<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Happy Anniversary Harry Potter!	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:01:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: gingerbaker		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453383</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gingerbaker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:01:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453383</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Larry Potter and Harry Potter books both have the word muggles in them, though.&quot;

Umm... No.  No, they don&#039;t.  Again - No.

Is this why your handle is &quot;Wow&quot;?

J/k - I have enjoyed many of your comments over the years.  But on JKR, for whom I admit to unqualified admiration and perhaps a little bit more, you are hideously and irrevocably incorrect. It&#039;s as if you have been enchanted by a Dementor.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Larry Potter and Harry Potter books both have the word muggles in them, though.&#8221;</p>
<p>Umm&#8230; No.  No, they don&#8217;t.  Again &#8211; No.</p>
<p>Is this why your handle is &#8220;Wow&#8221;?</p>
<p>J/k &#8211; I have enjoyed many of your comments over the years.  But on JKR, for whom I admit to unqualified admiration and perhaps a little bit more, you are hideously and irrevocably incorrect. It&#8217;s as if you have been enchanted by a Dementor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Wow		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453382</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453382</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Larry Potter was not in any book that had the word “Muggles” [mutant humanoids]&quot;

Neither did Harry Potter have any book with the word &quot;Muggles&quot; [mutant humanoids].

X-Men has mutant humanoids.

Larry Potter and Harry Potter books both have the word muggles in them, though.

&quot;Stouffer is a documented liar&quot;

And JKRowling is a documented greedy douchebag. I can make my claims &quot;documented&quot; too, ginge.

&quot;but stoop to mention JKR’s financial celebrity, as if that is trenchant to the discussion&quot;

It is.

You get the justice you can afford. Just like OJ Simpson did. Got off the criminal charge and practically broke because of his high priced lawyers. Just like the lawyers JKR employed to get her off the hook.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Larry Potter was not in any book that had the word “Muggles” [mutant humanoids]&#8221;</p>
<p>Neither did Harry Potter have any book with the word &#8220;Muggles&#8221; [mutant humanoids].</p>
<p>X-Men has mutant humanoids.</p>
<p>Larry Potter and Harry Potter books both have the word muggles in them, though.</p>
<p>&#8220;Stouffer is a documented liar&#8221;</p>
<p>And JKRowling is a documented greedy douchebag. I can make my claims &#8220;documented&#8221; too, ginge.</p>
<p>&#8220;but stoop to mention JKR’s financial celebrity, as if that is trenchant to the discussion&#8221;</p>
<p>It is.</p>
<p>You get the justice you can afford. Just like OJ Simpson did. Got off the criminal charge and practically broke because of his high priced lawyers. Just like the lawyers JKR employed to get her off the hook.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: gingerbaker		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453381</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gingerbaker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2017 14:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453381</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;““Muggles” was the name of a race of mutant humanoids””

Who looked after the orphan larry potter….&quot;

No.  It&#039;s right there in print from wiki.  Larry Potter was not in any book that had the word &quot;Muggles&quot; [mutant humanoids] in it.  Larry Potter was not a character in a novel - it was an &quot;activity booklet&quot;. Pamphlet was the wrong word.

So, you have this story completely backward. Stouffer is a documented liar, perjurer, and legal opportunist looking to cash in off the brilliant work of JKR, a universally admired woman who has given away to charity most of that billion+  dollars her intellectual property was deservedly earned.

And you, for some reason inexplicable to me, refuse to admit the plain evidence of your error, but stoop to mention JKR&#039;s financial celebrity, as if that is trenchant to the discussion. You seem blinded by your resentment.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;““Muggles” was the name of a race of mutant humanoids””</p>
<p>Who looked after the orphan larry potter….&#8221;</p>
<p>No.  It&#8217;s right there in print from wiki.  Larry Potter was not in any book that had the word &#8220;Muggles&#8221; [mutant humanoids] in it.  Larry Potter was not a character in a novel &#8211; it was an &#8220;activity booklet&#8221;. Pamphlet was the wrong word.</p>
<p>So, you have this story completely backward. Stouffer is a documented liar, perjurer, and legal opportunist looking to cash in off the brilliant work of JKR, a universally admired woman who has given away to charity most of that billion+  dollars her intellectual property was deservedly earned.</p>
<p>And you, for some reason inexplicable to me, refuse to admit the plain evidence of your error, but stoop to mention JKR&#8217;s financial celebrity, as if that is trenchant to the discussion. You seem blinded by your resentment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Wow		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453380</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:12:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453380</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;“Muggles” was the name of a race of mutant humanoids”&quot;

Who looked after the orphan larry potter....

&quot; in Stouffer’s pamphlet.&quot;

Oh dear. So childrens&#039; books are now &quot;pamphlets&quot;, ginge?

&quot;I think&quot;

No, not really.

&quot;Your O.J. reference seems way beyond the pale.&quot;

No. Not really. Pretty accurate.

&lt;blockquote&gt;JK Rowling becomes richest British celebrity in the world &#124; OK! Magazine&lt;/blockquote&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;“Muggles” was the name of a race of mutant humanoids”&#8221;</p>
<p>Who looked after the orphan larry potter&#8230;.</p>
<p>&#8221; in Stouffer’s pamphlet.&#8221;</p>
<p>Oh dear. So childrens&#8217; books are now &#8220;pamphlets&#8221;, ginge?</p>
<p>&#8220;I think&#8221;</p>
<p>No, not really.</p>
<p>&#8220;Your O.J. reference seems way beyond the pale.&#8221;</p>
<p>No. Not really. Pretty accurate.</p>
<blockquote><p>JK Rowling becomes richest British celebrity in the world | OK! Magazine</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: gingerbaker		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453379</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gingerbaker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 19:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453379</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Muggles&quot; was the name of a race of mutant humanoids&quot; in Stouffer&#039;s pamphlet.  Which sold zero copies, so it seems impossible JKR could have stolen it.

I think “These elements do not relate very well to JKR ” is accurate, if not generous.

 Your O.J. reference seems way beyond the pale. Doubt if JKR was wearing Bruno Magli&#039;s when she wrote the Harry Potter series.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Muggles&#8221; was the name of a race of mutant humanoids&#8221; in Stouffer&#8217;s pamphlet.  Which sold zero copies, so it seems impossible JKR could have stolen it.</p>
<p>I think “These elements do not relate very well to JKR ” is accurate, if not generous.</p>
<p> Your O.J. reference seems way beyond the pale. Doubt if JKR was wearing Bruno Magli&#8217;s when she wrote the Harry Potter series.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Wow		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453378</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 19:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453378</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;These elements do not relate very well to JKR &quot;

Yeah, right. Muggle is such a common place word.

And Larry Potter practically the John Smith of the children&#039;s entertainment world.

The fact is that JKR had shitloads of cash and therefore got the justice she could afford.

Much like, say, OJ Simpson.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;These elements do not relate very well to JKR &#8221;</p>
<p>Yeah, right. Muggle is such a common place word.</p>
<p>And Larry Potter practically the John Smith of the children&#8217;s entertainment world.</p>
<p>The fact is that JKR had shitloads of cash and therefore got the justice she could afford.</p>
<p>Much like, say, OJ Simpson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Wow		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453377</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 19:01:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453377</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Meh,&quot;

Fair enough. That&#039;s your take on it.

Two things

1)  How hard was it to find? Not very.
2) The law doesn&#039;t ascribe copyrights to works that are worth engaging in. See Gigli. Where not watching it caused the movie studios to start trying to ban phones from cinemas because people were texting friends waiting and saying &quot;DO NOT WATCH&quot;.

I would be &quot;meh&quot; too if JKR had been similarly &quot;meh&quot; about fanfic.

She wasn&#039;t.

Ergo my stance on her.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Meh,&#8221;</p>
<p>Fair enough. That&#8217;s your take on it.</p>
<p>Two things</p>
<p>1)  How hard was it to find? Not very.<br />
2) The law doesn&#8217;t ascribe copyrights to works that are worth engaging in. See Gigli. Where not watching it caused the movie studios to start trying to ban phones from cinemas because people were texting friends waiting and saying &#8220;DO NOT WATCH&#8221;.</p>
<p>I would be &#8220;meh&#8221; too if JKR had been similarly &#8220;meh&#8221; about fanfic.</p>
<p>She wasn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>Ergo my stance on her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: gingerbaker		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453376</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gingerbaker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:35:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453376</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[According to wiki, it does not look good for the case that JKR stole her ideas from the author of the word &quot;muggles&quot; and &quot;Larry Potter&quot;. These elements do not relate very well to JKR use of terminology, and they were merely in self-published pamphlets which never sold a copy.

Additionally, the author&#039;s suit against JKR was dismissed with prejudice, and notes that the author lied in court and fraudulently changed text and dates of texts. Appeal was dismissed.: [from wikipedia]

&quot;In 1999, American author Nancy Kathleen Stouffer alleged copyright and trademark infringement by Rowling of her 1984 works The Legend of Rah and the Muggles (ISBN 1-58989-400-6) and Larry Potter and His Best Friend Lilly.[1] The primary basis for Stouffer&#039;s case rested in her own purported invention of the word &quot;Muggles&quot;, the name of a race of mutant humanoids in The Legend of Rah and the Muggles, and Larry Potter, the title character of a series of activity booklets for children. Larry Potter, like Harry Potter, is a bespectacled boy with dark hair,[11] though he is not a character in The Legend of Rah and the Muggles.[12] Stouffer also drew a number of other comparisons, such as a castle on a lake, a receiving room and wooden doors.[11] Portions of Rah were originally published in booklet form by Ande Publishing Company in 1986, a company founded by Stouffer together with a group of friends and family.[13] Ande Publishing filed for bankruptcy in September 1987 without selling any of its booklets in the United States or elsewhere.[13] Rowling has stated that she first visited the United States in 1998.[14]

Rowling, along with Scholastic Press (her American publisher) and Warner Bros. (holders of the series&#039; film rights), pre-empted Stouffer in 2002 with a suit of their own seeking a declaratory judgment that they had not infringed on any of Stouffer&#039;s works. The court found in Rowling&#039;s favour, granting summary judgment and holding that &quot;no reasonable juror could find a likelihood of confusion as to the source of the two parties&#039; works&quot;.[13] During the course of the trial, it was held that Rowling proved &quot;by clear and convincing evidence, that Stouffer has perpetrated a fraud on the Court through her submission of fraudulent documents as well as through her untruthful testimony&quot;,[13] including changing pages years after the fact to retroactively insert the word &quot;muggle&quot;.[13] Her case was dismissed with prejudice and she was fined $50,000 for her &quot;pattern of intentional bad faith conduct&quot; in relation to her employment of fraudulent submissions, along with being ordered to pay a portion of the plaintiffs&#039; legal fees.[13] Stouffer appealed the decision in 2004, but in 2005 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling.[15] In 2006 she stated on her website that she was planning to republish her books and was entertaining the possibility of another lawsuit against Warner Bros., J. K. Rowling and Scholastic Press.[16]&quot;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to wiki, it does not look good for the case that JKR stole her ideas from the author of the word &#8220;muggles&#8221; and &#8220;Larry Potter&#8221;. These elements do not relate very well to JKR use of terminology, and they were merely in self-published pamphlets which never sold a copy.</p>
<p>Additionally, the author&#8217;s suit against JKR was dismissed with prejudice, and notes that the author lied in court and fraudulently changed text and dates of texts. Appeal was dismissed.: [from wikipedia]</p>
<p>&#8220;In 1999, American author Nancy Kathleen Stouffer alleged copyright and trademark infringement by Rowling of her 1984 works The Legend of Rah and the Muggles (ISBN 1-58989-400-6) and Larry Potter and His Best Friend Lilly.[1] The primary basis for Stouffer&#8217;s case rested in her own purported invention of the word &#8220;Muggles&#8221;, the name of a race of mutant humanoids in The Legend of Rah and the Muggles, and Larry Potter, the title character of a series of activity booklets for children. Larry Potter, like Harry Potter, is a bespectacled boy with dark hair,[11] though he is not a character in The Legend of Rah and the Muggles.[12] Stouffer also drew a number of other comparisons, such as a castle on a lake, a receiving room and wooden doors.[11] Portions of Rah were originally published in booklet form by Ande Publishing Company in 1986, a company founded by Stouffer together with a group of friends and family.[13] Ande Publishing filed for bankruptcy in September 1987 without selling any of its booklets in the United States or elsewhere.[13] Rowling has stated that she first visited the United States in 1998.[14]</p>
<p>Rowling, along with Scholastic Press (her American publisher) and Warner Bros. (holders of the series&#8217; film rights), pre-empted Stouffer in 2002 with a suit of their own seeking a declaratory judgment that they had not infringed on any of Stouffer&#8217;s works. The court found in Rowling&#8217;s favour, granting summary judgment and holding that &#8220;no reasonable juror could find a likelihood of confusion as to the source of the two parties&#8217; works&#8221;.[13] During the course of the trial, it was held that Rowling proved &#8220;by clear and convincing evidence, that Stouffer has perpetrated a fraud on the Court through her submission of fraudulent documents as well as through her untruthful testimony&#8221;,[13] including changing pages years after the fact to retroactively insert the word &#8220;muggle&#8221;.[13] Her case was dismissed with prejudice and she was fined $50,000 for her &#8220;pattern of intentional bad faith conduct&#8221; in relation to her employment of fraudulent submissions, along with being ordered to pay a portion of the plaintiffs&#8217; legal fees.[13] Stouffer appealed the decision in 2004, but in 2005 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling.[15] In 2006 she stated on her website that she was planning to republish her books and was entertaining the possibility of another lawsuit against Warner Bros., J. K. Rowling and Scholastic Press.[16]&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Obstreperous Applesauce		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453375</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Obstreperous Applesauce]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 17:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453375</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Meh,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_disputes_over_the_Harry_Potter_series]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Meh,</p>
<p><a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_disputes_over_the_Harry_Potter_series" rel="nofollow ugc">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_disputes_over_the_Harry_Potter_series</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Wow		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/06/25/happy-anniversary-harry-potter/#comment-453374</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 17:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=24233#comment-453374</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Oh dear.

So it&#039;s good because JKR did it. But she did it. Whether you claim it good or not.

What about the fanfic sites closed down? Was it good if they do the same thing? JKR said not. Why not?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh dear.</p>
<p>So it&#8217;s good because JKR did it. But she did it. Whether you claim it good or not.</p>
<p>What about the fanfic sites closed down? Was it good if they do the same thing? JKR said not. Why not?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
