Harry Potter 6 pirated, even in audio–and issues abound

David Rothman writes “I recently suggested that billionaire writer J.K. Rowling could make a little more money and help the cause of literacy if she authorized electronic versions of her works. Why let this omission create a demand for pirated Rowling? Guess what. As reported by MobileRead and TeleRead, the inevitable is now happening with Rowling’s latest novel, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. The pirates have been spreading around Potter–even in audio, as a sample shows–without a nickel reaching Rowling.

David Rothman writes “I recently suggested that billionaire writer J.K. Rowling could make a little more money and help the cause of literacy if she authorized electronic versions of her works. Why let this omission create a demand for pirated Rowling? Guess what. As reported by MobileRead and TeleRead, the inevitable is now happening with Rowling’s latest novel, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. The pirates have been spreading around Potter–even in audio, as a sample shows–without a nickel reaching Rowling.

There are some other angles here, too, ranging from basic library economics to copyright terms and even the ’08 presidential race. Rowling won’t authorize electronic editions of her works. But e-books, used with suitable business arrangements, are far better than libraries’ loading up just on paper copies that may go unread after the demand has peaked. Of course, format standards would also help to give libraries more for their money. And so would repeal of the Hollywood-bought law known as Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, which will reduce appreciation of modern classics by Net-oriented young people. Repeal, granted, wouldn’t help immediately in the case of very recent works like the Potter series. And I don’t know about some older works, either–that’s for the lawyers to puzzle out. If it weren’t for the Bono Act, however, American high school students right now could be downloading the Great Gatsby and many other popular modern classics for free off the Net. Doesn’t copyright law exist for schools, libraries and society at large–not just as a profit-optimizer for entertainment conglomerates and rich heirs? Thanks to the Bono Act, even legal Harry Potter e-books may not reach the Net for another century or so, given Rowling’s distrust of e-books and the possibility that her publishers will feel the same way in the case of the Potter series.

Hello, John Edwards? As a believer in Poverty Fighter One, education, and as a former member of the copyright-related Senate Judiciary Committee, can’t you take a stand on Bono, the DMCA and other cost-increasers for schools and libraries? Ideally the ALA can elicit a substantive statement from Edwards on such issues, given that he has focused so much on economic and educational opportunities. So far he’s been resolutely mute. Edwards counts. If he can be turned around, then other prospective ’08 presidential candidates such as John Kerry and Hillary Clinton may follow. Meanwhile some Edwards supporters who should know better, such as Paul Jones at UNC, the mastermind behind the ibiblio archive, virtual home of Project Gutenberg, refuse to use their blogs to encourage Edwards to be a full-service populist on copyright issues. Perhaps the Potter case can help remind Edwards and his ’08 presidential supporters of their responsibilities. Schoolchildren won’t be able to download public domain copies of Potter until 70 years after the death of Rowling, who’ll be 40 on July 31. Bono extended the time by two decades; it earlier had been a mere 50 years. Recently the Economist suggested copyright terms of no more than 14 years, renewable once–too short as I see it as a supporter of balanced copyright law, but still far better than the Bono-esque outrage. Pre-Bono could be a good, realistic compromise with Hollywood.

Will John Edwards care about cash-strapped libraries and schools and oppose the Bono Act–this multi-billion-dollar diverter of wealth to the entertainment elite? Interestingly, a Net- and library-friendly strategy could help Edwards in the end by strengthening his Web-based efforts–very likely, enough to offset the reduction in Hollywood money, especially given the Net’s growing importance on American life.

His true supporters in Hollywood will contribute regardless of his copyright stands and maybe even appreciate the display of courage here. Without spine, “populist” Edwards in the end will be remembered as just another commodity pol.

Please note that I am picking on Edwards because of his populism and because he went to my old school–I’m a lifelong liberal Democrat who voted for him and Kerry. I’d encourage library advocates of all political stripes to use the Potter example to lean on their own candidates to take library-friendly stands on copyright.

Meanwhile you can read a bit more on Potter at TeleRead.”