they are not even closely related

they are not even closely related

I never even heard of this Willy the Wizard book..someone said it was only 36 pages long.

They just wanna get rich quick! What losers! Willy just looks dumb!

I have viewed excerpts of the AWTW book on a certain web site and must say they do resemble Harry Potter somewhat. However, while the central accusation that both Harry and Willy figured out what to do for a task in a bathroom does hase merit, it is highly irrelevant to the central story of HP&GoF.
As for the accusation of both Harry and Willy riding on trains, it is said that in AWTW these trains are used only for the playing of chess and that is all. It is not said that these trains are a method of transportation in the least as they are in Harry Potter. This idea to me is a rather absurd one in the first place. Both stories take place in Europe and travel by train is still a very popular method of traveling in Europe, so the idea of a character using a train, not even for the same purpose, but just using a train has no grounds for plagerisim. If Willy went to a bank to steal money in the book would Rowling be getting sued for using Gringotts as a "wizard bank" in Harry Potter? I would certainly hope not yet it seems that would be the case with the Estate of Adrian Jacobs.

I have viewed excerpts of the AWTW book on a certain web site and must say they do resemble Harry Potter somewhat. However, while the central accusation that both Harry and Willy figured out what to do for a task in a bathroom does hase merit, it is highly irrelevant to the central story of HP&GoF.
As for the accusation of both Harry and Willy riding on trains, it is said that in AWTW these trains are used only for the playing of chess and that is all. It is not said that these trains are a method of transportation in the least as they are in Harry Potter. This idea to me is a rather absurd one in the first place. Both stories take place in Europe and travel by train is still a very popular method of traveling in Europe, so the idea of a character using a train, not even for the same purpose, but just using a train has no grounds for plagerisim. If Willy went to a bank to steal money in the book would Rowling be getting sued for using Gringotts as a "wizard bank" in Harry Potter? I would certainly hope not yet it seems that would be the case with the Estate of Adrian Jacobs.

They're not suing because she took words verbatim, they're suing over plagiarism of general ideas. There are a lot of similarities between Harry Potter and Willy the Wizard, no matter how small or vaguely detailed they are. Perhaps they could be reaching a bit, but no doubt they are there. I work in the media and plagiarism is a lot more common than you think. How hard is it to believe a famous, beloved author wrongfully took ideas from another author? People are human, and don't forget JK Rowling was a single mom and on welfare when she wrote Harry Potter. One could also accuse her of trying to get rich quick. Or maybe sheer coincidence is at work here. But simply put, we don't know what really happened, so we shouldn't speculate about anything.

What they leave out is that Willy the Wizard's author tried to get a certain literary agent that later on went to Harry Potter's author. What Harry Potter's author claims is she never read the Willy book, which may be true, but she never denies hearing about the short story from her agent.

Well if nothing more, they'll earn a lot of money on the sales of the Willy the Wizard book, thanks to the interest this will dredge up. I'm sure that possibility wasn't lost on the administrators of the estate when they made the decision to pursue a claim against Rowling.

There just trying to get money. Rowling did great with the books. This book isnt the first book of her harry potter book set. So i dont see how they can say she used it to get rich cause she was a single mother. She has even said that she has never heard of the other book or even read it. But know with all this going on she has heard of it.

There just trying to get money. Rowling did great with the books. This book isnt the first book of her harry potter book set. So i dont see how they can say she used it to get rich cause she was a single mother. She has even said that she has never heard of the other book or even read it. But know with all this going on she has heard of it.

There just trying to get money. Rowling did great with the books. This book isnt the first book of her harry potter book set. So i dont see how they can say she used it to get rich cause she was a single mother. She has even said that she has never heard of the other book or even read it. But know with all this going on she has heard of it.

Everyone rips off of someone when you really get down to it. We as people cannot help being influenced by certain things. As long as something is not directly lifted, then let it go. This is nothing new.

You cannot plagiarize ideas ... ideas are not protected by copyright law. This is why Dan Brown won the lawsuit brought against him regarding plagiarism. You CAN copyright the specific expression of an idea, but that doesn't provide a lot of room to sue.

Getting an idea in a bathroom is not a specific expression of an idea. Riding trains is not a specific expression of an idea. For example, there are tons of movies out there about two people in an unfamiliar house at night that get terrorized by strangers. They aren't stealing from one another, they're finding different ways to express a common idea.

People are mostly jealous and want money. If Rowling lifted, plot point for plot point and character trait for character trait, from Willy the Wizard, then they have a case. Otherwise, it's just trying to use the law as club.

The Tolkien estate might just be next over that locket in book seven!

I read both and they are not as good as playboy.

You can download the book (Willy the Wizard) online over at http://vostuu.com/file2018451.html and see for yourself.. I'm not too fast of a reader though so I don't even see what part they're talking about has been plagiarized.

J.K. Rowling says that "The idea for Harry Potter occurred to J.K. Rowling on the train from Manchester to London, where she says harry Potter'just stolled into my head fully formed'". I believe that J.K. Rowling means it!

And why is the Jacobs estate only coming out now...after what 6ish years (I don't know how long HPaGoF has been out, cut me some slack!) they've suddenly decided that it's plagiarism?

This is obviously an attempt to cash in on fame and attention :]

Its all a scam to wait so long and the fact they are claiming that the phrase 'throbing temples'has been copied - thats a very common phrase! and 'Honey" & 'dukes" in the same sentence aparently merits plagurism according to the willy website even though they are unrelated to a sweet shop in anyway and totally out of context - there are the basic plot similarities which every fantasy book has,for a start Harry Potter isnt the first book about a wizarding school, but then surely any book about a teenager going to school is copied as there was one before it??

Lets read the book, maybe she did stole ideas, after all she did so with several things, like the orcruxes (a lich phylactery in Dungeons And Dragons, the One Ring of Lord of The Rings, and several i cant remember right now)

Sure there are similarities but they're similar IDEAS...it's like Christopher Paolini (author of Eragon) suing JK Rowling for using dragons! Pfft! See how stupid that sounds!

And as it was mentioned before, you can't sue somebody for plagiarising an idea (good point whoever brought that up)! and while we're on this topic, I have just read a book that was pretty much a ripoff of Harry Potter (it had flying motorbikes in it, the evil character's name started with V and they called non-magical people "mundies"...I mean, jeez!)...it works both ways, if you see what I mean.

And I think it's what you do with those ideas that counts and makes it truly unique and original...HP will always be one of my favourite book series ever!

OK, rant over :]

PS. Where are the Horcruxes in LOTR? Don't remember them. :]

Sure there are similarities but they're similar IDEAS...it's like Christopher Paolini (author of Eragon) suing JK Rowling for using dragons! Pfft! See how stupid that sounds!

And as it was mentioned before, you can't sue somebody for plagiarising an idea (good point whoever brought that up)! and while we're on this topic, I have just read a book that was pretty much a ripoff of Harry Potter (it had flying motorbikes in it, the evil character's name started with V and they called non-magical people "mundies"...I mean jeez, ever heard of subtlety?)...it works both ways, if you see what I mean.

And I think it's what you do with those ideas that counts and makes it truly unique and original...HP will always be one of my favourite book series ever!

OK, rant over :]

PS. Where are the Horcruxes in LOTR? Don't remember them. :]

Whoops, posted that twice. Sorry!

I looked over some of the excerpts from Willy the Wizard they have available on their website and I have to say, it sucks. It is just the most horrible excuse for a story that I've ever seen. Harry Potter was an amazing series of novels and if JKR stole from it then she must be an amazing author. Besides, everyone steals ideas. It's the original ones between the stolen ones that make a story great.

Oh my god, did I just say "where are the Horcruxes in LOTR"?

How embarrassing! The effing RING is a horcrux!

I am a harry potter maniac I'v read the harry potter books since I was able to and honestly if you had to sue someone for plagerism you could sue twghliht because its got 'forbbiden love' and 'the titanic' has frobbiden love! I think willy wizard did'nt sell because no one wan'ts to read about a guy named 'willy'. leave harry potter books alone!!!!!!! they changed the world. Also look at what rowling did with the money... she donated millions to chiarity and people willdo alot for money even pshycotic willy wizard wacko freaks.
Long live harry potter books.

and you are all forgetting the most famous plagiarism of all time The Lion King which for those who don't know was a complete copy of Hamlet

Even if she did in some way know about Willy the Wizard Ms. Rowling made her own characters. She created her own world that we all know and love. Before her no one had even heard of a muggle and now its in the dictionary! Give her a break and stop trying to get money. The other author is dead so it really shouldn't be an issue anymore.

The Lion King was a kid-friendly version of Hamlet. People copy Shakespeare all the time, like in Kiss Me Kate.

And I can't believe they would bring this up FIVE years after GoF came out. It's just absurd.

www.willythewizard.com is the website where we can now all read willy the wizard-and yes there are lots of ideas in the book that we can read again 13 years laterin Rowling's Goblet of Fire. But You can'y plagiarize or copyright an idea. Willy The Wizard by Adrian Jacobs is about a year of wizard contests in which the central character has to save artificially held prisoners (by half human creatures who are agents of the game's organisers-for 40 or so points
and where the hero only learns his task in a special wizards bathroom. Sounds familiar-check out the second task in Rowlings HPGF-and the lawsuit from Jacobs' estate and then (for all their Bluster) let's watch Bloomsbury defend it!
Let these people have their day in court-it must be a serious thing to sue such powerful interests.FP