Harry Potter: Cybersquatter

This one will run and run

Warner Brothers bullies girl over Harry Potter site
Reg to fight for Harry Potter 'cybersquatter'
Warner Bros backs down on Harry Potter Web site
Warner Bros/Harry Potter dispute kicks off again
Warner Brothers bullying ruins Field family Xmas

There was plenty of mileage in the old Harry Potter cybersquatter story, as the above list proves. Fred Yontz had plenty to say on the subject:

I've been reading your accounts of how Warner Brothers has been in full legal attack mode on any Harry Potter fan, usually children, that dare put up a fan site that has any mention of Harry Potter anywhere on the site. Seems like another case of companies getting too big and becoming 900 pound gorillas...

I saw your observation about Les Field not having any resources to face Whiny Bastards in court, though some offers of free counsel might help him out. I think I also read in one of your accounts that most everybody was just caving in after getting a poison pen letter from Wicked Bastards' evil minions, e.g. lawyers, and maybe no one has actually taken something into the courts. So I got to wondering about some big, nasty, crafty law firm, that takes a dislike to what the Great Satan of Entertainment is doing to J.K. Rowling's fans, registering one or maybe a flood of Harry Potter referencing sites, and then make life legally miserable for the Wrotten Bastards. I'd love it if you instigated some mischief like this, and please let me know if you do.

Whatever, I commend you for supporting Claire Field and revealing the evil lurking in the hearts of Worthless Bastards. It also seems, from your attempt to contact the author of the Harry Potter books, that in selling the film rights to the Great Satan she also became a prisoner of them... maybe sold a little of her soul?

On top of that, I don't think setting the books to film is a good idea. I haven't read any of them yet, but I remember reading for the first time, about twenty years ago, the Hobbit books, during a Christmas vacation trip to the left coast (U.S. west coast). Now I was in my forties at the time, but I couldn't put the books down, and the imagery they evoked is still vivid in my mind. It would have been a disaster putting those stories to film, thus cutting off the imagination the reader brings to the experience. It's like the young boy said about radio vs. television: "The pictures are better." So I think Ms. Rowling has made a great mistake and done a great disservice to her readers by allowing the books to be shallowly imprisoned on film. Ieven thought of trying to write to her to tell her these thoughts, and urge her to preserve the primacy of the reader's imagination, but seeing how much she seems to now be a corporate captive, it most likely would have been a futile exercise.

Food for thought. Any more contributions?

Sponsored: 5 critical considerations for enterprise cloud backup