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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dear [Exec]:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,
[me]

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

Back to writing my letter.