as much as i am a fan, i don't get the outrage over breaches in the harry potter embargo. the 12:01 a.m. on july 21st release date is just that. it's a marketing scheme, one that's designed to stir the public into a pre-potter frenzy. the rules of that scheme--no potter before 7/21--are not sacred. they're arbitrary. and there's no doubt that the intended frenzy has come about even with all the rule violations.
seriously, what's the big deal? no one wants to have spoilers slip out, but when a book is this popular it's pretty much inevitable. it's not the end of the world when they do slip through. it's not nice to spoil books for other people, but even when there isn't a spoiler, people seem to be offended just by the fact that the 12:01 rule was broken. is it really so hard to live with the fact that someone else might have the chance to read a novel before you?
and then there's this letter about the NYTimes' embargo breach. i'm referring to the last one behind the link, the one by andrew m. mangino. mr. mangino is upset that the newspaper "messed with the magic" of the books and might ruin the novel's surprises for the reader. and yet in the very first sentence he blurts out who died at the end of the sixth book. mrs. noz hasn't read "harry potter and the half-blood prince". maybe she never will. but thanks to mr. mangino she now knows how it ends. thanks for messing with the magic, dude!
