Romance, Historical, Contemporary, Paranormal, Young Adult, Book reviews, industry news, and commentary from a reader's point of view

Top 10 Tips for Plagiarists

10. Don’t claim the dog did it. We all know that all but a very few dogs, maybe none other than Underdog, is capable of the task because they have no opposable thumbs. In fact, blaming it on any animal makes us suspect unless it is one of the gorillas studied by Dian Fossey.

9. Don’t plagairize someone famous. The more popular the author, the more likely your plagiarism will be caught out. Try to find someone obscure.

8. Don’t blame it on depression or physical disability, i.e., wheelchair bound stroke victims. Only because that insults wheelchair bound stroke victims everywhere.

7. Don’t set up a website and post the plagiaristic material. If it is on the web, someone is bound to find it, particularly when google indexes it.

6. Don’t do interviews. Again, the more people that hear about you, the more likely that your stealing will be sussed out. Try to rip as many people off before the gig is up.

5. Don’t steal from rich authors. These people are more likely than the poor obscure authors to be able to hire lawyers to sue you into oblivion.

4. Don’t copy word for word. It’s harder to catch out your theft if you mix it up a bit. Maybe try the word randomizer.

3. Don’t advertise as writing “because I feel each person has something unique to share with the world and writing is my gift to share” when, in fact, your uniqueness is actually some other person’s uniqueness.

2. Don’t send to reviewers who are known as “mean girls” because they might make up a top ten list just to mock your stealing and then your gig will really be up.

1. Don’t publish it, particularly as a POD option since it doesn’t really make sense to pay for your own stealing. It kind of defeats the purpose of stealing in the first place.

***


Text from the Prologue of “Of Atlantis”

By Lanaia Lee

From Conception to Devastation

The golden-haired child sat alone, as he usually did, and wondered whether his Father would die today. Some distance away, across the royal gardens , his nurse was talking to the two sentries who guarded him during the hours of daylight. The soldiers, grim eyed warriors, did not look at him and shifted nervously as he approached.
Archimedes was used to this reaction. Even at four he understood it.
He remembered with sadness the day three weeks ago when his Father, garbed for war, had walked along this same garden path, his cuirass gleaming in the sunlight. It was so beautiful that Alexander had reached out to touch the gleaming plates of iron, edged with gold, six golden lions on the breast. But as his hand came forward his Father moved swiftly back.
"Don't touch me boy!" he snapped.
"I would not hurt you, Father," whispered the prince, staring up at the black-bearded face, with its blind right eye like a huge opal beneath the savagely scarred brow.
"I came to say goodbye," muttered Lionus, "and to tell you to be good. Learn your lessons well.– 
"Will you win?" the child asked.
"Win or die, boy, " answered the King, kneeling to face his son. He appeared to relax, though his expression remained stern. "There are those that think I cannot win. They remember Onomarchus defeated me when we last met.

* * *

Picture of the text from David Gemmell’s Dark Prince.

Dark Prince

Jane Litte is the founder of Dear Author, a lawyer, and a lover of pencil skirts. She spends her downtime reading romances and writing about them. Her TBR pile is much larger than the one shown in the picture and not as pretty. You can reach Jane by email at jane @ dearauthor dot com

452 Comments

  1. Anji
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 07:20:02

    At this point, I can only shake my head at how Ms. Lee and her agent are presenting themselves. (And if you’re trying to present yourself in a professional manner, for the love of Pete, won’t it help to spellcheck? I know, I’ve said that a few times, but reading through the incoherent postings is exasperating).

    I want to note that there are plenty of people, including writers, out there who carry on with their daily lives without demanding extra consideration for their problems, disabilities, etc.

    I need to step away from the computer and stop watching this train wreck.

    ReplyReply

  2. Ann Bruce
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 07:26:02

    I can’t believe I missed all this! This is what happens when you spend time doing goody-two-shoes work.

    And what’s this with Janet Dailey plagiarizing NR? I don’t recall it making the news in Canada. And the best excuse this NYT bestselling author came up with was “my dog died”? Over 300 million books in print and that was it?

    ReplyReply

  3. Jayne
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 07:36:14

    “They want to be an author, but see no reason to become a writer first.”

    But she did write! Her name on a paycheck to the ghostwriter. Doesn’t that count? :) ::blinks:: No?

    ReplyReply

  4. Jennifer McKenzie
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 08:29:45

    OMG! I’ve had one cup of coffee and read 200+ comments at “Making Light” (which was very sad) and the comments here.

    Nora said it best.
    The difference, to me, is there are those who want to write and be published, and there are those who want to be published. The second group doesn't care how, doesn't want to do the work, pay the dues, hone the craft. All they want is their name on a book.

    I don’t understand the apologies that are just more finger pointing.
    It’s the old “I wouldn’t have done it if you hadn’t…” syndrome and it’s deadly.

    ReplyReply

  5. shuzluva
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 08:29:50

    I can't believe I missed all this! This is what happens when you spend time doing goody-two-shoes work.

    Ann, I’m with you! I simply spent time making other people richer than Midas and missed this whole thing. Bam and Annie, I have a question for both of you: why didn’t you lure me out of transaction hell to take a look at this and enjoy myself for once?

    Lastly, I am speechless. And enjoying every fucking word.

    ReplyReply

  6. bam
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 08:54:58

    From: Making Light

    A Formal Apology:
    We apologize for the pain this situation has caused. We were unaware of it until yesterday, 10/11/07. The book has been placed on hold for a re-write.
    I’m a Trekkie, not a Trekker, yes, I write Forever Knight stories and yes I’m a fan of the show.
    The blame for this should be on Mr. Hill, Lanaia is an innocent pawn in this disaster, it was brought to my attention and we took action. But people seem to enjoy slamming people with hurtful insults instead of giving the person a chance to research and solve the issue. If we could find this Mr. Hill, he would be a hurting puppy and Jane Little is no better. She was informed not to post, so her and James did, this could do some serious damage when this is solved and how can you take back the hurtful words that were said. I thought we were innocent before guilty. Now you know why I prefer the Underworld then this world. It’s amazing on how people never learn or grow up and don’t use conversation as a tool to solve things without throwing nasty words at each other.

    Do you read that, Jane? You’re as bad as invisible Mr. Hill, the scammer.

    Hey, CHERYL, it’s called TAKING RESPONSIBILITY.

    Why would they re-write a book they plagiarized? that makes… zero sense. Wouldn’t they just be… paraphrasing?

    ReplyReply

  7. Stevie
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 09:14:37

    It seems to me that Jane may have solved the mystery, much commented on over at http://absolutewrite.com, of why Christopher Hill went to so much trouble for such apparently small sums of money. Typically authors were charged less than £100 to allegedly have their manuscripts touted around publishers. It occurs to me that Christopher Hill may simply have sold those manuscripts to other ‘authors’ in search of ghostwriters, thus greatly increasing the profitability of the scam.

    ReplyReply

  8. Jane
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 09:17:05

    I am happy to report I am hive and boil free. I didn’t realize that exposing a scam made me a scammer too. I think the likelihood of the “serious damage” being my fault is about the same of the boils and hives showing up.

    As apologies go, it’s pretty poor. Perhaps she needs to read the link about how well Janet Dailey apologized to Nora Roberts (read: not at all).

    ReplyReply

  9. Kerry Allen
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 11:41:57

    Now they’re threatening to hurt puppies? Oy vey!

    ReplyReply

  10. Has
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 12:44:42

    Not the puppies !!!

    I think this link kinda sums up the situation about writing something and putting it in a place where oyu could get into trouble :)

    ReplyReply

  11. Bianca
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 12:52:14

    Things are getting more interesting: her publisher is apparently incapable of telling the difference between your blog and Making Light, and is now threatening you with lawsuits and “wiccan” tenfold retaliation there. It doesn't bode well for Lee or Pillsbury.
    ============================

    O_o Wtf? There is no Wiccan tenfold retaliation. And somehow I dont’ see Maat or the other Gods of Justice being this interested.

    Former Wiccan(for those Wiccans who care, solitare ecclectic)

    :P

    ReplyReply

  12. Bianca
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 13:43:56

    Head Keyboard.

    I would like to say for the record, not all Pagans or Wiccans are this ummm well insane.

    My mind is well and truly boggled.

    However, I shared it with other Pagans, and Wiccans so, hahaha, I won’t be the only one. I do believe there will be a snark in the making.

    ReplyReply

  13. Nora Roberts
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 14:05:39

    ~I would like to say for the record, not all Pagans or Wiccans are this ummm well insane.~

    No possible way this person is Wiccan–or as she put it–Wicca. She knows about as much about Wicca as she does about grammar.

    ReplyReply

  14. Jennifer
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 15:12:56

    This is so sad. Gemmell’s Dark Prince is one of my favorite books. I understand the desire to emulate something that you admire, but to foist it off as your own is awful. It is unfortunate that people can be manipulated this way, but there’s no excuse for it, really. ‘Responsibility’ was often my elementary school’s word of the month, so it’s hard for me to see how people could let this go as it did.

    I will never understand why people can’t use the spellchecker…it’s right there in your browser, if you use Firefox.

    ReplyReply

  15. Robin
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 15:28:23

    A few people have mentioned student plagiarism, which IMO presents an interesting contrast to what we’re discussing here. Plagiarism in an academic environment is really a case by case situation (and I’m speaking as someone who has caught it in students numerous times). After all, that’s a learning environment, and while definitely an ethical breach, there are many, many circumstances under which students end up replicating material, from purchasing papers outright to mistaking encyclopedic text for public ‘free for all” factual material to over-enthusiastic paraphrasing. I had a student once who purchased a paper that had itself been plagiarized, and when I presented him with the evidence, he was REALLY surprised. And honestly, I felt bad for the kid because, well, because he was a kid and that one incident really cost him in ways he did not anticipate. When it’s kids, and it’s a learning environment, I see the burden of responsibility differently.

    What we’re talking about here, though, is grown-ups who see themselves as professional writers/authors. So to me, the question is how much we should expect of adults who are involved in a career path for the recognition and financial rewards they think it can yield. Should we expect adults who advertise themselves as professional freelance writers to purchase ghostwritten material to sell as their own? Should we expect them to vet any work for hire, especially from KNOWN (even to them) scammers? Should we expect them to remove evidence of copied text from their website? Should we expect them to see how not being the actual writer of a copied ms does not necessarily divest them of responsibility or actions that are intellectual dishonest? In other words, where do we set the bar for self-professed professional authors/writers who seek all the rewards of a writer’s career?

    To me, what’s really revealing here is not the purchase of copied material from a scam agent, it’s all the behavior exhibited afterwards. Can you imagine what this situation would have looked like now if Lee and her agent had a) removed the copied material from her website b) left in its stead a sincere apology to readers and to the Gemmell estate, and c) indicated ANY level of responsibility for what happened? IMO Lee would have generated some authentic good will and good publicity for herself AND her work (whatever of it is hers, or at least not copied). More good publicity, likely, than the ms would have made on its own, even if none of it was copied.

    And as for the disability issue, there are so many disabled people fighting valiantly for the exact same rights as the otherwise abled, that IMO asking for or offering sympathy based on a disability for something **completely unrelated** is a real insult to those fighting for equal rights and equal access for the disabled. How insulting it must feel to the disabled to be thought of as more likely or capable, somehow, of publishing copied work.

    ReplyReply

  16. emmigeek
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 16:00:07

    vealing here is not the purchase of copied material from a scam agent, it's all the behavior exhibited afterwards. Can you imagine what this situation would have looked like now if Lee and her agent had a) removed the copied material from her website b) left in its stead a sincere apology to readers and to the Gemmell estate, and c) indicated ANY level of responsibility for what happened? IMO Lee would have generated some authentic good will and good publicity for herself AND her work (whatever of it is hers, or at least not copied). More good publicity, likely, than the ms would have made on its own, even if none of it was copied.

    Robin, I couldn’t have said it better. Her actions and the actions of her ‘agent’ have disgusted me to the core.

    ReplyReply

  17. Kimberly Anne
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 16:17:53

    Why don’t I read this site a dozen times a day? I see only a couple comments so I feel safe enough to go to sleep. Then, like a good girl, I go to the chiropractor’s before doing my interweb rounds, and this happens!

    I’m glad I found out about the Christopher Hill angle before posting, though. I would likely have been very nasty. But whatever sympathy I might have had was washed away in her tidal wave of lies and desperate pandering.

    So, I gird myself in the (very heavy, when you want to rave) mantle of Harm None, and say only this:
    “Mind the Threefold Law ye should, three times bad an’ three times good”

    Yep, ‘nother Pagan.

    ReplyReply

  18. Melissa Blue
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 17:44:43

    ~She knows about as much about Wicca as she does about grammar.~

    I’m not sure if you know this, but she’s behind the LOLcats. Sadly she still doesn’t know why everyone laughs.

    ReplyReply

  19. Shawn Struck
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 17:45:36

    Oh my GOD you guys:

    Mary “Lanaia Lee” Kellis just got written up today in her local paper promoting “On Atlantis”.

    Not mentioning it was ghostwritten, instead playing up her disabilities and claiming it was all her own work.

    Cheryl claimed to have read the book SIX TIMES.


    “Of Atlantis” is based on a short story called “Identity,” which Mary wrote four years ago under the pen name Lanaia Lee. Lanaia comes from a character on the “Stargate” science fiction series and Lee is her mother's maiden name.”

    ReplyReply

  20. Sara Dennis
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 17:51:40

    The date on that article is August 12th, Shawn. It’s October. ;)

    ReplyReply

  21. Shawn Struck
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 17:54:55

    Okay, so I got the month wrong.

    But still… Cheryl said she READ THE BOOK SIX TIMES.

    How could she not catch any of this?

    ReplyReply

  22. bam
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 18:31:26

    Mary “Lanaia Lee” Kellis just got written up today in her local paper promoting “On Atlantis”.

    Not mentioning it was ghostwritten, instead playing up her disabilities and claiming it was all her own work.

    Cheryl claimed to have read the book SIX TIMES.

    Uh-oh. See, if it had been kept on the Globo-web, maybe it would have died a quick death and all you would have had after you is a mob of angry fangirl/boy nerds… but when you bring out IRL…

    That’s just asking for the Gremmell estate to find you. “I’m over here! I copied you work and claimed it for myself and look at me! Look at me! SUE ME! PAY ATTENTION TO ME!”

    ReplyReply

  23. Roslyn
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 20:25:00

    Why is this whole thing starting to remind me of an Agatha Christie novel? If that Hill character winds up dead I’ve got dibs on writing the story!

    ReplyReply

  24. sybil
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 20:36:28

    Nope. You see that woman… is really a man baby.

    Mary IS hill. It is the greatest double cross evah. Good damn thing nuthing gets past writer beware!

    ReplyReply

  25. Random
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 21:21:11

    Has @ 172: Just wanted to say that you rock. Same to you, Robin @ 215.

    I’d like to say that I find myself boggled both by the “author” and her scammer wanna-be agent, but I’ve dealt with a handful of plagiarists (in fandom, out of fandom, and of my own work) and have seen excuses ranging from the dead (fill in blank), to a brother going to jail, to a photographic memory, to writing down someone else’s work and then mistaking it as their own–and so far, the only thing out of the ordinary here is the threat of curses.

    Very few will do what this case didn’t: fess up, stop claiming all of the plagiarized material as their own work, and apologize directly to the party or parties who actually created the work to begin with.

    The plagiarized material’s continued presence on her page doesn’t give me any good feelings. She’s got the time to ban people from her yellbox, but not to remove any links and make an official, permanent statement?

    ReplyReply

  26. The Daily Square - Stand! Edition | Booksquare
    Oct 12, 2007 @ 21:43:47

    [...] Top 10 Tips for PlagiaristsA cautionary tale. [...]

  27. Missy S
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 08:37:46

    The only thing I think people haven’t asked, is if Lee had ever read any of Gemmel’s books. I know I’ve never heard of him (and I’ve read half the scifi/fantasy wall at Borders), so she might not have realized that the work was plagerized.

    I AM NOT EXCUSING HER IDIOTNESS AFTERWARDS, just commenting.

    ReplyReply

  28. Jane
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 08:57:59

    Missy – If you contract for a “work for hire” and that person sells you a product that is plagiarized and you claim it for your own, then you are responsible for plagiarism. In the copyright law, there is no need to prove intent. It is enough that you did it.

    The problem with Ms. Lee, as I see it, is the dishonesty that stems from the entire course of actions. If you google her name and the book, you’ll see a widespread posting of her work and advertisements for freelance work done by her. I’m not sure whether she was going to have the freelance work ghostwritten but she was selling her freelance work on the basis of her “Of Atlantis” excerpt which was ghostwritten.

    If she was selling her writing on the basis of the “Of Atlantis” excerpt but was going to write it herself then the excerpt was misleading.

    The article, however, in the Burlington paper was really disturbing because it is supposedly this inspirational story of how she overcame all these terrible tragedies to write a book when, in fact, she didn’t write the book.

    ReplyReply

  29. Missy S
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 09:11:09

    I understand that, I just wondered if she’d ever heard of David Gemmel. Just a thought. I’m definitely not excusing her of anything, but many of the comments sounded like she should have known. I was simply a thought- not an excuse for her. Nothing more.

    ReplyReply

  30. Mridu Khullar » Blog Archive » While I Was Sleeping
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 10:40:53

    [...] If you’re looking to join the ranks of Kaavya Viswanathan and now Lanaia Lee, some tips: http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2007/10/11/top-10-tips-for-plagairists/ [...]

  31. The Good, The Bad and The Unread » Good Intentions...
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 11:40:28

    [...] We could talk of roads to hell and all that but really that seems to be a topic well in hand. [...]

  32. bam
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 13:07:00

    Why won’t this woman just SHUT UP?

    From Making Light:

    “I am her agent and close friend. She is a victim of this persons work, both of us never heard of him or read his books, sorry he passed away, it is a great loss. When it was brought to our attention, I immedicately investigated the situation and found the written e-mail proof this Mr. Hill, the ex-ghost writer did copy his first chaper from Dark Prince as her prologue for Of Atlantis. We have apologized many times, we have placed the book on hold until we re-write it so this will end and no one is hurt, but its too late. Before anyone could give us a chance to solve this, everyone is having a field day like kids, calling names and labeling the wrong
    person, this is wrong. I have used a ghost writer with some of my work and thankfully I didn’t have this happen, but unfortunately she did. We know we are innocent and will hold onto that. If everyone wishes to continue to slander, she may sue. My attorney has copies of everything and he’ll decide what needs to be done. This horse issue is dead and I’m tired of repeating myself, the subject is closed, move on.”

    Hey, I thought what we’re doing is libel!

    ReplyReply

  33. bam
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 13:11:41

    I love how she just off-handedly says, “Sorry he passed away, it is a great loss”.

    She is a victim of this persons work, both of us have never heard of him or read his books

    I assume “this person” refers to Mr. Hill, but the “him” and “his” refer to Gemmell (how weird is it that she doesn’t refer to the ONE PERSON THEY METAPHORICALLY ASS-FUCKED WITHOUT LUBE by name– is it because it makes it all too real?), but the strange way she phrases it makes it sound like Lanaia was victimized (there’s that word again) by Gemmell… which makes this situation SO MUCH MORE FUCKED UP.

    ReplyReply

  34. Shawn Struck
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 13:28:12

    Here’s what Cheryl just e-mailed me.

    “I am her agent and close friend. She is a victim of this persons work, both of us never heard of him or read his books, sorry he passed away, it is a great loss. When it was brought to our attention, I immedicately investigated the situation and found the written e-mail proof this Mr. Hill, the ex-ghost writer did copy his first chaper from Dark Prince as her prologue for Of Atlantis. We have apologized many times, we have placed the book on hold until we re-write it so this will end and no one is hurt, but its too late. Before anyone could give us a chance to solve this, everyone is having a field day like kids, calling names and labeling the wrong
    person, this is wrong. I have used a ghost writer with some of my work and thankfully I didn’t have this happen, but unfortunately she did. We know we are innocent and will hold onto that. If everyone wishes to continue to slander, she may sue. My attorney has copies of everything and he’ll decide what needs to be done. This horse issue is dead and I’m tired of repeating myself, the subject is closed, move on.”

    So, do you hear that? She has copies of email! And her attorney might decide to do something! And we’re slandering her! And the book is on hold, what more do we want?

    Also, she’s written for vanity presses and used a ghostwriter too! I don’t know if that’s just sad, or stupid.

    ReplyReply

  35. Robin
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 13:45:23

    If you contract for a “work for hire” and that person sells you a product that is plagiarized and you claim it for your own, then you are responsible for plagiarism. In the copyright law, there is no need to prove intent. It is enough that you did it.

    The problem with Ms. Lee, as I see it, is the dishonesty that stems from the entire course of actions. If you google her name and the book, you'll see a widespread posting of her work and advertisements for freelance work done by her. I'm not sure whether she was going to have the freelance work ghostwritten but she was selling her freelance work on the basis of her “Of Atlantis” excerpt which was ghostwritten.

    If she was selling her writing on the basis of the “Of Atlantis” excerpt but was going to write it herself then the excerpt was misleading.

    Yeah, it’s the disconnects that are frustrating. Lee seems to think that since she bought copied material from Hill as work for hire that she’s an innocent victim. BUT, while she may have a claim against Hill for how he scammed her, she isn’t free from scrutiny for oh so many other things, including representing the work as hers to begin with. Then, as I said before, there’s everything that came after, including the refusal to take down the copied excerpt and the threats to sue, which REALLY piss me off because legally protected rights to free speech can be chilled.

    And despite the claims that “everyone” hires ghostwriters, I still find that whole aspect of this situation really troubling, for so many reasons. Again, if someone represents themselves as a professional writer, seeking commercial reward, what standard should we expect from them, both in the work they represent as their own (and which is purchased from someone they KNEW was dishonest) and in their general professional persona? Even if I buy everything about how Lee was scammed by Hill, there is still SO MUCH MORE that is disturbing to me about HER behavior, as well as her agent’s. To me, anyway, the Hill aspect is merely ONE SMALL part of a whole sordid situation.

    ReplyReply

  36. bam
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 14:15:10

    maybe she thinks it IS hers because she paid for it…

    screwed up logic, but maybe she IS all screwed up because of the stroke, so it makes sense to her.

    ReplyReply

  37. Nora Roberts
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 14:21:46

    I know lots and lots of writers. No one I know personally uses a ghost. I’m sure there are writers who do. But to have this “agent” who so obviously doesn’t know dick about publishing, Wicca, legal issues or basic grammar claim everyone uses them is too dumbass to be insulting.

    Both these women continue to insult Gemmell and his family by refusing to issue a straight-out apology and remove the stolen material from the website.

    I don’t see this Mary/Laniana as any kind of victim. She lied. Again and again. Whether or not she knew the material Hill gave her was stolen or not, she lied about it–and used the platform for her own gain that this was a work of her heart, one she’d bleed for, how she’d overcome such adversity to write it. When in fact, all she did, apparently, was pay a con artist for the material.

    No sympathy from me.

    Meanwhile this CP threatens, insults, whines, makes excuses and blames everyone else. It’s really kind of amazing that there are people that oblivious or that calcified.

    ReplyReply

  38. Robin
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 16:30:18

    I know lots and lots of writers. No one I know personally uses a ghost. I'm sure there are writers who do.

    On Writer Beware, Victoria Strauss said it’s widespread, too, but when I asked her how common she didn’t respond to my question. It frustrates me to no end to hear how “common” something is with NO exemplification.

    maybe she thinks it IS hers because she paid for it…

    screwed up logic, but maybe she IS all screwed up because of the stroke, so it makes sense to her.

    Well, she’s definitely the owner of a work for hire, but no one but the legal owner of the copyrighted material is the *true* owner. When you pay for a work for hire, though, you pay to represent the material as your own. Of course, if you got that material from a known scammer, would you WANT to claim it as your own without vetting it?

    So much of this is screwed up, but I sincerely doubt it has to do with strokes, or with any other physical impairment. And if it does, then no one else — especially one acting as an agent — should be facilitating or supporting the questionable conduct, IMO.

    ReplyReply

  39. Shawn Struck
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 16:31:44

  40. Lynne
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 16:36:50

    I read the article Jules Jones linked to, and it’s fascinating. I definitely recommend reading it.

    In this case, there’s incompetence and the accompanying unawareness of it that the article discusses. But I also sense an unwillingness to become aware of it. The infringing material has yet to be removed from the “author’s” web site, and she and her “agent” continue to issue non-apologies, threats, and bullshit excuses.

    For some people, it’s all about the ego and being able to say they’re published. If that’s where a person’s priorities lie, I guess it’s damned inconvenient that being a writer actually involves, uhh, writing.

    ReplyReply

  41. sybil
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 16:41:20

    Well anyone ever been in a room with both ‘writer’, agent, con ‘hill’ all at the same time? Oh what the hell throw in the hubby and the dog too. Or have the ‘writer’ and ‘agent’/BFF posted anywhere in the same forum?

    Emails? anyone anyone…

    Ten will get you twenty there aren’t that many ‘different’ people involved. All we need now is news of a hospital stay and/or an orbit so the hubby can come tell us all (five mins after the fact) his wife is gone and it all those MEANGRRL blogger’s fault.

    me think we need more popcorn

    ReplyReply

  42. Robin
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 16:51:32

    But I also sense an unwillingness to become aware of it.

    I also think that some folks truly believe that if they have an idea, it doesn’t matter WHO writes it up, that the idea alone makes a written work authored by that person. And to some degree, I think our culture really devalues the written word and the unique voices different writers have — that you can get two people to tell the “same” story and have two completely different works, for example. So to some degree I understand how giving someone an outline and paying them to write it up might actually *seem* like writing a work oneself, even though IMO it’s not. Here, though, we’re well beyond that. But in general, I think as a society we place far to little value on the craft of writing as, well, writing.

    ReplyReply

  43. Jackie L.
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 17:42:09

    I call Bullshit! IRL, I have experience in speaking to stroke survivors. I explained in language at an appropriate level to Mary/Lanaia, that she really, really needed to take down the David Gemmel prologue. I know she and her little friend, Cheryl, are hanging out at Making Light. She replied that her webmistress (which, miraculously she can now spell) is preparing a NEW prologue. She is leaving the plagiarized one up until the new one can be substituted. If she is an innocent victim of a scam, I will eat something very unappetizing. And as for Cheryl, scum of the earth would avoid her, I fear.

    I hope that Jane is still free of hives and nightmares.

    ReplyReply

  44. bam
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 17:45:50

    Ten will get you twenty there aren't that many ‘different' people involved. All we need now is news of a hospital stay and/or an orbit so the hubby can come tell us all (five mins after the fact) his wife is gone and it all those MEANGRRL blogger's fault

    Ha-ha, Sybil watches fanwankdom!

    ReplyReply

  45. DS
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 18:54:41

    There was a plagiarism scandal late 80′s/early 90′s where a rather well known romance author was caught copying part of a book by (I think) Jan Wescott. The author (now deceased) claimed that she had hired a “researcher” who became a ghost writer and it was this ghost who had written the offending material. Given that it was material from a book that was very popular though oop, I thought that was a bit of BS then and I think so in this new case.

    ReplyReply

  46. thom
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 19:34:15

    i find it interesting that she contacted strauss in june to tell about how she was yet another victim of hill and then was interviewed by the local paper most likely in August and didn’t mention the hill aspect of her story.
    I think we’ve got an attention-seeker…she’s the hero of every story and the victim of every crime.
    i feel kind of sorry for -the reporter — i think her name is charity apple — if it gets out professionally that she was so completely taken in by mary she’ll have trouble every leaving burlington. most hiring editors will be convinced that she should have immediately seen there was a flavor of a hoax in the woman’s story.
    on the other hand mary and cheryl would be great guests on maury or jerry if they ever decide to do a story on how vanity presses take advantage of poor crippled folk who just want to tell their story to benefit mankind

    ReplyReply

  47. thom
    Oct 13, 2007 @ 19:36:55

    ouch: ever leaving burlington

    if there was ever a story that showed the reason to spellchek and proof before sending it’s this one

    ReplyReply

  48. Elisabeth
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 02:32:36

    Quote and cite! Quote and cite! This is the rule in academia at least.

    ReplyReply

  49. Anji
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 05:32:04

    Quoting from Making Light:
    [blockquote]
    #368 ::: Lanaia ::: (view all by) ::: October 13, 2007, 09:06 PM:

    Pathetic? I fired Christopher before I finshed the book. He was there for the prologue and chapters 1-4, the rest IS mine. [/blockquote]

    So it’s more than the first chapter? Does anyone know how long the book is?

    I’m glad to see that the spelling has gotten better.

    ReplyReply

  50. Anji
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 05:55:23

    Btw, what happened to all the HTML tags (sorry about my various quote and blockquote brackets out there)? And the avatars?

    ReplyReply

  51. Anne Marble
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 10:17:24

    For more on Christopher Hill, there is a long thread on his agency that started in May of 2005:
    http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12420

    Writer Beware has been collecting information on him since before that time. There was a series of blog posts about him starting from fall of 2006:
    http://accrispin.blogspot.com/2006/09/victoria-strauss-hill-hill-literary.html

    Was he actually involved in this scam? I wouldn’t be surprised because he sounds like the kind of scumbag who would pull this stunt. That doesn’t excuse anything Cheryl Pillsbury did, and it doesn’t excuse the coverups
    and excuses of Lanaia Lee. But he is a real scammer and has been known to Writer Beware and other similar organizations for years. The problem is that many writers are so desperate that when an agent or publisher is interested in their work, they don’t bother so much as Googling that agent’s or publisher’s name. Some authors learn from their mistakes, and others never seem to learn.

    ReplyReply

  52. Robin
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 11:27:23

    That doesn't excuse anything Cheryl Pillsbury did, and it doesn't excuse the coverups
    and excuses of Lanaia Lee.

    That’s the part I don’t think they get. Lee recently repeated her line “I did nothing wrong” on Making Light, so clearly she sees no responsibility for herself in any of this. My own impression is that she is so fixed on the Hill issue that she can only see herself only as victim, regardless of what she has done otherwise. I can take at face value that Hill scammed her, but that still leaves a bad taste in my mouth in regard to how Lee and Pillsbury have handled things. And I still find completely unjustifiable the idea that the copied excerpt was not removed immediately from Lee’s site.

    ReplyReply

  53. Anne Marble
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 11:41:49

    Leaving the excerpt makes no sense — neither does insisting that they will rewrite it. By this point, the book is dead, Even PublishAmerica wouldn’t want to publish this book. This is probably the same desperation that drives other vanity press authors to attack people who expose their publishers as a scam. I can understand it to a point, I guess, but that doesn’t mean I have to put up with it.

    As far as published writers using ghostwriters, I thought up some names for a post somewhere else. The recent Robert Ludlum novels are ghostwritten as he died several years ago. Then you have some of those books written by a well known author and a “coauthor” — in many cases, “coauthor” is another word for “ghostwriter.” ;-) Ghostwriting is also rampant in men’s adventure series, many of the Western series, and many children’s and young adult series. There are many cases we will never know about because the writers who do the actual work are pledged to secrecy.

    Also, sometimes you get a ghostwriting scandal such as the case of late romance author Sylvie Sommerfield. IIRC in the 1980s, one of her books turned out to be plagiarized from a Jan Wescott novel. She said that she had hired a ghostwriter because she couldn’t complete the books for her contract on time, and the ghostwriter had turned in a plagiarized manuscript. Some people were suspicious of her claims and wondered if Sommerfield had actually done the plagiarizing herself. I suppose there’s no way to know.

    ReplyReply

  54. Robin
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 12:02:56

    This is probably the same desperation that drives other vanity press authors to attack people who expose their publishers as a scam. I can understand it to a point, I guess, but that doesn't mean I have to put up with it.

    And I think things went beyond that quickly. Had Lee taken ANY responsibility for what happened, I think the tide would have turned and stayed more in her favor. She thinks her name has been sullied by Hill, but I don’t think she realizes that she and Pillsbury have done far more damage to it than he ever did or could do yet, IMO.

    As for the ghostwriting thing, I learned about book packagers when the Viswanathan scandal hit, and while I’m not a fan, all you have to do is look at the copyright of those packaged books to see the corporate ownership, so IMO it’s not so bad. And god knows I expect all those celebrity books to be ghostwritten. As for dead authors and their name franchise, well, again, it’s not to my personal taste, but it doesn’t seem inherently dishonest because the death of an author is public knowledge, even if not all readers know that.

    I think the reason a case like Lee’s bothers me is that it seems deceptive to the reader, even if it’s not intended to be, especially because you have this actual person out there claiming the work as her own “work of the heart” or whatever. And honestly, it weirds me out on a totally visceral level that unknown authors are hiring ghosts. At some level the ghost thing seems the ultimate divorcing of the author from the book, but not, IMO, in a good way. Not in the way of ‘let’s focus on the quality of the work,’ but rather of ‘writing is a mere formality, a service’ rather than an art or even a craft.

    ReplyReply

  55. Bernita
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 12:31:49

    Anne’s examples, celebrity, franchise, etc. are clearly understood as ghostwritten, but hardly justify a sweeping statement that many authors use ghost writers.

    ReplyReply

  56. Nora Roberts
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 12:36:34

    Franchises like The Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew are a different kettle than ghosting, imo. There is no Carolyn Keene or Franklin W. Dixon. The books were always work for hire. Andrews and Ludlum–dead–and again now a franchise.

    It’s a different matter for Popular Author or Desperate Newbie to hire a ghost then publish the work under his or her own name. Yes, it’s their property if they paid for it, but it’s not their work.

    The first examples don’t play into, imo, the statement that writers hire ghosts all the time.

    I knew Sylvie a little–and had honestly forgotten about the plagiarism until it was brought up here. Bad stuff. Initially, if memory serves, she blamed her assistant/researcher for passing on the material to her. Then claimed she’d hired a ghost due to contractural deadlines and stress.

    Stress is routinely one of the excuses, as is the hapless assistant, when plagiarism is discovered.

    ReplyReply

  57. Nora Roberts
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 12:38:17

    I could have said all that quicker, like Bernita.

    ReplyReply

  58. Bernita
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 13:08:23

    Why should you, Nora?
    You’re always a pleasure to read.

    ReplyReply

  59. Charlene
    Oct 14, 2007 @ 19:56:12

    I can’t imagine going through the sweat and toil of writing fiction as another author’s ghost writer. Non-fiction doesn’t often require an emotional investment on the part of the writer; you can knock off an instruction manual for a monitor or even an ‘autobiography’ of a celebrity without putting yourself into it, and in fact it’s probably better if you don’t.

    But it seems to me that fiction of any kind requires an emotional commitment to the work. Yes, ghosting happens, and I can see why an established writer with a reputation to uphold would consider hiring a ghost writer during a dry spell, but I don’t know if I could do it. Then again, if the wolf is at the door, better to work than to starve.

    ReplyReply

  60. Controversy « WritingHermit
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 09:18:20

  61. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 11:56:38

    Apparently Lee can add content to her site but not delete it.

    While I am boil and hive free still, I did get a bad cold over the weekend making my voice froggy. I think frogs are part of curses aren’t they? Do I need a Wiccan intervention?

    ReplyReply

  62. Mimi
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 12:38:42

    Latest from the yellbox on Lanaia’s website:

    [quote] Lanaia: I AM INNOCENT, I will have my attorney contact Jane and Jim, you know slander is a bad thing. I am even going to take a polygraph,I WI LL sue [/quote]

    ReplyReply

  63. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 12:44:10

    So the old link is still active? And her rewrite is giving me headache.

    I guess she thinks her proof is strong enough to absolve her from all responsibility. I’m not so sure about that… Plus, it looks like the issue involves more than the prologue.

    This whole situation is so bizarre and it keeps getting weirder and weirder.

    I don’t know much about Wiccan interventions, but I just got rid of my cold, so I’d say it’s the season.

    ReplyReply

  64. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:02:10

    I am supposed to hear from the attorneys for Lee and Pillsbury today. I’ll keep you all apprised.

    ReplyReply

  65. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:08:30

    I guess suit papers are imminent. I just received an email from Lee (and have since told her about 20 emails ago that I would feel free to post anything publicly if she continues to email me )

    My attorney is named Tony Billard, I even volunteered for a polygraph! See you in court!

    ReplyReply

  66. Shannon Stacey
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:15:06

    That led to extremely unimpressive Google search results, but since there’s only an approximately .05% chance she spelled that correctly, who knows?

    I wonder if he was recommended by her agent.

    ReplyReply

  67. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:18:11

    Oh, Shannon, that was my thought. I checked with the Texas State Bar and there is no licensed attorney with that name. I asked her for his phone number and state bar number.

    ReplyReply

  68. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:19:57

    I’m in good company though:

    He will contact you, no way you are going to bug him, I am sueing for deformation of character and slander, also I’m sueing Jim McDonald, see in court

    ReplyReply

  69. tasha
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:29:55

    Anthony Biller of Cary, NC?
    http://www.coatsandbennett.com/anthonybiller.html

    Although if anyone’s guilty of “deformation of character,” it’s Lanaia herself, and David Gemmell who should due the suing.

    ReplyReply

  70. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:31:11

    I couldn’t find him either, and I looked in the NC bar too (since that’s where she lives). I guess she thinks she has legal standing. Wondering about the deformation of character thing though…

    ReplyReply

  71. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:33:36

    I would actually hope it was Mr. Billers because he would at least be able to advise Ms. Lee on her rights, and lack thereof.

    For some reason I thought she was located in Texas. Where is Cheryl Pillsbury located because apparently they have the same attorney.

    ReplyReply

  72. tasha
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:39:00

    Cheryl is in Massachusetts, I believe.

    ReplyReply

  73. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:40:14

    I think she’s in in Massachusetts, Greater Boston area, according to this

    Yup, it’s Boston, according to the contact info on her agency’s website

    And Biller’s profile from Martindale-Hubbell

    ReplyReply

  74. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 13:58:16

    Boo, too many links in my last post. According to Cheryl’s agency website, she’s in Boston: http://www.agpress.50megs.com/contact.html

    ReplyReply

  75. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 14:01:50

    He will contact you, no way you are going to bug him, I am sueing for deformation of character and slander, also I'm sueing Jim McDonald, see in court

    *snort*

    Jane, Jane, Jane — what have you done? Led so many people down the path of deformation. No wonder you’re getting sick and developing boils.

    Hopefully, she’ll listen to whatever her attorney has to say. Like, “stop e-mailing and posting about this online, and digging a deeper hole.”

    ReplyReply

  76. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 14:03:57

    Holy crap. She changed her main page but the original, plagiarized excerpt is STILL up?! ::headdesk:: Is this day four now?

    ReplyReply

  77. The Writer Behind the Words » Blog Archive » Tales of Terror: Part Three
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 14:51:33

    [...] You can find out more similarities between these two books at the Dear Author Blog where they also post the informative Top 10 Tips for Plagiarists. [...]

  78. Random
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:00:11

    Meljean @ 274: Yeah, she can tweak the main page to add in a (still plagiarized) reworked chapter but somehow can’t take the coding out for “Read an excerpt here!”

    If I am ever this technologically inept, I want someone to shoot me.

    ReplyReply

  79. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:15:57

    Because they love me so . . .

    This is Cheryl Pillsbury, I'm the founder of AG Press. She was scammed by Mr. Hill and asked me to help her with hers. We have written proof of this of what he did and we are going to sue, we each have lawyers. You have caused enough pain and suffering from this, Lanaia is ill over this and if she has a stroke from this, stand clear for more lawsuits. I'm requesting you to keep quiet, refrain from further words.

    Timestamp: 3:14 pm CST

    ReplyReply

  80. Bernita
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:21:33

    If they have lawyers, they’ve clearly not consulted them.

    ReplyReply

  81. Anna
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:23:02

    Jane @277 – someone should request that Lee and pillsbury keep quiet and refrain from further words.

    It’s just not going to happen is it ? They open their mouths or log onto their pc’s and ooops yet another garbled statement comes out.

    ReplyReply

  82. Robin
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:25:26

    Okay, has ANYONE determined the actual “deforming” comments? Last time I checked it was perfectly legal to uncover, post, and/or comment on a factual case of plagiarism/copyright infringement.

    The one thing that really makes me mad, though, is all the laying blame for particular health conditions and the absolute refusal to take responsibility for ANY questionable or wrong conduct. Although I imagine it’s quite stressful to disavow any responsibility, to continue to hold out one’s physical condition as a threat makes me feel as if my head is going to ‘splode.

    ReplyReply

  83. Shawn Struck
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:33:23

    On Lania’s Yahoo Group:
    “I spent the entire week and nights investigating this issue; it is true
    Mr. Hill did purposely copy David Gemmell’s book into hers. We have
    placed the book on hold to re-write the prologue, which she did. I
    also have an employee that will do a page-by-page comparison of the two
    books, which I personally bought. Before we attack and injure the
    wrong the person, we should look at who started this first, Mr. Hill
    and you should know that Ms. Lee would never do such a thing. We both
    never heard of this writer or his books. WE ARE GOING TO SUE!!!! Who
    else wants to join the party???”

    ReplyReply

  84. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:35:58

    My response:

    Ms. Pillsbury:

    I don't understand why you are emailing me. If you have a lawsuit, have your attorney contact me. If not, why email me? I really don't understand why I am the cause of the “pain and suffering” since all I did was point out that the material your client still has posted at her site is a word for word copying of David Gemmell's work.

    As I explained to Ms. Lee, she would need to identify the specific statements that are objectionable because I do not find anything that I have written to be outside the bounds of either civil or criminal laws.

    Jane Litte
    http://dearauthor.com

    and Ms. Pillsbury’s response:

    Because you are accusing the wrong person, you should do a search and find Mr. Hill. He did it, not Lanaia Lee. Don't worry, when the papers are ready, you will hear from him, trust me. We had no clue this person or his books existed until last week when YOU posted it. I asked you not to and YOU did, now we have this huge explosion going on and it started with YOU.

    ReplyReply

  85. Stevie
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:37:15

    I find it very hard to sympathise with someone who is prepared to lie, threaten and abuse.
    I find it very easy to sympathise with someone with a nasty cold…

    ReplyReply

  86. Anna
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:40:26

    @281.

    Pillsbury’s employee is going to have to read more than Dark Prince, in the Chapter plan included as proof about Hill, there are numerous David Gemmell references, from more than just Dark Prince.

    @282

    i think it’s clear that this didn’t start with Jane.

    ReplyReply

  87. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:43:07

    I’m just glad to be at the beginning of something because bloggers are so often accused of being parasitic. It’s like I can’t win. ;)

    ReplyReply

  88. shadowsong
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:44:33

    So… Cheryl is essentially saying in her email that the person who says, “Your pants are on fire,” must therefore be the one with the lighter? Ah yes, the “She who smelt it, dealt it,” school of accepting responsibility.

    ReplyReply

  89. Robin
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:49:32

    You know, I can see where it would hurt like hell to have a blogger uncover the fact that work you have publicly represented as your own is, in fact, copyrighted to someone else. That must sting and embarrass like a mother. I believe that it really shocked and hurt Lee to find out that the material she paid lots and lots of money for and promoted as her own was Gemmell’s work. Even though she apparently took no steps to vet the material she received from a guy SHE REFERRED TO AS A SCAMMER:

    BUT, to not get that a) you have still taken credit for and posted work that is not your own b) that regardless of whether someone you hired sent that work to you and didn’t tell you it was plagiarized, c) that you still represented that work as your own, and d) kept the copied material up on your website for days, and e) admitted no wrongdoing whatsoever despite all this and more is, IMO, unbelievable in the extreme.

    And that’s not even addressing the “apology” directed at Gemmell’s estate.

    ReplyReply

  90. Shawn Struck
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:52:03

    I’m just wondering what one wears to a lawsuit party.

    ReplyReply

  91. Robin
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 15:59:28

    The threats to sue aggravate me because they can chill perfectly legal speech among those who don’t know the law. And they can create an ironic situation in which someone whose legal rights have not been infringed on at all ends up infringing on the rights of others.

    ReplyReply

  92. Shannon Stacey
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:03:16

    What’s starting to bug me is how indistinguishable Lee’s and Pillsbury’s comments are.

    Not everybody has so unique an online voice that we know them even when they post anonymously—though there are a few of those—but the share misuse of spelling, punctuation and ALL CAPS emphasis is making me wonder if either Pillsbury or Lee is handling the “communication” for both.

    As if this story needed any more conspiracy theories. But honestly, my ear thinks they’re both bad writers in the same bad way.

    ReplyReply

  93. Sybil
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:08:41

    oh, oh, oh! me me pick me! Is it because they are the same person?

    hmmm they sort of look alike too. Maybe it is Patty Duke?

    ReplyReply

  94. Caro
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:15:40

    Shannon, you said exactly what I’ve been thinking. There’s been a few times that during some of Pillsbury & Lee’s posts where tenses have slipped that makes me wonder who’s posting under whose name.

    The threats to sue are amazing, along with the repeated playing of the health card. It’s shameless manipulation to achieve exactly the effect Robin suggested: to stop all speech by others so they can keep claiming total and utter innocence in this case.

    On Friday, I might have had some sympathy for a woman who may have been scammed. Not anymore.

    ReplyReply

  95. Bernita
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:20:03

    A picnic short of sandwiches, a load short of bricks and a stalled elevator here, apparently.

    ReplyReply

  96. Darlene Marshall
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:25:43

    >>I asked you not to and YOU did, now we have this huge explosion going on and it started with YOU.<<

    I have hardly gotten any work done since Thursday, following this saga here and at Making Light. Just when you think it can’t get any more stupid, surprise!

    ReplyReply

  97. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:27:37

    And so it continues:

    I have an interview with a major state newspaper on Thursday, they have all of Christopher’s e=mails vindicating me, here’s the deal, you acknowledge my innocence or I will drag your name through the mud, like people from your site and Mr. McDonald’s site did to my name. You have until tomorrow or when the paper does the interview it will be posted on line and I will post it everywhere I can showing how your article unjustly accused me.

    ReplyReply

  98. Shannon Stacey
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:37:00

    Just when you think the deepest depths of stupidity have been plumbed.

    Perhaps the left sock needs to explain to the right sock the definition of “unjustly”.

    ReplyReply

  99. Stevie
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:38:30

    One of the most offensive aspects of this particular piece of plagiarism is that David Gemmell was passionate abot his writing, and died with his authorial boots on, as Christopher Priest noted in his obituary in the Guardian:

    ‘He travelled often, and was visiting Alaska when the first signs of his final illness became apparent. He flew home at once, checked into a private hospital in London and underwent surgery for a quadruple heart bypass. Within two days of the operation he was taking physical exercise, and went home as soon as he was able. He resumed work on his novel, and when he died he was found slumped in front of his computer.’

    Compare and contrast…

    ReplyReply

  100. Stevie
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:42:50

    Sorry, make that ‘about his writing’.

    ReplyReply

  101. Caro
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:45:08

    Jane@295 — Good lord, this has just gone beyond funny to the sad and pathetic. You expose her attempt to pass off David Gemmell’s words as her own (and whether she paid for ghostwriting or not, the initial act was to pass the words off as hers), and she thinks she’s going to expose *you*?

    Just sad.

    ReplyReply

  102. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 16:59:37

    I asked you not to and YOU did, now we have this huge explosion going on and it started with YOU.

    Well, actually, no. And given how actively Ms. Lee has been trying to promote Of Atlantis, sooner or later someone would have noticed the plagiarism. If the plagiarism had come out after actual publication, I’m pretty sure the explosion would have been worse. Ms. Lee and Ms. Pillsbury consider the issue of ‘drawing attention to the plagiarism’ as their problem. Ms. Lee states that she is innocent and did not commit the plagiarism itself. But it’s about the copyright of a plagiarized book, as well as the response and remedy (including public behavior).

    I don’t think paraphrasing the relevant sequence(s) fixes the issue. And it seems that there may be more plagiarized than just the prologue, since Mr. Hill worked on Chapter 1-4 (according to Ms. Lee) and potentially additional chapters and outlines (according to Ms. Lee’s proof of innocence).

    And, as Robin said, even though she’d heard he was disreputable, she chose to work with him and accept his ghostwritten work. Oy.

    I’d assume that a newspaper that would print her story would look into any accusations she’d make, and I don’t think the outcome would be quite as straightforward as Ms. Pillsbury anticipates. (Take the Burlington Times example).

    With a different response, this whole situation could have turned out differently.

    ReplyReply

  103. Belinda
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:07:37

    I imagine that newspaper interview is going to be substantially different from what Lanaia currently envisions, particularly if the reporter has Hill’s emails. Or you think it’s a “major state newspaper” in the way that Roval is a “publisher”?

    ReplyReply

  104. Robin
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:11:53

    Ms. Lee states that she is innocent and did not commit the plagiarism itself. But it's about the copyright of a plagiarized book, as well as the response and remedy (including public behavior).

    And with copyright infringement, intent isn’t necessary. The person whose name is attached as author of the published plagiarized material is committing the infringement.

    ReplyReply

  105. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:12:35

    Good lord, this has just gone beyond funny to the sad and pathetic.

    Word.

    I felt a little bit of sympathy when I heard that she was scammed, but it just can’t hold in the face of the “we’re going to sue you!” and “drag your name through the mud!” assertions, and the complete and utter lack of responsibility she’s taken. If anything, Jane actually did a favor by getting this out there before the book was published — and from everything said, it sounded as if Ms Lee was notified and given a chance to remove the plagiarized material before Jane ever posted. So it didn’t start with Jane’s action, but blew up because of Lee’s and Pillsbury’s inaction (my god, how can it STILL be up?) And I can’t help but think that if Jane hadn’t posted publicly, and if it hadn’t blown up, that book would have gone to the printers despite the evidence of plagiarism and Lee and Pillsbury’s being notified.

    Lee desperately needs to get in and actually see her lawyer. When she does, I have a feeling it’s going to get really, really quiet from that end.

    Unless, of course, the “lawyer” is as qualified as Cheryl is as an “agent”.

    ReplyReply

  106. Robin
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:20:09

    I felt a little bit of sympathy when I heard that she was scammed, but it just can't hold in the face of the “we're going to sue you!” and “drag your name through the mud!” assertions, and the complete and utter lack of responsibility she's taken.

    Exactly. And that’s the most baffling part of this for me. I get the sense that Lee is so worried about being thought a bad person for being scammed by Hill that she and Pillsbury have said and done other unsavory things that have done much more to taint public perception of Lee than ANYTHING anyone else has done. Another level of irony here.

    ReplyReply

  107. Shawn Struck
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:20:38

    Okay, so Mary Kellis gets to compare herself to someone in the Salem Witch Trials or someone being burned at the stake, Pilsbury is screaming about lawsuits, and yet on Lanania’s group, she says…

    “Yes I did mention lawsuit and I plan to after I discuss the matter further with him.”

    and

    “Mr. Hill started this, he should get the death penalty for this mess, because he's done this before with others.”

    and

    “Before you continue to through stones, remember glass houses.”

    ReplyReply

  108. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:25:06

    Robin said:

    And with copyright infringement, intent isn't necessary. The person whose name is attached as author of the published plagiarized material is committing the infringement.

    Exactly.

    It’s extremely exasperating to read through the postings and the repeated assurances of innocence. You feel like you’re banging your head against a wall, and that either they don’t get it or that they don’t want to get it (or that it will all magically go away). It’s useless to try to reason with them. Ms. Lee is just making things for herself and any sympathy I originally had for her has been replaced by annoyance.

    ReplyReply

  109. Robin
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:35:31

    This hasn’t gotten a lot of play in this discussion, but I found Lee’s offer of freelance writing services with a link to her website and in the context of her upcoming Of Atlantis release here.

    ReplyReply

  110. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:36:09

    I get the sense that Lee is so worried about being thought a bad person for being scammed by Hill that she and Pillsbury have said and done other unsavory things that have done much more to taint public perception of Lee than ANYTHING anyone else has done.

    This is my sense as well. And I can see how she might be embarrassed and defensive, and have no kind feelings toward those who brought this out (or those who have been offering her some really solid advice) — and I know hindsight is 20/20 … but as Anji (and others along the way) said above, a different response to all of this would have led to an entirely different outcome. Take down the excerpt, say up front she was scammed, and all of the focus would have been on Hill and (perhaps to a lesser extent) Pillsbury.

    But instead of it being a warning for authors who are thinking of paying their agents, going the self-publishing route, or using the services of a ghostwriter, it’s just a big freaking trainwreck into a silo of manure, and all of the parties come out smelling like crap.

    Just a tiny bit of discretion and good judgment … but there wasn’t even a tiny bit.

    ReplyReply

  111. Robin
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:48:06

    The line between victim and victimizer can be considerably thinner than a pile of plagiarized pages.

    ReplyReply

  112. emmigeek
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:56:19

    Honestly I couldn’t help myself. No more sympathy.
    I haven’t gotten any writing done watching this woman shoot herself repeatedly in the a$$.

    ReplyReply

  113. emmigeek
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 17:57:28

    http://home.maine.rr.com/mattyg/wambulance.jpg
    there was sposed to be a picture link there there. Sorry.

    ReplyReply

  114. The Mess in Progress » Feeling Challenged
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 18:56:41

    [...] so far today: the beginnings of a rubber band ball and watching the plagiarism trainwreck over on Dear Author and Making Light. Perhaps it’s the fact we’re having our first grey [...]

  115. Nora Roberts
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:04:12

    I feel I have a victim of deformation, and must sue someone as I have lost valuable writing time reading about all this insanity. Plus, my head hurts from the stoopid.

    Jane, you have 24 hours to reform me, or the puppy I’m holding hostage will get boils. It started with YOU, and don’t YOU forget it.

    ReplyReply

  116. emmigeek
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:21:26

    I second Nora!
    hehe

    ReplyReply

  117. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:24:58

    I feel I have a victim of deformation, and must sue someone as I have lost valuable writing time reading about all this insanity.

    This is the last fricking straw. I’m suing someone now, too, goddammit! J.D. Robb is like crack for me, and by god, if someone forces Nora to slow the writing because of their stoopid, then I’m going to make everyone pay one-fucking-thousandfold! Screw boils! I’m going straight to herpes!

    Cover your genitals now, plagiarists and evildoers!

    ReplyReply

  118. emmigeek
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:30:41

    mwahahahaha!
    Can I sue for physical injury (sore ribs) due to giggle fits and bleeding eyes due to unintelligible writing?

    ReplyReply

  119. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:34:06

    Sorry, I refuse to be cowed by these baseless threats of stomach injuries due to giggling or loss of valuable writing time due to reading the comments on this thread. Show some restraint people.

    Nora, I think you know that you are not reformable. I’ll just say goodbye to the dog here and now. “Dear Dog, I hardly knew ya. Hope those boils aren’t too painful. Best, Jane.”

    ReplyReply

  120. Gennita Low
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:34:10

    Not the puppy!!!

    I’m glad I’m not the only one suffering from deformation watching this the whole wreckend. I also think I overdosed on popcorn.

    Free the puppy!!!

    ReplyReply

  121. Nora Roberts
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:34:32

    Woo-hoo! Meljean jumps from boils to herpes with one sweep of the black magic wicca. Plus, after that we’re suing everybody for slibelder, which–if you knew anything about the law, you’d know is a buncha big, fat lies on the internets. Or a Ukrainian appetizer.

    And if none of this works, I’m sicing my polograph on you.

    Logic, reason, sanity, even considerable sympathy from some haven’t worked. Might as well surrender to the wacky.

    ReplyReply

  122. Random
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:36:30

    May I be reformed too? It might help me stop procrastinating.

    In return, I’ll steal save Nora’s puppy.

    ReplyReply

  123. Nora Roberts
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:46:59

    Poor puppy. It was orphaned and raised by a half coven of Golden Retrievers but dreamed of being a German Shepherd. Now, due to cruel, meangirl Jane it can never live a boil-free life.

    Surely, this is evidence of further deformation and will require somebody’s lawyer to file papers about something on someone at some point in the near future. Or never, as the case may be.

    ReplyReply

  124. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:49:58

    At least I am consistently a mean girl.

    ReplyReply

  125. Gennita Low
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:55:40

    Stop boiling the puppy or I’ll start polographing. You don’t want that, I’m telling you right now.

    And uh, GO CLEVELAND INDIANS!

    ReplyReply

  126. Nora Roberts
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 19:59:50

    I backed the puppy to simmer because I gotta watch Heros.

    Priorities!

    Save the puppy, save the internets!

    ReplyReply

  127. Shannon
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:02:11

    And uh, GO CLEVELAND INDIANS!

    Now I R hyperventilating becuz that Jane lets Indians fans deform us and I M going to SUE you because Red Sox fans are very fragile and U R deforming me. C U in court!

    The Red Sox are win. I will take a polograf, so THERE!

    (Between the ALCS and you guys, I’m now exhausted.)

    ReplyReply

  128. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:03:39

    God damn it, I take a nap and you are getting sued. I thought this thing more or less died.

    Why is nobody suing me? What am I, a poor relative? I want to be sued, damn it.

    ReplyReply

  129. Belinda
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:05:50

    Logic, reason, sanity, even considerable sympathy from some haven't worked. Might as well surrender to the wacky.

    As Cheryl said on Lanaia’s yahoo group, “Diddo.”

    ReplyReply

  130. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:12:46

    In light of you being sued, you should get a lawyer. Can I suggest this guy?

    ReplyReply

  131. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:17:42

    OMG Belinda. That can’t be true. LOL! Diddo. That’s my new mantra.

    Nora: am going to boil a puppy.

    Meljean: am going to plague you all with genital warts.

    Me: Diddo

    ReplyReply

  132. Shawn Struck
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:22:51

    Well, I happen to have the best internet lawyer for e-lawsuits:

    Leonard J. Crabs’ Legal Barn

    He’s really good.

    ReplyReply

  133. Nora Roberts
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:32:57

    ~As Cheryl said on Lanaia's yahoo group, “Diddo.”~

    More mean girls! Everyone makes typos. Obviously, she left out the ‘l’ in the middle. Could happen to anyone.

    Back to Heros.

    ReplyReply

  134. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:40:45

    Hmm, weeping sores vs rough bumpage.

    I’m pretty sure I’ve got you beat, mean girl. And with warts, you don’t need any ribbing for his pleasure.

    Ilona, if you feel left out, I’ll totally sue you. ‘Cuz I’m nice like that.

    ReplyReply

  135. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:42:34

    Meljean: oh good! Can it be for lewd behavior? I totally need the publicity.

    ReplyReply

  136. Jackie L.
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:42:45

    Lanaia truly isn’t the smartest person on the web. I don’t buy the whole stroke defense, however. Nora, you are hysterical. Must get back to my paperwork.

    Go Rockies! Who cares about Cleveland? Our boys have won something like 20 out of the last 21 games they’ve played. And that after hardly winning any games all year.

    ReplyReply

  137. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:42:53

    I think my brain has been deformed by all this…

    I can has puppy?

    ReplyReply

  138. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:47:07

    Where exactly does the “l” go? Dilddo? Didldo? Diddlo? And is the latter a musical instrument akin to the fiddle but played with the penis?

    ReplyReply

  139. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:48:40

    “And is the latter a musical instrument akin to the fiddle but played with the penis?”

    You made me spit my drink.

    ReplyReply

  140. Janine
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:52:31

    The more I of Lanaia’s messages I read, the more puzzled I am that she wanted to author a book.

    ReplyReply

  141. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:54:29

    Meljean: oh good! Can it be for lewd behavior? I totally need the publicity.

    Sure thing — only, you have to counter-sue me for something, too. Spread some of that publicity goodwill around. Like, maybe you’ll call your book Magic Demon and I’ll call mine Demon Magic, and then we’ll scream “title stealer!” and slap each other until our clothes fall off and we roll around in oil. The lawsuits will start pouring in, I’m sure.

    Jane — diddlo playing is a sacred art in the Temples of Atlantis. The music is so sweet, and if it sounds like something you’ve heard before … well, just tell yourself that Atlantis existed 10,000 years before ancient Greece and the invention of the flute, and it’ll all be okay.

    ReplyReply

  142. Gennita Low
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:55:11

    Jackie L, oh, go Rockies too ;-), since I live a few months there a year. But it’s the Cleveland Indians tonight, babee!

    Nora, Cheryl’s diddo is very polographic, btw.

    Aww, poor puppy.

    ReplyReply

  143. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:56:39

    Janine, why? She is a pathological attention junkie. She parades her disabilities on her blog, she advertised her freelance services on the basis of her “ghostwritten” book, she actively sought out interviews and promoted herself. Somewhere a small part of her is loving it, because any attention, even bad attention, is still attention. She is acting very much like a spoiled child that can’t believe that she is in trouble because she is just too precious but at the same time she loves the spotlight. This is probably the most attention she ever had.

    ReplyReply

  144. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:58:50

    Meljean: We’ll have to get somebody to take pictures. Visual evidence is best.

    ReplyReply

  145. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 20:59:03

    Sure thing -’ only, you have to counter-sue me for something, too. Spread some of that publicity goodwill around. Like, maybe you'll call your book Magic Demon and I'll call mine Demon Magic, and then we'll scream “title stealer!” and slap each other until our clothes fall off and we roll around in oil. The lawsuits will start pouring in, I'm sure.

    Something will pour in but I doubt it will be lawsuits unless it is to ban your books which, if you think about it, is the perfect publicity stunt. It’s like Craig Davidson’s boxing matches only instead of Mangina being the sideshow act, it is the act complete with the two of you naked and going at it in oil. I’ll sell the pay-per-view rights and we’ll all end up millionaires.

    When’s the first match?

    ReplyReply

  146. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:04:03

    I can’t during the week – day job is demanding and in the evenings I sleep to avoid writing. How about the weekend?

    ReplyReply

  147. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:07:14

    Ooh, ooh, ooh!

    Can we combine it with a pajama party and all come and watch?

    And for some reason, wrestling matches with oil make me think of the wrestling match in Old School.

    Oh, I’ve needed the laughs.

    ReplyReply

  148. Random
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:09:21

    Anji: Shall we have a puppy party?

    *brings lots of puppies*

    ReplyReply

  149. emmigeek
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:09:53

    **dies of giggles**

    ReplyReply

  150. Nora Roberts
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:09:54

    Never post during commercials. Replace one middle d with l. Har.

    Or enjoy the magical notes of the diddlo.

    Need to go check on the puppy.

    ReplyReply

  151. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:10:27

    “Can we combine it with a pajama party and all come and watch?”

    Anji: only if you buy our overpriced popcorn and beverages

    ReplyReply

  152. Gennita Low
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:20:02

    I want Jane to review the match with Legos. I’ll sell the cheap wine.

    ReplyReply

  153. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:21:17

    Jane, as previously mentioned, I would like to be portrayed as a very skinny tall blonde with big boobies

    ReplyReply

  154. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:21:48

    Ah, man. Weekends aren’t any good for me. Those are the days I take my lead pipe to my ghostwriter’s knees. Bitch doesn’t write fast enough, and Demon Magic is on deadline. God, this pressure is killing me! But no matter how many times I whack, it’s never enough. And how can I be an author if my ghostwriter doesn’t perform? Gah!

    ReplyReply

  155. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:22:24

    If she has big boobies, I want to be short.

    ReplyReply

  156. ilona andrews
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:22:37

    Dirty title stealer

    ReplyReply

  157. Jane
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:25:03

    They are legos. Everyone will be squat with flat chests and like it. Some of you will have mustaches.

    ReplyReply

  158. Nora Roberts
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:30:47

    I would like a lego moustache. And a hat.

    ReplyReply

  159. Gennita Low
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:43:49

    Meljean,
    Try a diddo on the ghostwriter. :)

    ReplyReply

  160. Gennita Low
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:46:24

    And YAY, Cleveland Indians! And now, back to ghostwriting my own stuff, tentatively titled Demon’s Magic Demon.

    ReplyReply

  161. Meljean
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:46:24

  162. Shannon Stacey
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:46:38

    After absconding with them from my oldest son’s Lego bucket, I have Jack Sparrow, Will Turner and Han Solo Legos I’d be willing to part with for a substantial stud fee.

    The Red Sox are win. I will take a polograf, so THERE!

    For the record, I didn’t write that. It was my ghostwriter. *grumbles*

    ReplyReply

  163. Shannon Stacey
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:49:19

    OMG, Meljean! I had no idea there was a WW Lego! I’ve spent years in vain trying to convince my sons she’s a real superhero. I MUST have one!

    ReplyReply

  164. Anji
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 21:53:44

    No no no, forget the diddo, try a diddlo on the ghostwriter

    A puppie and pajama party, with popcorn and beverages. All we need is a circus.

    Well, Meljean, you could also be Darth Vader or Princess Leia

    ReplyReply

  165. Bianca
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 22:00:19

    Ilona, I’ll sue you. You have made me addicted to your work. That’s gotta be ground for something.

    And Ilona, you should totally use this as research.

    Mean Pagan person

    ReplyReply

  166. Janine
    Oct 15, 2007 @ 23:00:20

    Hey, the Quicktag buttons are back! Good on you, Jane! :)

    Janine, why? She is a pathological attention junkie. She parades her disabilities on her blog, she advertised her freelance services on the basis of her “ghostwritten” book, she actively sought out interviews and promoted herself.

    All true Ilona, but… she can’t write her way out of a paper bag. Can’t spell, can’t put together a decent sentence, can’t communicate calmly or rationally. She’s embarrassing herself so much that even though she doesn’t deserve any sympathy, I still cringe.

    ReplyReply

  167. How to Fling About Legal Insults Like a Lawyer, Part 1 of Many Parts | Dear Author: Romance Book Reviews, Author Interviews, and Commentary
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 04:01:47

    [...] minute someone uses the word “slander” in conjunction with something that is written, bells should go off indicating that the accuser has [...]

  168. Mimi
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 04:24:52

    The latest from Lanaia’s guestbook

    {I am being interviewed by a major newspaper, they have all my evidence, the proof will come out then and I WILL post the article. Unlike blogs and things that can be tampered with, my proof is dated, no way it can be tampered with, so we shall see who id truthful. I have nothing to worry about, but others, well they really should stop for a moment and think, as for Of Atlantis, it WILL be published, I worked TOO hard and as for when the new prologue appears, I know it takes like 24 hrs to show up, got complaints contact [email protected], my webmistress and I know it was changed Lanaia}

    How exactly did she work hard? She got someone else to write it for her, didn’t she?

    ReplyReply

  169. Stevie
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 05:03:33

    There’s a lengthy article over on LA Weekly about an extraordinary internet scam practised by a woman using the name Janna St James; see

    link

    for a picture. Any bells ringing?

    ReplyReply

  170. emmigeek
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 07:25:26

    How exactly did she work hard? She got someone else to write it for her, didn't she?

    posting copies of the prologue everywhere. It is hard work ignoring common sense too. I like how she states that it takes 24 hours for changes to appear. Thats a load. She was able to make changes the day this blew out of the water, remember her deleting the posts on her message board. Victim my arse. She wants attention… *grumble grumble**

    You know it will come out. And she’ll be given a few boxes of pre printed books just like my grandpa was. And after the initial family and friends have received their copies the rest will languish unsold in a box in her garage or perhaps she’ll drop copies all over the place hoping people will see and want to buy. Only given her lack of writing finesse who would want to voluntarily [i]buy[/i] firestarter?

    ReplyReply

  171. emmigeek
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 07:27:12

    my webmistress and I know it was changed Lanaia}

    Unfortunatly for you Lanaia no one else can tell thanks to the butchery.

    ReplyReply

  172. sybil
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 07:29:02

    yep, yep

    Stevie that isn’t that odd. And it would be not at all shocking to learn that is what is going on here to a point. It will continue as long as we shine a camera on it. The hardest part can be making sane people see the insanity. The first thing you do is try and understand it from a sane point of reason. You can’t. CAN’T. can’t.

    It is hard as hell to get. Someone that stoopied can’t be this clever. I had started to look yesterday for a newspaper article I was interviewed for for the ‘Death’ of a chick on a message board I moderated. Then decided not to mess with it. The funny is OUT there as Josh’s story seems I really think it happens often.

    Right now it is going on maybe here maybe not. But we can guess at least 5, 10, 100000 different places. There is a person creating a life on the net. Many different lives to adore that one. And a few sane people are caught up with it.

    The really, really fucked up thing is ‘if’ that is what is playing out here. Just think with a little ‘work’ and effort. “Mary”, “Cheryl” or whoever could really have made a go of it. But really it is too out there right? That could never happen. No one would ever believe that sort of screwed up fiction, it could never sell.

    So why not live it instead? Man you gots to lurve the internetz. Best place evah to get your crazy on.

    ReplyReply

  173. Chantal
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 08:02:42

    This is fascinating to me. She has been outed big time, yet she still insists on keeping the work up there.

    I wonder if she will play the cryptomnesia card? Hey, it worked for Helen Keller.

    ReplyReply

  174. Mimi
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 08:04:03

    Sybil that ‘death’ wouldn’t be Janet P Hildreth would it?

    ReplyReply

  175. Stevie
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 08:17:12

    Sybil, I accept that there were a lot of very weird people around long before the internet, and that the web has created an environment where weird can flourish.

    I suspect, however, that Joss Olsen still can’t really believe that a friend of his could be that naive. I don’t blame him; I would find it almost impossible to believe that a friend of mine could be that naive.

    Which is another way of saying ‘things like that don’t happen to people like us’. And when they do, it gets really scary…

    ReplyReply

  176. Sybil
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 08:43:31

    Of course it happens to people like us. Stevie you could be Mary/Cheryl/Janet P Hildreth/Evie/JessieJames/whoever for all I know. You could be that person the article is about looking for another 10 seconds.

    I would bet mary/she/he/it is already posting in this thread, making fun of herself and ‘creating’ an identy here. Of course it could also be said I am very cynical. Sadly though I must go work. So play on players, cuz it is an amusing train wreck and free to watch ;).

    ReplyReply

  177. Mimi
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 09:37:21

    This is the latest from the owner of Long Story Short:

    {{Denise Cassino Tuesday, 10/16/07, 7:16 AM

    Lanaia Lee, along with her publisher and lawyer, are addressing the situation that revolves around her book, Of Atlantis, and the David Gemmell book. She has posted a statement on her page in the Writers’ Lodge. Until she is proven guilty of something, her page will remain. This is America. Many of you are on a campaign to destroy her. Be aware that you will be hearing from her lawyers. If it is proven that she did indeed purposely plagarize the work, her page will be removed. Until then, she is a member of our Writers’ Lodge.

    Web Site: Long Story Short
    Email: [email protected] }}

    Surely it’s irrelevant whether Lanaia is guilty or not. The fact remains that David Gemmell’s work should not be on that site under Lanaia’s name.

    Sounds to me as though the webmistress went to the same ‘law’ school as Ms Pillsbury

    ReplyReply

  178. Mimi
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 09:44:31

    The latest from Long Story Short’s owners, who have missed the point completely.

    Denise Cassino Tuesday, 10/16/07, 7:16 AM

    Lanaia Lee, along with her publisher and lawyer, are addressing the situation that revolves around her book, Of Atlantis, and the David Gemmell book. She has posted a statement on her page in the Writers’ Lodge. Until she is proven guilty of something, her page will remain. This is America. Many of you are on a campaign to destroy her. Be aware that you will be hearing from her lawyers. If it is proven that she did indeed purposely plagarize the work, her page will be removed. Until then, she is a member of our Writers’ Lodge.

    Web Site: Long Story Short
    Email: [email protected]

    ReplyReply

  179. Julie
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 09:53:42

    Holy freaking …

    ReplyReply

  180. Caro Kinkead
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:13:51

    Just amazing. We’re hearing the same line as Pillsbury and LL are putting out: she did nothing wrong, you’re trying to destory her, you’ll hear from the lawyers.

    The site goes on my list of places to Not Recommend.

    ReplyReply

  181. SallyQ
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:25:36

    I’ve just emailed Long Story Short twice today to ask them to remove my story from their website. I was just trying to protect myself, as I had a story on their site a long time ago and it’s still findable on a search engine.

    I was upset by someone asking on the LSS if all authors on the site are plagiarists and when I learned they had no intention of removing David Gemmell’s extract I sent them a second, firmer email as I didn’t want to be associated with a site that would fail to do the right thing in this case.

    I’ve now been accused in an email of trying to destroy the owner of Long Story Short.

    ReplyReply

  182. Meljean
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:33:47

    Oh. My. God. They’re refusing to take down the excerpt until it’s been proven that it has been plagiarized?

    I can’t even… *brain explodes*

    The arrogance is astounding. Absolutely astounding.

    ReplyReply

  183. Meljean
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:38:04

    I've now been accused in an email of trying to destroy the owner of Long Story Short.

    I simply don’t understand this, either. Why wouldn’t the owner be like you, SallyQ, and distancing themselves from this as fast as possible? What possible incentive could they have to protect Lanaia’s excerpt at all costs, and what thought process goes into, “One of the writers put obviously plagiarized material on my site, but I’m not going to stand by and watch legit writers take me down!”

    *still picking up smooshed pieces of my brain*

    ReplyReply

  184. Belinda
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:40:50

    I've now been accused in an email of trying to destroy the owner of Long Story Short.

    So we can attribute the new LSS writing course, Writing Under Fire, directly to you?

    ReplyReply

  185. Stevie
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:42:24

    ‘They're refusing to take down the excerpt until it's been proven that it has been plagiarized?’

    No. They’re refusing to take it down until it’s been proven that is was deliberately plagiarised. And since they deny the intent to plagiarise they must intend to leave it there forever.

    Wonder what the lawyers acting for the people who own the copyright will make of that…

    ReplyReply

  186. Caro Kinkead
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:46:03

    So we can attribute the new LSS writing course, Writing Under Fire, directly to you?

    Except that if you click on that link, you get a “page not found.” I guess the fire was extinguished.

    The final wreckage from this is going to be very sad.

    ReplyReply

  187. Nora Roberts
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:47:12

    The coo-coo continues. The site owner of what is supposedly a site for writers ignoring plagiarism–and now accusing another writer of trying to destroy her for demanding her own work be removed from said site.

    What’s with all this destroying?

    We must call out the lawyers immediately, and have them do the destroying instead of all this willy-nilly destroying. Because this is America! We pay lawyers to do that.

    ReplyReply

  188. SallyQ
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:50:19

    **So we can attribute the new LSS writing course, Writing Under Fire, directly to you?**

    No that’s nothing to do with me. Maybe someone else who pulled out?

    Mine was just one short story, posted years ago.

    Or was that a joke and I’ve just let it go straight over my head? (probably. It’s been a long day)

    But yes, they seem to be saying that they must have proof it was deliberately plagiarised before they remove it. Which isn’t the point, surely?

    ReplyReply

  189. SallyQ
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:54:15

    Hey, I’m in Britain. We only have solicitors here. And lots of accident injury people. So unless I trip over a manhole outside Lanaia’s house, I’ve got no chance.

    ReplyReply

  190. Belinda
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 10:55:52

    Will the Gemmell estate even mess with this? (More importantly, how will we ever get to see a copy of the Cease and Desist order?)

    ReplyReply

  191. Anna
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:04:22

    David Gemmell’s estate and his UK publishers are aware of the situation, I’ve been told that David’s agent (who is US based and well versed in plagiarism law) has also been notified and is looking into the situation.

    ReplyReply

  192. Sybil
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:05:02

    I doubt it Belinda, first they would have to find a real life person to sue. Really though if someone wanted to… they should do a couple of searches. Figure who the server is that hosts the site currently hosting the plagiarized material and email it.

    ReplyReply

  193. SallyQ
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:10:31

    Perhaps best leave it to them then, Anna. I’m sure they’ll know what they’re doing.

    But yes, Belinda. It would be nice to see that order, wouldn’t it? ;-)

    ReplyReply

  194. Anna
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:21:13

    Sally Q – That’s the feeling on Legend Readers, the David Gemmell forum. Mine too now to be honest, I’m really fed up with the attitude of the people involved. (You all know who I’m referring to.)

    It appears there is no logic nor common sense that will appeal to these people and I’ve got better things to do with my time. I’ll find out how this pans out when it gets announced on the Legend Readers forum.

    I do have a sneaking suspicion that it will go in favour of the original author though.

    ReplyReply

  195. SallyQ
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:26:00

    Just got an email from the owner of Long Story Short to say that both my story and the David Gemmell extract have now been removed from the site. I’ve checked and that is the case.

    I suspect that she might have thought that Lee’s rewrite on her home page was the replacement but I’d sent her the link to Gemmell’s extract and she has deleted it.

    ReplyReply

  196. Janine
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:37:53

    Just got an email from the owner of Long Story Short to say that both my story and the David Gemmell extract have now been removed from the site. I've checked and that is the case.

    Finally some good news!

    ReplyReply

  197. Shawn Struck
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:38:41

    SallyQ:

    Not quite.

    ReplyReply

  198. Simon Bradshaw
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:39:38

    “This is America”

    Which, the last time I looked, was a signatory to the Berne Convention on Copyright.

    ReplyReply

  199. Anji
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:42:22

    Shawn, I had to refresh the page to see that it’s gone.

    ReplyReply

  200. Janine
    Oct 16, 2007 @ 11:43:22

    Shawn Struck, I’m getting “Page not found” at your link. So maybe we’re seeing a glimmer of light at the end of this 400-post tunnel after all.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

%d bloggers like this: