Rowling named Harry after a brother and sister she used to play witches and wizards with as a girl, their name was POTTER. Stouffer's claims are rot, take NIMBUS this is a rain cloud or halo of light around a saint, because Stouffer named a character this Rowling is accused of copying because she has a BROOM called NIMBUS 2000. (LONG LIVE THE BALLYCASTLE BATS!) [the what?]
 

What is Stouffer talking about? 'Much of Rowling's fame and glory might be hers'. J.K. Rowling's books are a masterful creation, and from what I can see all Ms Stouffer ever did was self-publish some activity books. If she wanted to get some real fame and glory, maybe she should write some decent books worth reading and stop capitalising on other people's success. Before any news of this alleged plagiarism came out, J.K. Rowling already had children all over the world captivated by her writing ability. It is the skill of the author that had made these books what they are, not just some names that Ms Stouffer claims to be her trademark.
 

One other thing, I love this quote: "'Neville' is another name in the books I have trademarked." -- I never realised that you could trademark a name! If it is true that you can just think of all the money I could make from the church for using my name (Peter) in all those copies of the bible that have been printed over the last 2000 years! Don’t even think about it Nancy, I was born with this name, it’s mine, you hear! I for one won’t be reading Nancy’s books if they ever publish them in the UK.
 

Her books are so great, sold so well, yet she couldn't find a copy?!? Also, if her books sold that well, don't you think that they would have made the bestsellers list or something... I couldn't find it in ask.com, yahoo.com, and other search engines.
 

Another nonsense is because Rowling has a castle and lake in her books, she must have copied Stouffer, castles and lakes have been used in fantasy books and films for years. Rowling lives in Edinburgh in Scotland where Hogwarts is located in the Highlands, there are no shortage of real castles and lakes in Scotland in fact Edinburgh castle used to have a lake beside it before the land was reclaimed and in europe in general there are plenty of castles and lakes.Lastly did Larry Potter exist before Harry Potter or did Stouffer alter some old unpublished books of hers to make them look more like Rowling's books.
 

Is Stouffer absolutely sure she is the first person to ever use the name Potter in literature? She better check or else she can expect a lawsuit from someone who used it before her! Finally, Stouffer admitted that the only Harry Potter book she read was Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. In fact, she didn't actually read it. According to her, she scanned through it. Yep. She desperately wants $$$...at JKR's expense. Give it up, Stouffer! I have no intention of reading your book! In fact, I never even heard of it until now, and I live in the USA. A billion dollars in earnings...yeah, and the earth is shape like a pyramid.
 

I went to Nancy's website when I first heard about the legal issue, about a year ago. When I read her accounts of receiving death-threats from JKR's fans, I felt sympathetic. There's no excuse for getting evil about it. And after all, there could be something to what she claims. Only trying to protect her livelihood and all that. And if her claims were true, and some ideas were *inadvertently* taken from her books, then Rowling and her publisher could certainly afford to settle some amount on her for compensation.

Then I read the details of her "stolen" creative ideas. Good Lord! As everyone here has pointed out, nearly every one of her claims is based on well-established fantasy "cliches", if you will, such as castles with big wooden doors and bodies of water nearby. To claim that Rowling stole the names of her characters from Stouffer's Larry and Lily Potter is silly. If the name were an uncommon, completely made-up one, like Rumpelstiltskin, it would be hard to dispute that there was something fishy, as two people would be unlikely to independently come up with the same name. But Potter is such a common name! Would she sue me if I wrote a story about Gary and Millie Potter? Ridiculous! And stories about children discovering magic powers are throughout literature. Maybe the creators of Superman should sue her because Clark Kent wears glasses and has dark hair. After all, he was once Superboy.

The only word that is at all unusual is the word "muggle." And as has already been pointed out, it existed long before Nancy came along, and has meant many things in many different times and contexts. Poor Nancy! Because of JKR's fame, her lawsuit, and this new printing, some people may actually get to read her life's work. You'd think she'd just enjoy the affinity and milk it for all it's worth.
 

In my humble opinion she deserves all of the ridicule and criticism she gets. Her lawsuit is a blatantly opportunistic and insults the intelligence of readers everywhere. Whatever her "rights" may be, freedom from criticism is not one of them. Nor is she entitled to an audience for her work. I say flame away, lampoon to your heart's content, boycott her books, and tell her what you think of her absurd claims and her exploitative marketing strategy. If she can't take it, then maybe it is time for her to quietly examine what she may be doing to bring this on herself.
 

I would have trouble reading this, (and I'm well-educated) much less a 6 year old who's just starting to read!!??? The plot may be interesting if she'd tone down the hoity-toity language and the endless descriptions of the wars. Based upon the beginning, I would think that it was only about wars. I would not care to read it since I'm not a big war fan. But I'm sure once you get past the first part, it may get more interesting. Just say, "There was a big war." Children will understand and the story can move on. Sorry, honey, you don't have what it takes and all the lawsuits in the world aren't going to lift you up into the same league as JK.
 

As for JKR owing her success to Stouffer, come on; that's stretching it a tad, don't you think? It takes a heck of a lot more than a vague concept or idea to create something as deep and phenomenal as JKR has created with Harry's story(ies). Is anyone going to sue the writer who wrote "Girl With A Pearl Earring", a book based on the famous painting? Of course not. You need exceptional talent and imagination to create something as complex and as effective as the Harry Potter stories; no matter where her subconscious may or may not have drawn the stories from, there is no way to argue the fact that Harry, his life, his name, his friends, and every other thing about him that has made him so popular and beloved by so many, is due to the imagination and writing talents of JKR.
 

I bet in twenty years time people will still have their Harry Potter books somewhere, and their children will pick them up read them ask their parents what they are, and the Harry craze will start again. Because that's what J.K.'s writing does, it draws you in, makes you look again, and each time you unlock a bit more of the magic of the amazing world she has created. Who cares about Larry Potter?

Why has Mrs. Stouffer only mentioned her books when Harry is at his peak? She says her idea has been stolen but I can think of many stories with magic in them the worst witch, Narnia books, Lord of the Rings and many more. She just wants to get a little fame but by going up against J.K. Rowling, she has just made sure no-one ever buys her books. I can tell you this much, the profits won't be in the billions this time!
 

As for her claims to approach the matter in a business-like matter-well they haven't gone very far as she managed to slip out the name of Ms. Rowling's former husband when JK specifically asked for his name not to be disclosed to the public.
 

1. JK Rowling is clever enough to write such good stories, and so it stands to reason that if she was going to copy then she wouldn't be thick enough to use such similar names.
2. "I lost the records in a snowstorm" is about as believable as "the dog ate my homework".
3. Stouffer claims to be an English language writer, and this implies a better grasp of the language than "NEVILLE LOOSES (sic) THINGS" and "NIMBUS FLYS (sic) THROUGH THE AIR."
4. She only came onto the scene when the Harry Potter franchise became massively profitable.
5. Stouffer claims that her 25-page books retailed for $4 each, around the same price (at that time) as a full-length novel. I doubt such overpriced material would be as popular as she claims it was.

Oh and BTW, Larry and Harry merely rhyme. And you do not own the name Lily, for one thing that's a flower, and a name. Hey, Larry and Harry may look alike, but what do you picture when you think of a scrawny little boy? Do you picture a boy thats hot? Probably not. I picture a short skinny kid with glasses. I have not read your book, will not, and if I did I would not understand a word of it. If the way you talk on your web-site is the way you talk in your books, I'd say Id need to be a scholar to read them.

And guess what your doing. Sure it might be a little money for you if you win, but do you undersatnd what you would do to the youths of the world? I have heard of people who are homeless, and their only happiness was when they started reading HP. you are a disgrace if you think you can take away the only hope of the people who need it the most. The poor, the rich, the abused, the homeless. Have you effected any of these people as much as JKR has? Have you made my self confidence raise a 100%? No. It is pretty sad that the world revolves around money. That is all you are in this for. It is a scam.

People like me, who are foolish enough to wonder if the books are anything alike, will go out and buy your book, which you are REPUBLISHING. SO not only will you get a little fame from that, but you actaully want to take away someone elese work? If you ask me you are copying JKR in a way. You are copying her by taking away her fans. And my last thing I am saying to you is, "Who would want to own the slang term for drugs?".