Bookbinder removes JKR from Harry Potter novels

[Waitwhat23]

This person is removing the title pages (and unsurprisingly the copyright pages) from Harry Potter novels so that author attribution is removed in order to sell on for a (considerable) profit to those who 'need to feel safe'.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11622773/Bookbinder-23-removes-JK-Rowlings-Harry-Potter-novels-amid-furore-transphobia.html

As has been pointed out elsewhere, European copyright law includes the right for attribution i..e the right to be recognised as the author of a work.

(As a note for the 'Daily Fail!!!' shriekers, this is being reported on various sources but this is by far the most detailed).

Agreed. If other 'reputable' outlets don't even bother to report on issues, then it does make people start to wonder why. I used to be an avid Guardian reader. I now just don't bother. Their adherence to chanting the mantras of gender ideology have meant that they have produced some very shoddy journalism (such as their ridiculous reporting of the Wi Spa incident).

And I don't mean this piece (which is a bit 'puff' though infuriatingly eye rolling).

Eye drops, yes - and cotton buds dipped in the font could be useful for every orifice, Nitro.

Thanks, I'll take a dozen to start with, and a bottle of the special Lourdes water for emergency Hate Non-Crime incidents and general sprinkling.

Well that’s sensible- wouldn’t want you to lose any more.

It’s what happens when you want to make an ideological stand but also still want all the stuff you like.

Book burning is always a good look.

In other news I don't watch Roman Polanski films. Would I pay $140 for a version of Rosemary's Baby edited to remove him? No. Because I'm not a total fucking numpty.

I suspect that the publisher will sue, the copyright info will have been removed if the author's name has been removed. The name of the publisher is on the back, the spine and the inner cover (the one with the copyright info on).

This is the crux of it isn’t it- taking someone’s name of something doesn’t mean they didn’t make it anymore. Just like changing your birth certificate can’t magically change your sex.

Or just cover her name with a thick-nibbed felt pen!

If he removes the bibliographic page then he's breaking the law (in the UK, at least). By law every publication must display the name of the printer.

This is on top of the illegality of breaching copyright, etc.

At this rate I’ll be able to go positively WILD with the heating Arabella - especially if I can get people signed up to my Holy Water Sprinkling courses. I am, after all, fully trained in said art & have experience in training others. (I can also be trusted to carry a bishop’s crook or mitre [multitasking not an option for this one] without getting my grubby wee paws on the item itself…)

Excellent point.

This bookbinder is also not doing anything new - erasing women's names from the work they did had happened throughout history.

But we all know, as do they, that Jo Rowling wrote those books.

I have very vague memories of working in a bookshop and unpacking books. We would remove that page if they were damaged because it made them unsellable. I can't remember of we sent the book back or just the page to prove it. But it is a thing!

I've never read so much shite in my life. What a wee wanker

Goodness, it really works. I looked at the front cover of the rebound copy of Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone and instantly I couldn’t remember who the author was, went completely out of my head as though they had never existed. Who would have thought that such a simple action could have such a profound and far reaching effect. It was almost as though someone had waved a wand and cast a mysterious spell of forgetfulness on my mind. Spooky or what.

What's PIE's point? Because the DM are reporting on it then it's not actually true?

😵‍💫

Due to the way MN truncates posts on Threads I'm On, your post was displayed as if you'd said, What's PIE?

Quite misleading!

Brendan O'Neil in the Spectator:

www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-war-on-jk-rowling/

or the war on transphobia and bigotry?

For any lurkers who haven't seen it, this is JKR's essay -

www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

Waitwhat23· Today 20:28
For any lurkers who haven't seen it, this is JKR's essay -

Thank you very much, I had read it but it is good to be reminded of what she wrote. It is an excellent, nuanced essay and in my opinion shows a great deal of empathy for transpeople at the same time as explaining her views about the erosion of women’s rights.

JK Rowling asks about once a month for proof she is transphobic. Lots of people reply.

Not one of those replies actually demonstrates how she was transphobic.

Unless perhaps you could quote exactly where she has been transphobic?

I'm very sure lots of people would reply if you asked if you are a misogynist. Does that mean you definitely are?

I mean it's been 3 years and we will don't know what it is she actually said that deems her 'transphobic'. Do you know anyone who does know? Can they pop in here and tell us?