Warner Bros. v. RDR Books
A reference purpose may be transformative, but excessive copying and substitution for companion markets can defeat fair use.
INDEPENDENCE · COPYRIGHT · METHOD
Harry Potter Studies
An independent Academy of Worlds program for criticism, teaching, scholarship, and source-conscious analysis—not Hogwarts, roleplay, trivia, or a substitute for authorized works.
Independent status
Academy of Worlds is an independent fan-learning project. Harry Potter Studies is not produced by, affiliated with, sponsored by, or endorsed by Warner Bros. Entertainment, J.K. Rowling, Wizarding World Digital, or their affiliates. Harry Potter and related names are used only as necessary to identify the subject of study. Third-party intellectual property remains with its respective owners.
What Academy creates
Academy creates original educational prose, analysis, curriculum, learning objectives, assessments, timelines, comparative scholarship, certificates, interface, and Scholar progression. Academy publishes scholarship about source works; it does not publish the novels, screenplays, films, audio, companion works, or official reference material.
Fair-use framework
17 U.S.C. § 107 identifies criticism, comment, teaching, scholarship, and research as purposes that may qualify for fair use. Educational purpose is not automatically fair use. Academy considers all four factors: its analytical and noncommercial purpose; the highly creative nature of the source works; the amount and importance of any material used; and possible effects on existing and potential markets.
Lessons from relevant decisions
Castle Rock v. Carol Publishing
A large fan-recall trivia product was not made transformative merely by converting fictional details into questions.
Twin Peaks v. Publications International
Comment or criticism does not excuse excessive detailed plot reproduction.
Paramount v. Carol Publishing
A guide can create substitution concerns when it largely recounts protected fictional history.
Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley
Contextual historical use was transformative on its facts; Academy does not treat it as permission to use Harry Potter images.
New Kids on the Block v. News America
Limited referential naming may be appropriate when needed to identify a subject and sponsorship is not suggested; this Ninth Circuit authority is background, not universal law.
How Academy differs from the RDR Lexicon
| Concern | Academy response |
|---|---|
| Large reference compilation | Structured analytical curriculum |
| Heavy factual recitation | Teaching, interpretation, and source comparison |
| Excessive source wording | Original Academy prose and minimal reviewed quotation |
| Companion content incorporated heavily | Companion works are cited, never recreated |
| Reference-market substitution | Courses complement rather than replace authorized sources |
| Commercial printed product | Free, noncommercial, text-led learning program |
Not pure trivia
Assessments test Academy instruction about evidence, chronology, institutions, ideology, causation, ethics, literature, adaptation, and continuity. They avoid quotation completion, exact dialogue, incidental details, and moment-by-moment entertainment recall.
Our content commitments
No chapters, substantial passages, scripts, dialogue archive, audiobooks, films, clips, soundtrack, official art, logos, companion-book reconstruction, scraped official corpus, scene-by-scene summary, fanfiction, Hogwarts simulation, or paid Harry Potter education.
Sources and continuity
The core novels, companion works, official archive material, films, Fantastic Beasts screen works, stage works, games, and adaptations are classified separately. Conflicts and thin evidence are disclosed. Students are encouraged to consult authorized primary works for further study.
Rights inquiries
Academy respects creators and rights holders. Concerns may be sent to rights@academyofworlds.com. This page describes internal safeguards and is not legal advice or a claim of rightsholder approval.