Derivative Work

Last year, RDR books endeavored to publish an unauthorized encyclopedia of all things Harry Potter. Warner Brothers filed suit, and the resulting litigation turned out to be a fascinating fight over the precise contours of copyright law’s “derivative work” right. In this audio, we look back at that now-settled case, using it as a launching point from which to consider not only the scope of the derivative work right, but also some practical questions about when and whether a copyright holder ought to enforce such a right as against fan-produced materials. Guests include Warner Brothers’ Senior Vice President Jeremy Williams, and opposing counsel from the RDR case, Anthony Falzone of the Stanford Fair Use Project. UCLA law professor Doug Lichtman hosts.

5 Responses to “Derivative Work”

  1. [...] Lichtman’s latest IP Colloquium takes on the question of derivative works, mainly discussing the infamous Harry Potter Lexicon reference guide that a judge recently barred [...]

  2. [...] Lichtman’s latest IP Colloquium takes on the question of derivative works, mainly discussing the infamous Harry Potter Lexicon reference guide that a judge recently barred [...]

  3. [...] Lichtman’s latest IP Colloquium takes on the question of derivative works, mainly discussing the infamous Harry Potter Lexicon reference guide that a judge recently barred [...]

  4. [...] Derivative Work Last year, RDR books endeavored to publish an unauthorized encyclopedia of all things Harry Potter. Warner Brothers filed suit, and the resulting litigation turned out to be a fascinating fight over the precise contours of copyright law’s “derivative work” right. [...]