"An expert for Warner Bros will argue that 91% of the Lexicon content is taken from JK Rowling," adds Parness. "But they must also establish - how factual is a fictional fact?"

Rowling said she has stopped work on a new novel because the lawsuit in federal court has "decimated my creative work over the last month."

"This book constitutes wholesale theft of 17 years of my hard work," she testified Monday.

When Dale Cendali, Rowling's lawyer, asked how she felt about Harry, choked up and replied: "I really don't want to cry."

She also says it fails to include any of the commentary and discussion that enrich the Web site and calls it "nothing more than a rearrangement" of her own material.

One of her lawyers, Dan Shallman, on Friday told Judge Robert P. Patterson, who will hear the trial without a jury, that Rowling "feels like her words were stolen."

He said the author felt so personally violated that she made her own comparisons between her seven best-selling novels and the lexicon and was ready to testify about the similarities in dozens of instances.

In court Friday, Hammer said Rowling's lawyers did not want Vander Ark in the courtroom while Rowling testifies.

"It gives me no pleasure to take legal action, but I am here today because I feel very strongly about an important issue that affects everyone and not just me. If books that plagiarise other works are permitted, authors, fans and readers stand to lose. There are lots of books in many languages that comment on or criticize Harry Potter, and that's fine. But the book in this case is different. It provides no analysis and virtually no commentary. It takes far too much and it offers precious little in return. I would just like to add that I am extremely grateful for the incredible support of Harry Potter fans everywhere."

"Should it be published, I feel that carte blanche will be given to anybody who wants to make a quick bit of money,' Rowling said. 'The idea of my readership parting with their or their parents hard-earned cash for this is a travesty.'"

"What particularly galls is the lack of quotation marks,' Rowling testified. 'If Mr. Vander Ark had put quotations marks around everything he lifted, most of the lexicon would be in quotation marks."

But when Hammer tried to get Rowling to concede that the H.P. Lexicon is more comprehensive — in that it’s longer — than other books, she shot back: “Is that the best you can say for the Lexicon? That it has text?” She added, “An alphabetical rearrangement is the easiest and laziest way to re-sell my work.”

"Mr. Vander Ark has gutted that book," Rowling, who wrote seven Harry Potter novels, told a New York court. "He has simply taken it and copied it ... It is sloppy, lazy and it takes my work wholesale."

"He's taken my creation ... I did feel an act of betrayal," said Rowling. She said she was not sure if she had "the will or the heart" to now publish her own encyclopedia.

A bit of levity arrived early: As David Hammer, the lead attorney for RDR, introduced the owner of RDR, Roger Rapoport, he referred to him as the reason “why we’re here today.” But as Dale Cendali, the O’Melveny & Myers attorney representing Warner and Rowling took the podium to begin her opening remarks, she quipped that actually her client, J.K. Rowling, is the reason we’re here today.

“It’s not about money,” concluded Rowling on the stand. “There’s a measure of principle at stake. And I’m determined to have my say as an author.”

When asked to discuss the similarity of the Lexicon’s definition of Chinese fireballs on the stand with her own writing, she said that it was not like a giraffe, where if she and Mr. Vander Ark were describing the animal, they might inevitably use the same words. “It’s not as if we are describing something that exists outside my imagination,” she said.

Rather, she said she was opposed to how the “Lexicon” copied many phrases word-for-word from her book without adding meaningful additional context, adding that some of the work was sloppy or wrong. “Alohomora,” a spell that opens doors in Harry Potter’s world, does not come from “aloha,” the Hawaiian salutation, she said on the stand. Rather it derives from a West African term meaning favorable to thieves, she said.