J.K. Rowling: Rich Idiot

From AP (it’s Fair Use!):

“NEW YORK – Author J.K. Rowling and the maker of the “Harry Potter” films are suing a small publisher in Michigan over its plans to release a book version of a popular Web site dedicated to the boy wizard.”

I read these fine words sitting underneath one of the largest library collections on the planet: 7 floors practically groaning underneath exactly the sort of book that Rowling is suing to prevent. There’s probably an entire floor devoted to books about other authors’ books. Where is her precedent for this suit? Of course, precedent doesn’t matter when you’re rich: pay a law firm, and it will happily sue the sky for being blue.

I fondly remember a time before any bonehead who could afford a pack of lawyers (a trouble of lawyers? a suit of lawyers? a bill of lawyers?) decided copyright was a club to beat the heads of those who dared to trespass on their financial turf. I blame the RIAA, of course.

Perhaps there is a certain madness that comes upon the newly rich, which makes them honestly believe that their desires rate above those of others. All I know is that if I were Rowling, I’d never even want to hear the name ‘Harry Potter’ again. She beat that particular horse to death. My advice to her as a reader: fire your lawyers, and hire a decent editor for your next book.

Libraries and ‘Adult Materials’

More like ‘Adolescent materials’…Atlanta public library patrons are up in arms over alleged viewing of pornography at library workstations.

Viewing pornography is a private activity which should be restricted to one’s home.  If one doesn’t have a home, though, who am I to deny adults their rights?   And who decides what is pornographic?

A few days ago I saw another story about a public library that had two internet areas: one monitored; one un-monitored.  This struck me as eminently sensible.  Kids to the right; perverts to the left.

“The library system is not a baby-sitting service, and the librarians are not our children’s nannies,” he said. “Let’s not surrender our parental responsibility to a software package, the librarians and the county government.” – A library patron from the article.

I agree.  Filtering software has been shown (at least to my satisfaction) to be  poorly programmed, and likely to block sites based on oversimplified textual criteria (breast cancer information, for instance.)   Who will decide what is pornographic – “community standards”?  Oh, please…I personally don’t care to surrender my personal tastes to my community’s lowest common denominator.