.
My problem is copyrights that last forever or close to it. Will Mickey Mouse copyright(1928) ever go in to public domain? It still has 13yrs to go thanks to Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, for newer copyright its 120yrs for companies or life of arthur plus 70yrs.
What a crock! They’re as bad as Disney! Gonna be a long time before I go pay more money to see a WB picture than it costs to buy it when it comes out on DVD. Then I might not even buy it then. Leave that woman alone, you greedy lawyers!
It is forbidden to say, write or think Harry or Potter or whatever without paying Copyright fee to us — YES!!!
Are these underground dinners even legal? Does she have a business license to run a restaurant? Perhaps you could look at the spin of separating the HP from illegal food industry and protecting themselves, instead of trying to defend their royalties.
That’s real life for you. Those places are awesome, just like Ms Marmite’s initiative.
I have to agree WB is completely right there, however there are other ways to deal with it where every1 gets happy. Don’t sue, don’t threaten, tell her about the rights and add that you encourage such parties but request the permission to offer or make HP products available at the place – HP fans will probably end buying something and everybody gets money, including the money hungry WB.
Reminds me of the UK industry telling that piracy is killing the creative process or something like. Now, would that be a case where the victim becomes the killer?
WB, learn from this. Work with your costumers, not against them.
I feel that as long as she isn’t making money off of this harry potter theme party. She has the right to plan and creat this harry potter party!
Too bad Squeaky Fromme’s still on parole. Copyright lawyers make much better targets than Gerald Ford!
The title of this post should be changed, most likely. I doubt the problem is copyright, legitimatly, but rather trademark/consumer confusion issues.
Copyright cannot protect ideas such as those mentioned here, only the creative expression of them. It is doubtful that simply having people named as harry potter charecters and simple thematic elements from the franchise would violate copyright law.
Trademark law however, may well prevent her from having the event. Refrencing harry potter and various people in the franchise may violate the trademarks held on those books/movies.
I kinda doubt they can stop her, but not so familiar with their law. It would seem in many countries that if she changed the title and clearly communicated that she has no affiliation with the rights-holders and that the event is unauthorized, she would be ok provided the event is not commercial.
In any case, this site should alter the title of this article as it suggests something that the quoted passage from the lawyers does not (they only say IP rights, not copyright). Additionally it suggests a misunderstanding of the difference between copyright/trademark rights on the part of the author. I’m sure it was a simple error, but it might be something worth addresssing for appearances sake.
How fucking low can those righteous bastards get?
Anyone who posted here will be sued. We have phoned the FBI and they will track you down and sue you. :P
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Laywers.
All of this is happening because when JK gave the rights to Warner Bros., the fine print said:
You shall now agree to hand over a total of not more than your soul in just compensation for not less than a ton of money and limited freedom.
Warner Brothers does a shitty job with the movies anyway. They’re down to a formula at this point.
Harry Pottter, Harry Potter, Harry Potter!
*awaits owl from WB that she will be sued for saying that*
*waits for world to implode*
5 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.