Business Ethics. The case The Harry Potter Lexicon is about a legal dispute between Steve Vander Ark and J.K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter book series. Steve Vander Ark created the Harry Potter Lexicon which is basically an onlin

ETHICAL ISSUES

        I believe that the only ethical issue involved in this case is plagiarism/copyright infringement.  Is Vander Ark’s Harry Potter Lexicon considered copyright infringement because of the significant amounts copied directly from the book?  Some moral issues on the part of the judge would be whether or not to consider his/her own interests in making the ruling.  Depending on the way the judge rules it could hurt or help his/her reputation.  Also the judge will need to remain objective; he/she will need to leave their personal feelings out and only rely on the facts of the case in making the ruling.  The decision of whether or not to consider self-interest is s moral dilemma the judge will need to overcome.

STAKEHOLDERS

        There are a number of stakeholders involved in this lawsuit including Steve Vander Ark, RDR Books, J.K. Rowling, the federal judge, and the general public.  Depending on the outcome of the lawsuit Vander Ark and RDR Books could be affected financially; they could lose the possibility to make a large sum of money.  In winning the case they would be able to publish and sell the book with the potential to make huge financial gains.  In losing the case they will not be able to publish the book and therefore will lose that opportunity to sell the book.

        The lawsuit and its outcome could also affect the reputations of RDR Books and the judge.  When it comes to RDR Books their reputation could be damaged through publicity.  If they lose the case many authors could view it as bad publicity for RDR Books and therefore not want their name associated with the publishing company.  If they win the case it could show that they are dedicated to the authors that they publish which could have a positive effect on their reputation.  The judge’s reputation will be affected regardless of which party is ruled in favor of; either way there are going to be people that disagree with his/her decision and criticize him/her.  However, as I hinted above, ruling in favor of one party over the other could have different effects on the reputation of the judge.  If the general public wants Rowling to win over Vander Ark and the judge rules in favor of Rowling his/her reputation could be less adversely affected than if he/she rules in favor of Vander Ark and vice versa.

        I believe the general public is also a stakeholder in this case because depending on the outcome of the lawsuit they could be losing the ability to own a hard copy of the Lexicon.  If the judge rules in favor of Rowling the general public will have to continue to view the Lexicon online which could be difficult for those who don’t own computers.  If the judge rules in favor of Vander Ark the general public will be able to buy the Lexicon in bookstores or rent it from the library making it easier for those who don’t own computers to view it.

        I also want to point out that although Warner Bros. is involved in the lawsuit I don’t think they are stakeholders.  I don’t think that the outcome of this situation will directly affect them in any way.

SOLUTIONS

        One solution for this case is for the judge to rule in favor of Steve Vander Ark and RDR Books allowing them to publish the Harry Potter Lexicon as a book without it being copyright infringement.  Another solution is to rule in favor of Vander Ark and RDR Books allowing them to publish the book but requiring that a portion of the profits made be paid to Rowling.  A third solution, the exact opposite of the first, is to rule in favor of Rowling and Warner Bros and not allow the book to be published and have it remain as an internet web site only.  A fourth solution, similar to the last, is to rule in favor of Rowling and Warner Bros by not allowing the book to be published but also making Vander Ark take down the internet site by concluding that the Lexicon, in its entirety, is copyright infringement.