What I do want to say though is that Thomas has shown remarkebly poor judgement all accross the board. He seriously needs to decide whether he wants the TSR peeps to be friends, slaves or employees, becase you can't have your cake and eat it too.
My father runs a rather lage company. He does not personally know all the people that work for him. He pays them for their work and talks to them often, but he doesn't know who they are outside the factory. So he knows better than to waltz unto the workfloor showing pictures of his newly adopted cousin or the house he's building in France. That's just common sense and has noting to do with the internet stealigng our privacy and so on.

It's the same with Thomas and the FAs. Either they're his friends and he needs to stop paying them for their work and cracking the whip, or they're his employees and he needs to keep a professional distance. A decent boss can't be both a manager and your best buddy, especially not in a very large company. The reverse is also true. Don't try to be friends with the guy who writes your paycheck. As soon as the exchange of money is involved, it's hard to talk friendship.
He choose to brag to a bunch of employees. Apparently, one of these employees isn't as much of a friend as he thought. Thomas is a big boy and he doesn't need us or anyone else to watch out for him and hold his hand on the mean old intartubes. He made a very poor decision. If he's suffering because of it, that's entirely his fault.

I know that in your eyes, his incredibly poor managment skills aren't reason enough to have these pictures redistributed, but I'm still of the opinion that the people who were being lied to ('sub money pays for server costs') had a right to the truth. If a real reporter caught wind of something fishy going on in the management of, for example, a multinational company, I'd also expect that person to sound the alarm and gather the troops. If there's a reasonable chance you've discovered a truth that was purposefully being hidden by those who benefit from it (as is the case here), I would go so far as to say that it's your duty to get the word out.

But, again, we're talking opinions here.

You mean this lexicon? It's the only one I'm familiar with and I faintly recall that there were past issues in regards to rights and possibly being closed down.

Skoria_Bay he does still have the site, and LadyDea, that is the one. His publisher kept telling him that it would be fine because he wrote the stuff. The publisher felt that even though it used quotes from the book, they could still publish it and give credit to Rowlings.

siberiansunset, yeah we know who would win that. But I would love to hear the argument TSR puts up. What on earth could they possibly say that would make what they are doing legal?

What?!  Linky, please.

What I think rum was referring to was the site that wants to publish the Harry Potter encyclopedia/lexicon.  Rowlings has a HP encyclopedia in the works and is trying to stop the website from making money in publishing theirs.