RE: 16.2.4. Intentional copying of the written works of others (including but not limited to books, articles and/or manuscripts) with an intention to claim such work(s) as the member's own.

Who says Mrs. Edwards had intentions to claim the work as her own? Over the past two weeks I have discussed this with a few authors in the romance industry who have said they were told NOT to list their research resources. Those who did said the information was not in their book when it was released. The authors in question are a lot more famous than the e-book writers and unknowns on this site and the SB site. All of you who are waiting to see if Mrs. Edwards’ publishers drop her. You can forget it. It’s not going to happen!

I found the letter to be well thought out, articulate and very effective. I think if Jane had threatened a boycott she would have appeared to be irrational, overly emotional and somewhat senseless seeing as how multiple authors would be hurt by such an action. The end result of such a threat would only be to undermine the impact of the rest of the letter. Instead, as it’s written, Jane comes across as intelligent, informed, passionate and rational.

However, boycotting the entire publishing house will punish many authors who have done nothing wrong. A bit like tossing the baby with the bathwater, if you will. Indeed, as Ms Walker mentions elsewhere, midlist and new authors don’t have the clout nor the resources to withstand a boycott.

If the publisher doesn’t see sales of those authors’ books, the people in charge won’t stop to consider “This is the result of a boycott because of our poor handling of a public discovery of plagiarism.” What they will think is, “This author doesn’t sell; no more contracts for him/her, lets look at the next hopeful.”

Which is why, IMO, a letter writing campaign coupled with spreading information on the topic–so that others will write, so that others will be aware of the issue of CE, and JD, and others–is the way to go.

Aztec lady – any author found guilty of plaigerism should have his/her contract canceled and all outstanding books recalled by the publisher. WRT Ms. Edwards in particular – do I think she plaigerized? Sadly, Yes I do. And I do feel dismayed and sad at the whole thing; it is sad and awful when something like this happens. It would probably go easier on me if I claimed rightous and indignant fury, but I’m not there yet.

Ms. Scott – I am a she – Troll? I guess that depends on who you ask (asked kids – they were curious about what I was doing on computer – big girl agrees; little girl says not – so it would appear you are in the majority). Point finger at Jane – well, I conceed it does indeed have that tone – but target was really the letter.

Regarding my own letter – a WIP with intention to convey that I will purchase materials from any publisher who maintains a contract with a plaigerist. Not for myself and not for my children. In fact, if I am to defend the principle, it would be hypocritical of me to continue to give them my money. It takes me a while to wordsmith, but hope to have an acceptable composition in next day or so and would like to see further reactions from publisher.

Also led to intersting conversation with kids regarding concepts of honesty and integrity and respect for other people’s property (including their works of lit and music); still working out how to explain the intensity of reactions tho…

If nothing else, this exercise has reminded me of something a professor told me a long time ago: “when you write something and send it out, you are not there to explain what you meant. Do not leave room for interpretation.” Old age must be taking it’s toll..I completely forgot.

Although Penguin is the only publisher to make a public statement re: CE situation, Penguin is NOT THE ONLY PUBLISHER who’s published CE’s works. CE has books with Dorchester, etc.

If the plan is to write letters to let them know that you want something done about the situation, you should write to every publisher who ever produced CE’s works. Dorchester was silent, but that doesn’t mean they plan to do anything about it (yank CE’s “guilty” books off the shelf, etc.).

Dear [Exec]:

I am writing to voice my displeasure at the recent response given by Signet, a Penguin imprint, over the allegations of plagiarism by Cassie Edwards.

Regardless of Ms. Edwards' legal culpability, the issue of plagiarism is still in question. For Signet to disregard the ethical ramifications of plagiarism based on the fact that copyrights have lapsed seems unsatisfactory at best.

In the response to Jane Litte (of Dear Author), Signet indicates that “Ms. Edwards has done nothing wrong.” At the very least, I would expect some further investigation into the allegations before dismissal. In this particular case, entire passages of material seem to have been lifted verbatim and inserted into Ms. Edwards work. It seems that the people at Signet are using “copy-right violation” interchangeably with “plagiarism,” and this is not necessarily the case. Obviously, there is significant overlap, but the terms are not equivalent.

Additionally, the statement that citations and/or bibliographies are “virtually unheard of for a popular novel” is fallacious. Diana Gabaldon, for example, provides source information. Laurell K. Hamilton also includes source material, as do a number of historical authors. It seems ridiculous to assert that this does not happen in popular fiction.

I don't believe that anyone expects fiction of any sort to read like my doctoral dissertation, with footnotes at every turn. However, I do believe that a reasonable acknowledgment of source material is warranted, especially when those source materials not only informed the writer's imagination, but clearly (at the very least) influenced her prose.

I can only hope that Penguin will work with Signet to straighten out their misunderstanding of the term “plagiarism.” I also hope that Penguin will hold all of its authors to a reasonable standard of honesty and responsibility.

Please be assured that, while I will not punish other authors at Penguin for the mistakes of one, the Signet response does not endear that imprint to me.

Sincerely,
[me]

The question in my mind is how does one penalize her for it, should she be quilty? Will they do what James Fray’s (sp?) publisher did and offer a rebate to readers who were mislead to believe he wrote an autobiography that was in reality, more fiction than fact?
Cancel her contract and ask her to repay her royalties? Banish her from the publishing world altogether? Readers can make their views known by not purchasing any of her books.

Back to writing my letter.

I do think it is more effective if everyone who contacts Penguin does so in their own words

And the letters posted here are wonderful and by wonderful, I mean eloquent and meaningful and nothing else lest someone ascribe some terrible motivation to me.

Dear Mr Shanks,

I am writing concerning the recent allegations surrounding several of the books published by Penguin, under its Signet wing, by Cassie Edwards. I am certain that by now you will be not only aware of this case but will also have taken the time to acquaint yourself with the details of the plagiarised passages.

I am concerned that your editorial process permitted such work to be published without taking the most basic steps to ensure its originality. The copied passages were easily and quickly identified by (i) noticing places where the prose style was distinctly different; (ii) using an internet search engine to check for plagiarised expressions. How is it possible that the editors of these books were unable to take these basic steps for themselves? You must be aware that sophisticated software is currently available for checking plagiarism in academic writing. Would it not be advisable for a publishing house such as Penguin to avail themselves of this technology as well, in order to avoid future embarrassments of this kind?

Second, I was very disappointed by the response from Signet which claims that Ms. Edwards has ‘done nothing wrong.’ This suggests that the kind of copying evidenced in Ms. Edwards work was known about by her editors and condoned. Let me be clear: I understand perfectly that an author must do research and that this will involve the gathering of factual information and ideas. However, the writing process involves the use of this information within one’s own style and story. The evidence is clear that Ms. Edwards copied more than information and ideas, she copied large sections of text verbatim. Aside from the copyright infringement where this work was not in the public domain, this is a clear attempt to deceive the reader.

When I buy a book, whether fiction or non-fiction, I do so on the understanding that it contains original work. In particular, when I buy a novel, I expect the mode of expression – the words used – to be the original creative work of its author. I do not expect it to contain sections copied from another book, of any kind, included as if they are part of the original work. If quotations are used, I expect them to be clearly indicated. And if a source text has been particularly useful or influential, I think it is appropriate for this to be acknowledged briefly somewhere in the front or end matter.

However, it seems that I can no longer trust books published by Penguin Putnam to adhere to this standard. How will I know what I am buying in the future? If your staff see nothing wrong with this kind of copying (whether or not it can be legally challenged), then I think they have failed to understand the normal level of trust that exists between the reader and the author.

You will understand that this is a very serious matter since it impugns the credibility of the whole of the publishing industry.

I hope you will address these concerns and I look forward to your response.

This is all utterly depressing to me. The reaction becoming almost more so than the originating act. I was over at Crusie’s blog yesterday and tried to read the long ramble, that basically said nothing, while trying to sound incredibly smart.

I find it more than disappointing that an author would trivialize something so important to the trust between reader and author and the integrity in the publishing industry as a whole, and her own bottom line if it were her who was plagiarized.

Obviously, according to the gospel of Crusie, if you aren’t nice to everybody every time, she will not believe you have anything worthwhile to say.

Oh wait, that applies only to other people, not to her…

GrowlyCub

I hope it helps.

I will be writing my own letter to Signet/Penguin, so rest assured that you are not the only letter-writer.

Oh, the memories.

I’m a children’s book reviewer. Some years ago, I posted in a mailing list about some disturbing similarities between a book I was reviewing and another, much older book. The only result? Their publicity manager removed me from their review list. Take a wild guess which publisher it was.