The Instigator
Kohaku
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points
The Contender
Kikematsu
Pro (for)
Losing
8 Points

JK Rowling's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was plagiarized from Willy the Wizard

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Kohaku
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/5/2010 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,423 times Debate No: 13161
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (5)

 

Kohaku

Con

Rowling (Harry Potter) vs. the Jacobs Estate (Willy the Wizards)

The Jacobs Estate claim that JK Rowling's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was copied and plagiarized from Willy the Wizard.

I say Rowling did not plagiarism because Rowling said that she did not read Willy the Wizard (1).

My second reason is that Mrs. Rowling did not plagiarize from Willy the Wizard is because Mrs. Rowling used the usual uses from literature, mythology, real life events and other fiction.

One claim is that Mrs. Rowling copied from Willy the Wizard by having both books having the protagonist wizard competing in a magic contest (2). Many real life events involve competitions and real life events can influence an idea to a writer. It is easy think of competitions for your books, since there a lot of books and other fiction involve magical competition in a story arc (3). Since it is that easy to think of having competitions as a storyline she could have think of having a competition as a storyline for her books or do research on real life competitions like the Olympics, World Cup, Tennis, international martial arts competitions and etc. Competitions have been going on since the early days of the Roman Coliseum (4), maybe even longer than that. So Willy the Wizard is not the only thing that has competitions, there are so many competitions in fiction and real life that can have an influence JK Rowling.

The Jacobs Estate claim Mrs. Rowling also copyright by "Both Willy and Harry complete the task using information gleaned from helpers." (5). This is the one of the most common in literature, mythology and other fiction, this is called companionship where a warrior or people befriends the hero. This also happened in Wizard of Oz where Dorothy gets help from the Tin Man, Scarecrow and the Cowardly Lion. It also happened in Jason and the Argonauts, Power Rangers, Code Lyoko, Sailor Moon with the Sailor Scouts, and etc. Explain more at You Tube video number 3 and 4.

Just like Star Wars Revealed, JK Rowling could have the same or similar influence and ideas for Goblet of Fire as George Lucas did with Star Wars that the Jacob Estate obviously missed.

1.http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
2.http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
3.http://tvtropes.org...
4.http://www.rlrouse.com...
5.http://www.scribd.com...
Kikematsu

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate.

First I like to debunk my opponent's statements.

My opponent's statement says, "I say Rowling did not plagiarism because Rowling said that she did not read Willy the Wizard". Of course she will stay that to defend herself so she won't lose part of her business.

With your Joseph Campbell and Star Wars: Revealed You Tube theories, Joseph Campbell is wrong and nothing what he says that it claims to be (1). All of my opponent's "Star Wars: Revealed" You tube videos that my opponent's has is wrong, according to my first source.

My second opponent's statement is that "the Goblet of Fire" are the common uses of literature and other fiction throughout paragraphs 4-7, his ‘second reason' he calls it. It might be true but it is how it is written in both books that defines the copyright (2). There are at least 44 parts of copyright between Willy the Wizard and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (3). Is having 44 points of the same material between Willy the Wizard and the Goblet of Fire would be a coincidence? The truth is NO.

Willy the Wizard was issued at 1987 (4) and Goblet of Fire was issued at 2000 (5).

A law firm Andrews Kurth says that JK Rowling illegally copied from Willy the Wizard (6). How can a dozen of smart and successful lawyers can be so wrong? There are more a dozen of lawyers in the firm (7). Paul Gregory Allen (the head of the Adrian Jacobs Estate who is suing Rowling, Bloomsbury and Scholastic) was agreed by Thomas Kline, Joseph A Patella and Michele Schwartz who are great and smart lawyers and with a good education (8)(9)(10). Explain to me how they can be wrong? One lawyer can be wrong but a dozen can not. Lawyers are smart (11) and there are three lawyers backing up Allen's statements that Adrian Jacobs' "Willy the Wizard" was illegally copied by "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire".

May I ask the wonderful viewers to not let their personal feelings get in the way of this voting and vote only base on our logical arguments.

(1)http://www.ventrice.com...
(2)http://www.copyright.gov...
(3)http://www.scribd.com...
(4)http://www.thebookseller.com...
(5)http://en.wikipedia.org...
(6)http://www.lexisnexis.com...
(7)http://www.andrewskurth.com...
(8)http://pview.findlaw.com...
(9)http://pview.findlaw.com...
(10)http://pview.findlaw.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Kohaku

Con

Thanks for my opponent accepting.

You wrote "With your Joseph Campbell and Star Wars: Revealed You Tube theories, Joseph Campbell is wrong and nothing what he says that it claims to be (1). All of my opponent's "Star Wars: Revealed" You tube videos that my opponent's has is wrong, according to my first source."

When you said how a bunch of smart people cannot be wrong, well my You Tube videos are full of successful filmmakers, professors of Hamilton and Dana College, two people who are or was Speaker of the House, and doctors, how can they be wrong? With your first source saying Joseph Campbell is wrong, well explain how can a bunch of successful and smart people can be wrong? How would Peter Jackson, JJ Abrams, Nancy Pelosi, Newt Gingrich, professors of college and doctors all be wrong? And how often you see Pelosi and Gingrich having the same point a view?

My opponent also wrote "My second opponent's statement is that "the Goblet of Fire" are the common uses of literature and other fiction throughout paragraphs 4-7, his ‘second reason' he calls it. It might be true but it is how it is written in both books that define the copyright. There are at least 44 parts of copyright between Willy the Wizard and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Is having 44 points of the same material between Willy the Wizard and the Goblet of Fire would be a coincidence? The truth is NO."

Writing 44 parts between two or more stories can be a coincidence. One example is between "Alice in Wonderland" and "Spirited Away" where two of the stories where a young female protagonist, goes to a parallel world and tries to find a way home (1). With Alice and Wonderland and Spirited Away with a lot of similarities (look at my second argument's You Tube video) it is possible that JK Rowling a lot of the same ideas from Willy the Wizard or any other novels without realizing it. We have to remember, there are more than a million stories in the world and one new story can have the same of many ideas from any of one of the million stories. Also, "ideas" are not protected by copyrights (2)(3).

You wrote that your side is solid all because of three lawyers and an entire law firm says so. Well Rowling, Bloomsbury and Scholastic Inc. has lawyers too and this will be the case of lawyers vs. lawyers. Rowling has lawyers and wants to dismiss the case (4). So in this lawyer battle, it is about being smart vs. being smarter.

With new development…

One of the claims is that both books are based on a boy wizard, competing in competitions (5). A boy as a protagonist is not rare to novels and other fiction. Pokemon has a boy as Ash Ketchum as the main protagonist (6) and there are very more examples of boy as the protagonist (7). Wizards are also common to the novel and fiction world (8) and international competition are also common to the story and fictional world (9). Competitions are also common in real life such as the Olympics, World Cup, sports, game shows and etc. Combining all three ideas can happen.

Coming back that using Wizards are very common, well the NBA team, the Washington Wizards also shows how common and how easy thinking wizards can be. Even your lawyer, Thomas R. Kline who lives in Washington DC (10) miss that fact. So how can anyone rely on a lawyer's statement, when he can't realize a big hint about how common of thinking wizards can be? It is not a fact that you can easily miss, especially a lawyer from Washington DC. In fact, all of Paul Allen's lawyers missed that fact and the fact how common wizards, boys as the protagonist and competitions are or the lawsuit would not exist. That tells that Paul Allen just wants money and they are jealous of Rowling's success, not the value of his own book itself.

To be clear, no novel or any other fiction will not be thinking as an original. When you think of having a samurai in your novel you are thinking samurais from the 1800s and earlier. That thought samurai came from the history of the samurais, not from your own mind itself. Rowling thinking of a boy wizard competing in a competition can come from anywhere, not just Willy the Wizard. Willy the Wizard is not the only one with having a boy protagonist, having a wizard and having a competition in novels and other fiction. Any of those three ideas separately could come from anywhere, not just Willy the Wizard. There are more than a million novels, other fiction and real life events that can influence Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

Next round…

(1)http://en.wikipedia.org...
(2)http://harvardlaw74.com...
(3)http://www.copyright.gov...
(4)http://www.hollywoodnews.com...
(5)http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
(6)http://en.wikipedia.org...
(7)http://tvtropes.org...
(8)http://www.amazon.com...
(9)http://tvtropes.org...
(10)http://www.andrewskurth.com...
Kikematsu

Pro

My opponent's statements between paragraphs 2 and 3 attack my statement about my argument that his You Tube videos are wrong and in fact they are because your first round You Tube videos are based on Joseph Campbell's theory and Campbell has been proven wrong (1) and he being very deceitful (2). In other words my opponent is deceiving people with his first round You Tube videos so ignore them. You also argue that Peter Jackson, JJ Abrams, current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Newt Gingrich, professors of College and doctors are backing up your statements. The truth that Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich are full lies, so who knows they are speaking the truth (3)(4).

In my opponent's second statement says "Writing 44 parts between two or more stories can be a coincidence. One example is between "Alice in Wonderland" and "Spirited Away" where two of the stories where a young female protagonist, goes to a parallel world and tries to find a way home. With Alice and Wonderland and Spirited Away with a lot of similarities (look at my second argument's You Tube video) it is possible that JK Rowling a lot of the same ideas from Willy the Wizard or any other novels without realizing it. We have to remember, there are more than a million stories in the world and one new story can have the same of many ideas from any of one of the million stories. Also, "ideas" are not protected by copyrights."

I still say that having 44 similarities cannot be a coincidence. You wrote that between "Alice in Wonderland" and "Spirited Away" have a lot of similarities, well Hayao Miyazaki got permission from Alice and Wonderland and Rowling didn't. The way to tell is that Spirited Away is not being sued, and Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" is being sued.

My opponent also wrote: "You wrote that your side is solid all because of three lawyers and an entire law firm says so. Well Rowling, Bloomsbury and Scholastic Inc. has lawyers too and this will be the case of lawyers vs. lawyers. Rowling has lawyers and wants to dismiss the case. So in this lawyer battle, it is about being smart vs. being smarter."

Well a judge rule that the case will not be dismissed (5) and this proves that Paul Allen and Willy the Wizard's lawyers are smarter than Rowling's and Harry Potter lawyers. Justice David Kitchen says that Jacobs' estate Paul Allen had a chance of success (5) and this is looking can go Allen's way.

My opponent wrote:

"One of the claims is that both books are based on a boy wizard, competing in competitions. A boy as a protagonist is not rare to novels and other fiction. Pokemon has a boy as Ash Ketchum as the main protagonist and there are very more examples of boy as the protagonist. Wizards are also common to the novel and fiction world and international competition are also common to the story and fictional world. Competitions are also common in real life such as the Olympics, World Cup, sports, game shows and etc. Combining all three ideas can happen."

Three ideas can happen on there own but 44 ideas cannot. Although wizard are common to the fiction world, it his how two stories can be written in a similarly way that deifies how big of an issue that Mrs. Rowling violated the copyrights of Willy the Wizard. There are 44 similarities, not just three.

There are a lot of ways that Rowling plagiarized from Willy the Wizard (6) since there are so many similarities between the two books (7).

(1)http://www.ventrice.com...
(2)http://www.answers.org...
(3)http://www.hyscience.com...
(4)http://irritableliberal.blogspot.com...
(5)http://www.nzherald.co.nz...
(6)http://www.copyright.gov...
(7)http://www.scribd.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Kohaku

Con

My opponent said "My opponent's statements between paragraphs 2 and 3 attack my statement about my argument that his You Tube videos are wrong and in fact they are because your first round You Tube videos are based on Joseph Campbell's theory and Campbell has been proven wrong and he being very deceitful. In other words my opponent is deceiving people with his first round You Tube videos so ignore them. You also argue that Peter Jackson, JJ Abrams, current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Newt Gingrich, professors of College and doctors are backing up your statements. The truth that Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich are full lies, so who knows they are speaking the truth."

The fact is that you don't have proof that Nancy Pelosi AND Newt Gingrich are lying in this case and many professors of college and PhDs are backing up Pelosi and Gingrich's statements, according to my first round You Tube videos.

You wrote, "I still say that having 44 similarities cannot be a coincidence. You wrote that between "Alice in Wonderland" and "Spirited Away" have a lot of similarities, well Hayao Miyazaki got permission from Alice and Wonderland and Rowling didn't. The way to tell is that Spirited Away is not being sued, and Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" is being sued."

I still say that 44 similarities ideas can be a coincidence because it happens many times. Such as similarities between "Alice in Wonderland" and "Spirited Away", "Pokemon" and "Digimon" (1)(2), "Star Wars" and "Gundam" series have a lot of similarities (3) and their many more examples. The truth is that neither of them sued each other because they are all have ides and concepts, well ideas and concepts are not protected by copyright laws (4).

You wrote, "Well a judge rule that the case will not be dismissed and this proves that Paul Allen and Willy the Wizard's lawyers are smarter than Rowling's and Harry Potter lawyers. Justice David Kitchen says that Jacobs' estate Paul Allen had a chance of success and this is looking can go Allen's way."

Well the judge has not ruled or declared Paul Allen as the winner yet and the judge said that his case is "improbable" (5).

The lawyer, Nick Kounoupias said that "If the claim does proceed, then JK Rowling and Bloomsbury will be required to explain how the similarities between the two works came about, when to date there has been a refusal to disclose key manuscripts and notebooks." (5).

My answer to him is that both authors used the common uses of literature and other fiction, just like any author or fictionist would use (6).

Wizard is very common to the literature world (7). Boy as the protagonist are common to the fiction world too (8). Authors of tournaments for their books can are easy and very common to the fiction and real life world (9). One of Allen's claims that similarities that "both protagonist had help" (10), well protagonist normally have companions to help him on the hero's quest (11), said so on my first round You Tube vides. This is the writing industry, companionship is one of the most common uses in literature and Paul Gregory Allen who suppose to have knowledge in the writing industry forgot or don't realized that companionship is one the most common uses in literature and other fiction. In other words, Paul Allen and his lawyers know zip about literature and the common uses in fiction so Allen wouldn't know what could have been plagiarizes and what were from the common uses in literature for the Goblet of Fire. Monsters are also common in literature (12). Another piece that Paul Allen does not realize. I just don't get how you can miss something simple, as monsters, boy heroes, wizards and companionship are the common uses in literature and other fiction, it just makes no sense.

My last statements is that Rowling could have uses the aspects of the common uses of literature and fiction for the Goblet of Fire and not from Willy the Wizard.

(1)http://www.escapistmagazine.com...
(2)http://boardreader.com...
(3)http://www.animefringe.com...
(4)http://smallbusiness.findlaw.com...
(5)http://www.nzherald.co.nz...
(6)http://tvtropes.org...
(7)http://www.amazon.com...
(8)http://tvtropes.org...
(9)http://tvtropes.org...
(10)http://www.scribd.com...
(11)http://tvtropes.org...
(12)http://classiclit.about.com...
Kikematsu

Pro

You wrote:

"The fact is that you don't have proof that Nancy Pelosi AND Newt Gingrich are lying in this case and many professors of college and PhDs are backing up Pelosi and Gingrich's statements, according to my first round You Tube videos."

Of course some highly educated people will backup Pelosi and Gingrich's statements because they are supporters, not truthful. Plus their statements don't relate to defend Rowling in their day in court.

You wrote:

"I still say that 44 similarities ideas can be a coincidence because it happens many times. Such as similarities between "Alice in Wonderland" and "Spirited Away", "Pokemon" and "Digimon", "Star Wars" and "Gundam" series have a lot of similarities and their many more examples. The truth is that neither of them sued each other because they are all have ides and concepts, well ideas and concepts are not protected by copyright laws."

Well Allen's four lawyers still say that Rowling plagiarized and violated the copyrights from Willy the Wizard (1). These four lawyers are smart enough to know about the copyright laws and they know that Rowling did plagiarized and violated the copyrights from Willy the Wizard and the way that Rowling plagiarized, the "idea are not protected by copyrights" is not a factor in Rowling's plagiarism, according Allen's four lawyers.

You wrote:

"Well the judge has not ruled or declared Paul Allen as the winner yet and the judge said that his case is "improbable"." The judge said that it is "improbable" but the judge did not declared Allen as the loser yet and know that he will be declared the winner.

When you tried to debunk Nick Kounoupias' statements ""If the claim does proceed, then JK Rowling and Bloomsbury will be required to explain how the similarities between the two works came about, when to date there has been a refusal to disclose key manuscripts and notebooks."

Then you wrote "My answer to him is that both authors used the common uses of literature and other fiction, just like any author or fictionist would use. Wizard is very common to the literature world. Boy as the protagonist are common to the fiction world too. Authors of tournaments for their books can are easy and very common to the fiction and real life world. One of Allen's claims that similarities that "both protagonist had help", well protagonist normally have companions to help him on the hero's quest, said so on my first round You Tube vides. This is the writing industry, companionship is one of the most common uses in literature and Paul Gregory Allen who suppose to have knowledge in the writing industry forgot or don't realized that companionship is one the most common uses in literature and other fiction. In other words, Paul Allen and his lawyers know zip about literature and the common uses in fiction so Allen wouldn't know what could have been plagiarizes and what were from the common uses in literature for the Goblet of Fire. Monsters are also common in literature. Another piece that Paul Allen does not realize. I just don't get how you can miss something simple, as monsters, boy heroes, wizards and companionship are the common uses in literature and other fiction, it just makes no sense."

Well the truth is that all of the stories have all of these aspects. "Samurai Jack" did not have any "companionship". So this does not mean that all books will have this and they all books and fiction will have a different chemistry of "troupe" (2). With Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire", it has all the same "troupe" and same concepts, settings and etc (3).

Kitchin J expressed the view that it was improbable that the action would succeed – but this was Willy's day of triumph (4), so Paul Allen won that round against Rowling, Bloomsbury and their lawyers.

Sadly for Rowling and Harry Potter fans, but I know Rowling did plagiarized on Willy the Wizard (5) because there are numerous similarities (6).

I would like to thank for this debate and I hope I become the winner and please vote for me.

(1)http://townhall.com...
(2)http://tvtropes.org...
(3)http://www.scribd.com...
(4)http://ipkitten.blogspot.com...
(5)http://www.scribd.com...
(6)http://jetl.wordpress.com...
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by ReDo 6 years ago
ReDo
GO Rowling.
Posted by Kleptin 6 years ago
Kleptin
You're not the only one who thinks that it is nonsense. The courts and the vast majority of the world think so a well. Stop issuing me challenges in which you take positions that infants can argue in their sleep. It's insulting to yourself as a debater.
Posted by Kohaku 6 years ago
Kohaku
Well the Jacobs Estate is currently suing JK Rowling, Bloomsbury Publishing and Scholastic Inc. for plagiarism and the Jacobs Estate accusing JK Rowling copying from Willy the Wizard and suing her for it. I believe that is all non-sense and this debate on the subject will be like the one in the US and British Courts.
Posted by Kleptin 6 years ago
Kleptin
Why is it that you always challenge people to debates in which you have the easiest position possible? Cowardice isn't a great trait to have as a debater.
Posted by Kohaku 6 years ago
Kohaku
Believe me, I have never read Willy the Wizard.
Posted by TheSkeptic 6 years ago
TheSkeptic
Why did you challenge me? I don't have an interest, expertise, nor necessarily disagree.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by shadow835 6 years ago
shadow835
KohakuKikematsuTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Awed 6 years ago
Awed
KohakuKikematsuTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
KohakuKikematsuTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:51 
Vote Placed by ReDo 6 years ago
ReDo
KohakuKikematsuTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Kikematsu 6 years ago
Kikematsu
KohakuKikematsuTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07