Fair Use, Copyright and Rowling (Again)

Ms Rowling plans to testify in the case of Warner Bros. Entertainment and J. K. Rowling v. RDR Books where the author and Warner Bros. are trying to prevent a small publisher from publishing 'The Harry Potter Lexicon'.

The case hinges on fair use and where fair use becomes copyright infringement. Under the law, 'in determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered include —
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.'

A few issues come to mind when one thinks of this:
1. Can content which accompanies some other work and which has been published online and endorsed by the copyright holder of that other work subsequently be accused of violating copyright simply because the author of the second work plans to publish it in a more traditional manner?
2. What is the relationship between an online work available to readers without charge and a book sold to readers both of which contain the same material?
3. Can a copyright holder actually stop the publication of a companion work considering that the copyright in the original work does not extend to preventing the publication of companion works? Can a copyright holder legitimately claim that their work has merely been repackaged? And can that claim be made after the work has already been endorsed by the copyright holder?

The New York Times [1] says that 'though the case pits a billionaire author against a tiny publishing house, the Potter fan base seems to have little sympathy for RDR' although in an earlier article, [2] it described Ms Rowling as a copyright hog. I find that surprising considering that most Harry Potter fan sites exist in part due to the right of fair use. And I'm not sure if such a work in which an author has put a substantial amount of effort into can infringe a copyright simply because it's not a available at no cost to readers.

Links:
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/books/14potter.html?_r=1&ei=5090&en=960332b363f2f96c&ex=1365912000&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/business/09nocera.html?_r=1&ref=business&pagewanted=all