Perhaps, but the people who created that encyclopedia did not have access to her universe-building notes. They read her novel and then put in their own work col

Perhaps, but the people who created that encyclopedia did not have access to her universe-building notes. They read her novel and then put in their own work collating all the information within and compiling their encyclopedia. I don't know how extensive that encyclopedia was, but if it's at all comprehensive, probably a fair amount of work went into it. Hence, "quick buck" might be an unfair characterization of that work. And since they did not have access to Rowling's notes, why should they have to pay her anything for the work they put in? As a matter of fact, I'm sure they've already paid her some dues in the form of buying her novels. Let's take an analogy and assume JQuery does not have documentation. I download a copy of JQuery and write an API documentation for it. Should JQuery have the right to stop me from selling that documentation?