Pottermore is now open to the public. Is information from that site considered canonical?

Are we allowed to quote from that site when answering HP questions? Presumably all the content is approved by J.K.R., and certainly, there are tidbits directly from her expanding on various subjects. Those, at least, should be as authoritative as interview quotes, shouldn't they?

Are there any membership rules for that site (not allowed to leak content to non-members, for example) that would render that information as out-of-bounds?

  • 1
    I'm mildly tempted to move this to the main site, as 'is Pottermore canon' seems like a valid HP question. But I say that as someone who isn't a Harry Potter fan/expert.
    – user1027
    Commented Apr 21, 2012 at 3:33
  • I'm half tempted to delete it since I found the answer on my own, but thought I'd leave it out there in case others wonder. Commented Apr 21, 2012 at 3:37
  • 1
    @David - very useful question. I second Keen's idea of moving to main site. Commented Apr 22, 2012 at 15:33
  • required sign in? pass
    – DForck42
    Commented May 1, 2012 at 21:02

3 Answers 3


It depends.

Some people consider only the published books to be canon.

Some people consider the books and the movies canon.

Some people consider the books and J.K. Rowling interviews to be canon.

Some people consider the books, JKR interviews, and Pottermore canon.

So there's not a definitive answer to your question; different people consider Pottermore differently as far as being canon goes (personally, it's canon to me).

I admit that I'm unsure what question you answered for yourself because the answer you gave doesn't seem to correspond to "Is Pottermore Canon"? Maybe you could clarify? :)

The assertion that people may not discuss information found on Pottermore with others is patently absurd.

  • I was referring to the last sentence in my question - Are there any membership rules for that site (not allowed to leak content to non-members, for example) that would render that information as out-of-bounds? But I see from @Pearsonartphoto's response that there is precedent for using it. I think it should be canon as well, but it's just so darned fun to go through the site and unlock the new content that I'd hate to spoil it for others. Silly, thought, because all the questions/answers here couuld potentially give away plots to stories they're about. Commented Apr 21, 2012 at 4:51
  • @DavidStratton - I don't think it's a silly thought at all. I've tried to make it a practice myself to put all Pottermore information under spoiler tags, so people can choose for themselves if they want to read the new content. And, yes, sometimes that results in a good amount of text being under the spoiler tag, but if people have a huge problem with that they can choose another answer. To me spoiler tags are just common courtesy and, in the instance of Pottermore or any other new canon, should be utilized :) Oh, and thank you for clarifying. Commented Apr 21, 2012 at 18:17
  • Canon vs Word of God
    – Xantec
    Commented Apr 23, 2012 at 17:13

We actually already have quite a few answers that quote pottermore, even when it was in beta. I would say that it is fair use to quote portions of pottermore, just don't abuse it.


I don't see how the SFF.SE community could decide as a whole whether Pottermore is considered canon. As Slytherincess puts it, it's up to each individual to decide what they consider canon.

From our perspective, you are certainly allowed to cite Pottermore, like you're allowed to cite anything else (the books, the movies, interviews, what some random bloke wrote on his blog, …).

I had a quick look through the site's terms and conditions and saw no non-disclosure agreement. (Note that I did not perform a comprehensive review, and I'm not your lawyer anyway. What do with Pottermore content is your responsibility.) Subscribers agree to “ensure that […] all information provided by [them] via Pottermore is accurate, true and up to date in all respects and at all times and is not misleading in any way” and not to “make commercial use of [user-generated] content”. I didn't see any additional right granted above copyright law, so only fair dealing is permitted; in particular, direct quotes of material posted in Pottermore is likely illegal.

Note that we are not enforcers for Pottermore. If a contributor to Stack Exchange posts material in violation of the Pottermore terms and conditions, it is up to Pottermore to take any action they see fit. We will not edit Stack Exchange content or take sanctions against Stack Exchange users on the basis of Pottermore terms and conditions, since we are not a party to this agreement. If content is posted to Stack Exchange in violation of the copyright of a Pottermore contributor, said contributor can request the removal of the offending material by following Stack Exchange's copyright takedown procedure (§15 of the terms and conditions).

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .