Originally Posted by delphidb96
I disagree. The court made a *bad* decision and this puts all "derivative" works based upon extracting information and putting it in a database form. Think of all the Prima gaming guides for games like Diablo and Warcraft.
Nope, it was a clear case of stupid greed (Rowling) and idiocy (the court) winning over justice.
The key point made by the court in this case is that there was virtually no "creative input" by the author; he'd just taken extracts of Rowling's work and presented it pretty-much word-for-word. One would imagine that in a game guide, the author would have put a lot of effort into figuring out how to win the game - that presumably count as "creative input".
I'm afraid I disagree with your conclusion.