<P> Outside these controversies, a number of particular incidents related to Harry Potter have also led, or almost led, to legal action . In 2005, a man was sentenced to four years in prison after firing a replica gun at a journalist during a staged deal for stolen copies of an unreleased Harry Potter novel, and attempting to blackmail the publisher with threats of releasing secrets from the book . Then in 2007 Bloomsbury Publishing contemplated legal action against the supermarket chain Asda for libel after the company accused them of overpricing the final Harry Potter novel, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows . A comprehensive list of intellectual property and speech lawsuits involving Harry Potter, Harry Potter Lawsuits and Where to Find Them, was compiled by attorney David Kluft in 2015 for the Trademark and Copyright Law Blog . </P> <P> In 1999, American author Nancy Kathleen Stouffer alleged copyright and trademark infringement by Rowling of her 1984 works The Legend of Rah and the Muggles (ISBN 1 - 58989 - 400 - 6) and Larry Potter and His Best Friend Lilly . The primary basis for Stouffer's case rested in her own purported invention of the word "Muggles", the name of a race of mutant humanoids in The Legend of Rah and the Muggles, and Larry Potter, the title character of a series of activity booklets for children . Larry Potter, like Harry Potter, is a bespectacled boy with dark hair, though he is not a character in The Legend of Rah and the Muggles . Stouffer also drew a number of other comparisons, such as a castle on a lake, a receiving room and wooden doors . Portions of Rah were originally published in booklet form in 1986 by Ande Publishing Company, a company founded by Stouffer together with a group of friends and family . Ande Publishing filed for bankruptcy in September 1987 without selling any of its booklets in the United States or elsewhere . Rowling has stated that she first visited the United States in 1998 . </P> <P> Rowling, along with Scholastic Press (her American publisher) and Warner Bros. (holders of the series' film rights), pre-empted Stouffer in 2002 with a suit of their own seeking a declaratory judgment that they had not infringed on any of Stouffer's works . The court found in Rowling's favour, granting summary judgment and holding that "no reasonable juror could find a likelihood of confusion as to the source of the two parties' works". During the course of the trial, it was held that Rowling proved "by clear and convincing evidence, that Stouffer has perpetrated a fraud on the Court through her submission of fraudulent documents as well as through her untruthful testimony", including changing pages years after the fact to retroactively insert the word "muggle". Her case was dismissed with prejudice and she was fined $50,000 for her "pattern of intentional bad faith conduct" in relation to her employment of fraudulent submissions, along with being ordered to pay a portion of the plaintiffs' legal fees . Stouffer appealed the decision in 2004, but in 2005 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling . In 2006 she stated on her website that she was planning to republish her books and was entertaining the possibility of another lawsuit against Warner Bros., J.K. Rowling and Scholastic Press . </P> <P> The Legend of Rah and the Muggles is currently out of print . In early 2001, it was published by Thurman House, LLC, a Maryland publishing company . Thurman House, formed by Ottenheimer Publishers to republish the works of Nancy Stouffer, was closed when Ottenheimer ceased operations in 2002 after filing for bankruptcy . Stouffer later asserted that any copies of the book published by Thurman House are unauthorized because the publisher failed to honour its contractual obligations to her . </P>

Who owns the movie rights to harry potter