I don’t know, I don’t think JK’s really got a strong case here.
After all, it’s just a reference guide to her work – she didn’t write it, someone else (a librarian, woo-hoo!) put in that hard work.
I wonder, to take it to an extreme, if she wins this does it mean that travel writers won’t be able to write about the countries they visit, because they didn’t create them, just experienced them and loved them?
Assuming they even visited them in the first place, of course.
The case is being heard in America, and I’m not clear enough on UK copyright law (other than to know what I can and can’t copy in a commercial library) to know if she’d be able to bring the same sort of case here. I have a feeling she couldn’t but can’t guarantee it.
Either way, I think she’s perhaps getting a bit uptight about work created by people who love what she writes, and want to help guide others.
Dumpling in a Hanky 
I think the biggest problem JK has with this, is that it’s mostly not original work. Most of what he is done is take her words and rearrange them. Somethings he has created (eg the timeline) but not the majority of what he’s trying to publish.
LikeLike
The Times had a bit more detail on the content of the Lexicon, you’re right, it seems like a lot of lifting has gone on, rather than actual creative writing on his own part.http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article3746505.ece
LikeLike