Search Results
Dear Ms. Wendell and Ms. Tan.
 I spent Wednesday through Saturday last week at the Popular Culture Association Conference in New Orleans attending all the Romance Area panels. There were papers about domesticity as it constructs Eve’s character in JD Robb’s novels, and the moral construction of Sookie Stackhouse and the vampires she interacts with (from Jessica of Racy Romance Reviews, whom we have seduced to the dark side!), and how Milton’s Paradise Lost informs and creates the themes of Laura Kinsale’s Flowers from the Storm, and how sadomasochism is constructed and subverted by BDSM romances. An excerpt from this book would have fit right in at the conference, because it’s that insightful and well-researched. And a few “cuntmonkey”s and “fuck”s would certainly be no less inappropriate at an academic conference than me reading out loud “fisting his own cock desperately and sucking on his fingers like a whore sucking cock for a fix.”
You ladies need no introduction to the romance world, of course. You are the Smart Bitches, romance reviewers, fans, and advocates. (And Google-bombers extraordinaire.) Now, I consider Sarah a …
Isn’t it enough that you people set out to destroy her career and almost caused her death?
In case you don’t know, which I know for a fact you have been told, Cassie Edwards suffered a massive stroke due to the stress you idiots put on her.
I hope you can live with yourselves knowing what you did almost cost this woman her life. You have deprived her grandchildren of their grandmother. You have caused a lot of innocent people much heartache by your actions.
Everyone is blaming you and your cronies for what happened. Not just her fans, fan club members, etc. I’m talking publishers, authors, editors, and more. I hope almost killing someone was worth the 15 minutes of fame.
If you have any reason to think this is a lie, contact Carol Stacy at Romantic Times and I’m sure she’ll verify the information for you.
A lot of Cassie’s fans plan on being at the RT convention in Orlando just so they can attend your blogging seminar. Instead of it being about the art of blogging maybe it should be about the art of how to destroy a person’s life.
A few weeks ago, when Sarah …
 Loading ... I’m starting to wonder if there is a generational divide amongst readers of romance (and of writers too) wherein certain tropes appeal more to the older readers and certain tropes that appeal more to the younger readers.
I don’t mean to say that all readers/writers of a certain age fall into the “old school” v. “new school” dichotomy. For example, I think Nora Roberts writes a very new school type of heroine: self confident, unafraid of sex, and personally powerful (if often emotionally weak). Catherine Anderson writes old school heroines and plots as do authors like Cassie Edwards.
I’ve come to understand that few book clubs order Paranormals. I think that new school books are typified by the heroines you find in paranormals, particularly cross overs.
Do you agree or do you think I”m all wet? If you agree, how do you take into account the popularity of Twilight which has, by all accounts, an old school virgin heroine?
One of the search terms that brought a reader to the site in the past week was why plagiarism bothers authors. Given the size of the recent panel on plagiarism at RWA, it appears that it doesn’t bother some authors. Or is that the wrong assumption to draw? Needless to say, the panel was not well attended. The room seated about 200 and it appeared that there were 40-60 people there. I did see editors from a couple of different houses which was encouraging. I will admit that I never thought a panel that I sat on at RWA would fill a room of 200 but I did believe that Nora, who hasn’t spoken in room that wasn’t standing room only, would be greeted with a full crowd.
I know that Nora was disappointed and she voiced her disappointment from the podium. The room should have been full. The reason I say that is because I think that not everyone understands the difference between Plagiarism and Copyright. And I don’t know that everyone understands the reason why plagiarism isn’t such a good thing. …
We are starting a new series called “If You Like” which will be hosted by various readers, authors and bloggers of Dear Author. The purpose of the post and the comments is to explore what we like about a particular iconic author and what other authors have books like the iconic author. Dr. Sarah Frantz, Assistant Professor of Literature at Fayetteville State University, and regular contributor to the awesome blog called Teach Me Tonight, is hosting  this If You Like entry on Suzanne Brockmann. Suzanne Brockmann’s latest release, Into the Fire, is the 13th book in her famed Troubleshooter series.
If you would like to host an “If You Like” post, please email me at Jane at dearauthor.com
***
Suzanne Brockmann
Once upon a time, I was browsing in a Waldenbooks and saw a two-for-one deal: Suzanne Brockmann’s The Unsung Hero came free with a re-issue of her one and only time travel, Time Enough for Love. TEFL looked intriguing, so I bought the other book so I could get it. It was intriguing, but TUH, one of the most exquisitely plotted books I’ve ever read, truly rocked …
We have not dropped this. Our petition is up to 644 signatures and we are still planning on sending the printed version to both Amazon and the Washington State AG’s office. We actually received a response, albeit a form one, from Amazon yesterday. While this isn’t the response that we want to hear but it is a response at this point. As we have learned from the Cassie Edwards matter, it may take time for resolution to come forth.
***
Late Friday, AP reporter, Hillel Italie reported that Signet/NAL has severed its relationship with Cassie Edwards. Since we made a bit deal, here on the blog, about how appalling Signet/NAL’s initial response was, I thought it would be fair to give over our Sunday to say how awesome I think its final response is.
For newcomers, here are the details.
January 7, 2008: While a friend (Kate) of blogger Candy at Smart Bitches Trashy Books read Shadow Bear by Cassie Edwards, said friend noticed “didactic passages in the book. They were written in a distinctly different voice, and out of idle curiosity, she decided to Google certain phrases and sentences.” The googling revealed that Edwards used paragraphs of works from other authors in her fiction without attribution including Paul Tolme who wrote an article about ferrets in Defenders Wildlife magazine. In all, readers would review 22 books and help compile a PDF document of examples of copying 98 pages long. (as an aside, I think Paul Tolme is one of Edwards’ favorite resources).
January 9, 2008: Signet doesn’t respond very well to a query I made suggesting that whatever Edwards did was both legal …
Sarah just sent me the link to the news release that Signet and Cassie Edwards are no longer in business together.
“Signet has conducted an extensive review of all its Cassie Edwards novels and due to irreconcilable editorial differences, Ms. Edwards and Signet have mutually agreed to part ways,” the publisher said in a statement Friday.
“Cassie Edwards novels will no longer be published with Signet Books. All rights to Ms. Edwards’ previously published Signet books have reverted to the author.
Kudos to the Smart Bitches for uncovering the extensive plagiarism and kudos to Signet and the parent company, Penguin, for doing the right thing. We now await Kensington and Dorchester.
It only took a week to debunk supposed memoir Love and Consequences by Margaret B Jones. L&C was a story about Margaret’s “life as a half-white, half-Native American girl growing up in South-Central Los Angeles as a foster child among gang-bangers, running drugs for the Bloods.”
The author, Margaret Seltzer, is a) all white b) grew up in a ritzy neighborhood with c) her bio family. She didn’t even graduate from the University of Oregon.
How can publishers not catch this? It’s quite irksome that publishers have so little regard for the public that they continually put out books from a known plagiarist and continue to publish memoirs that are fake. Why should the reading public take these so-called gatekeepers seriously? These actions make me think that publishing is no more than a giant corporate conglomerate out to take as much money as possible, in as underhanded a way as possible, as it can. There is no lofty ideal.
On the SBTB site, Laura Kinsale asked the question “I’m curious. What’s the difference between Cassie Edwards writing about ferrets and fan fiction published for profit?”
Robin’s response was “the fact that fan fiction, by its very nature, has overt attribution.”
My response was
The difference, ethically (and in general), between fan fiction and plagiarism, i.e., the Cassie Edwards repeated use of other people’s words, is the attribution or lack thereof. Fan fiction gives attribution to the original authors work. Plagiarism is the passing off of someone else’s original work as your own.
I definitely think that there is probably fan fiction out there that a) plagiarizes and b) infringes. But I am not going to condemn an entire body of work based upon the individual pieces that may be unethical or may be violative of the copyright act just like I am not going to condemn the entire romance genre on the basis of work by Cassie Edwards or Janet Dailey.
I also think that there is fan fiction out there that is not infringing and would be considered transformative enough. I.e., I have thought that a work that
…
The question of whether there is a divide between authors and reader/blogger/reviewers has been discussed and debated here and elsewhere. To me it seems clear that it does, at least in some quarters. Some reader/blogger/reviewers, including some of my fellow bloggers here on Dear Author, have called out some authors for behaving badly. And some authors have called out reader/blogger/reviewers for being mean girls. Recently, Janet (Robin) blogged here about her own response to some authors’ reactions to the recent Cassie Edwards scandal, saying that “It felt to me (and still does) that there was a frighteningly easy shift into reader v. author discourse.”
But nowhere, perhaps, is the rift more evident than in the relative absence from the romance community of people who bridge the gap — those who are both writers or authors, as well as bloggers and reviewers.
I don’t mean to suggest that this hybrid is completely nonexistent in the romance genre. Authors HelenKay Dimon, Alison Kent and Stephanie Feagan all write reviews for Paperback Reader. Bam is a blogger and former reviewer who is now published. There have also been some unpublished …
 moar funny pictures
In tuth, in literature, in science and in art, there are, and can be, few, if any, things, which in an abstract sense, are strictly new and original throughout. Every book in literature, science and art, borrows, and must necessarily borrow, and use much which was well known and used before.
Justice Story in Emerson v. Davies, 8 F.Cas. 615, 619 (No. 4,436) (CCD Mass.1845).
One of the terms that has been bandied about during and post Savage Gate is “fair use.” In the Signet response to my inquiry regarding the allegations against Cassie Edwards regarding copying, I received a strange and bit confusing reply:
The copyright fair-use doctrine permits reasonable borrowing and paraphrasing of another author’s words, especially for the purpose of creating something new and original. Also, anyone may use facts, ideas and theories developed by another author, as well as any material in the public domain. Ms. Edwards’s researched historical novels are precisely the kinds of original, creative works that this copyright policy promotes.
This mixing of public domain and fair use is a bit misleading and it seemed to me that there was quite a bit of confusion about what …
moar funny pictures
After weeks of thinking, whining, ranting, and being generally disoriented in the aftermath of Savage Gate (phrase courtesy of Seressia Glass), it finally dawned on me that all of the brouhaha, both with the plagiarism thing and the mean girl thing, is all about boundaries (yes, I know I’m slow). Where does “inspiration” end and plagiarism begin? What is and isn’t appropriate for readers to discuss? What is and isn’t okay for readers to want to know? What once seemed like a series of no-brainers to me have suddenly become contested territory, with ongoing struggles and negotiations, not only on the limits of intertextuality (which is a wonderfully vexing or fascinating gray zone, depending on your perspective), but also of where blogging ends and “reporting” begins, and even on the limits of civility (this last, of course, not always addressed directly).
For every right someone claims, of course, a boundary in the form of a competing right or limiting obligation circumscribes it. And every boundary one person thinks is obvious seems foreign to someone else. For example, as someone who doesn’t really need to know …
As if the Cassie Edwards’ copying scandal hasn’t demoralized your faith in the publishing industry enough, Ishmael Beah’s bestselling memoir, A Long Way Gone, is the subject of two investigative pieces by The Australian. The first article was published on January 19, 2008, and tells the story about a couple who were keenly interested in Beah’s story.
They engaged in some research and thought that they might have uncovered Beah’s father. This discovery led to a revelation crucial to the timeline of Beah’s memoir.
Beah writes on the second page of his story: “The first time that I was touched by war I was 12. It was in January 1993.”
But the event he goes on to describe did not occur until January 1995.
The date difference is important since it mean that Beah might have only spent a couple of months in the army and not the years the memoirs describe. The article is not an indictment of Beah’s story but rather the oversight that the publisher took in fact checking the book. Perhaps this would be a non story if not for the Frey hoax but the reporters of The Australian note that …
It’s clear from emails, message boards, forums, and blogs that there is no common language that we speak, either readers or authors or both, as to what plagiarism is and is not within the fiction writing community.
There is a fear amongst authors that some readers are trying to set the bar too high. Conversely, I have heard some people posit publicly there should not be differing standards for differing communities.
I definitely believe that the academic standard for plagiarism should not be applied to fiction publishing. The academic standard would penalize those who cover even the same idea without attribution. Given the fact that there are very few plots, character motives, theme motifs, etc, the academic standard is too stringent.
However, I also think that using copyright law as the defining boundary for plagiarism is too broad. I don’t think that copying text in the fiction writing community should be determined by what is “fair use” and what is not. The reason that I think that the legal definition of “fair use” shouldn’t be the standard is because “fair use” was primarily designed to …
There’s been a backlash of sorts on some authors’ blogs around the internet due to the exposing of Cassie Edwards’ borrowing. I’ll be posting on Tuesday about some thoughts about the definition of plagiarism as it could be defined in the romance writing and read community, but today, in lieu of a ebook post, I thought I would ruminate a bit on the meaning of a fan. Here’s what I thought the fan/fangirl definitions were:
Fan - someone who appreciates, enjoys, and is positive about either an author and/or her work. Within the fan definition, there are varying degrees of fandom.
Fangirl - zealots, irrational in their devotion to an author. A person who has so personalized his or her relationship with the author that s/he becomes one with the author and presents herself/himself as the author’s voice throughout the internet.
Now it appears that fangirl is being used as a weapon, not against people who are fetishizing a particular author, but for those of us who take personally what we see dismissals of issues importance to the …
Newsweek ran a web special edition written by author Paul Tolme. Mr. Tolme penned a copyrighted article “Toughing It Out in the Badlands” that ran in the Defenders Magazine. Cassie Edwards copied some language from the article in her most recent Penguin release, Shadow Bear.
In the Internet age, every freelance writer fears that his or her words will be appropriated without compensation. First I was angry. Then I had to laugh. To see my textbook descriptions of ferrets in a bodice-ripper, as dialogue between a hunky American Indian and a lustful pioneer woman who several pages later have sex on a mossy riverbank, is the height of absurdity
I think Mr. Tolme’s article is worth reading because he obviously has a passion for his topic and has worked hard to make a life as a writer about wildlife. (Despite his obvious disdain for the genre)
I’m no longer angry with Edwards. In fact, I feel sorry for her. The blogosphere is buzzing with irate calls to boycott Edwards’s books and appearances. According to an interview she did with the Associated Press, she did not know she was supposed to quote source materials. Ignorance of law and
…
A lot of questions have been asked over the past week about what is and isn’t plagiarism, and what kinds of standards of attribution we should expect in fiction. While I don’t think readers are necessarily in a position to initiate this discussion, since it was readers who found the similarities between Cassie Edwards’s books and other materials, perhaps we have something to contribute to the larger discussion of what we should be able to expect when we enjoy books in the genre. So I figure that this is as good a place as any to have some dedicated discussion on this issue.
As an academic, I was trained with the highest possible standards of citation and attribution. When academics use the work of others, we must offer acknowledgment for a number of reasons. First, we are demonstrating that we have read the relevant scholarship on any particular topic. We are also honor bound to acknowledge the role that other work has played in the evolution of our own ideas and ethically bound to give proper credit to those whose work bears on, influences, or is in any …
Commenter at Smart Bitches, provided a copy of the following which is alleged to be the response of Cassie Edwards which she sent to a fan. Dear Author has contacted both the fan and Cassie Edwards for a response but has received neither a denial nor a confirmation.
Updated to add: DA contacted, via telephone, a representative of Cassie Edwards to authenticate the statement below. In response, the representative replied that there would be no comment. You can all draw whatever conclusions you want from that.
Jan 12,
2008
12:11 AM
Subject: A Few Words From Cassie Edwards. Please pass this on….
Body: With Cassie Edwards approval I pass this letter on, concerning the plagiarism accusation against her. She needs our support. Please forward this to all your friends.
In acknowledgement of your support contact me at:
www.myspace.com/destinyschoice8 or write to Cassie at:
www.myspace.com/cassieedwardsromance
Thanks, Lisa
Cassie Ed..
Date:
Jan 11, 2008 4:57 PM
————————— Original Message
From: Cassie Edwards
Date: Jan 11, 2008 11:58 AM
Hi, Lisa,
I just got on My Space and I found your wonderful encouraging letter. Thank you for believing in me, for I have done nothing wrong. My publisher is standing behind …
edited to add: Cassie Edwards website is now taken down. It redirects to the myspace page.
You might be suffering from Cassie Edwards plagiarism fatigue but because of what I have read on the internet in various places, from both authors and readers, I think I need to post this example. One of the Smart Bitch readers checked a Cassie Edwards, Savage Dream c. 1990, and found that it bore startling similarities to Laughing Boy: A Navajo Love Story by Oliver La Forge. Laughing Boy was copyrighted in 1929 and awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1930.
You can see all of the examples in a great PDF that Candy from SBTB is compiling which, unfortunately seems to expand every day.
Savage Dream (2003, ISBN 0-7862-5881-0, Thorndike Press [Large print edition]. First published 1990, Dorchester)
Laughing Boy by Oliver La Farge (2004, ISBN 0618446729, Houghton Mifflin)
At first light the desert is intimate, and somehow Shadow felt the presence of others as an intrusion this morning. …the blinding light of full day had not yet supplanted the soft greys of dawn, the uncertain forms …
Felicia Lee, reporter from the Times, provided an excellent summary of the Cassie Edwards plagiarism issue that broke on the blog, Smart Bitches, Trashy Books. While some around the community believe that exposure of this issue is a black eye on romance, I think the majority of the response showed the genre to a good light.
The news of the plagiarism issue made it across the Atlantic. The Daily Telegraph reported on the issue stating “Mrs Edwards and Penguin, her publisher, have tried to shrug off the controversy.” Later on, the report sites the new press release by Penguin, but it doesn’t let it or Edwards off the hook.
One thing I don’t like is the Edwards v. Roberts tone of some of the news articles I’ve read because this isn’t about Nora Roberts at all, any more than it is about Edwards v. John Barrie, the plagiarism expert. It’s about Edwards and the conscious decisions she made and the writers who have been directly affected. Behind that, it’s about the community and not any one particular author.
Thanks Nora for sticking up for the genre and therefore its readers. It’s not an easy road to take to make …
Over the past few days, some have lamented the fact that it was the Smart Bitches who broke the Cassie Edwards story, because they are not “neutral” enough where Edwards is concerned.
I don’t think anyone could argue seriously that the Smart Bitches are neutral about Cassie Edwards (although if you take a look at Candy’s statistics, the legends surrounding the extent of their attention to her are pretty obviously exaggerated). But my question is why should they have to be neutral about Edwards – about anything, actually – to have legitimacy as the source of the Edwards revelations? No one with an opinion is neutral. No one. To be neutral is to be disengaged. And seriously, do we want people to be neutral about plagiarism? Does anyone think that news reporters are disengaged with the issues about which they write? That they don’t have opinions about those issues? How about the ACLU or Ken Starr? I wasn’t thrilled when Ken Starr pursued the Clinton/Lewinsky relationship, but by no means did Starr orchestrate Clinton’s decision to play doctor with Lewinsky in the Oval Office. One might argue that it was a …
Given the statement by Ms. Edwards that she took materials but didn’t realize that you need to footnote it; the original Signet response that her use was fair use and the fact that the original sources were mostly public domain, it’s illuminating and disturbing to see the following by commenter Em at the SBTB site which provides two passages from Robert Hughes’ Fatal Shore published in 1987. Fatal Shore is described at Amazon as a non fiction book that “reads like the finest of novels” and that Hughes’ “narrative finesse . . drives the reader ever-deeper into specific facts and greater understanding.”
Maybe Signet would like to check out Ms Edwards’ Australian historical romance Touch the Wild Wind, since large chunks of descriptive passages are taken from Robert Hughes’ The Fatal Shore (published in 1987 and therefore not out of copyright).
TtWW ch 4: “The trees were filled with the thumping, scrabbling, and chittering of nocturnal creatures. Sugar-gliders with wide, furry airfoils slung between their fore and hind feet parachuted from tree to tree in wobbly swoops.”
Hughes: “After sundown, their trees were filled with the thumping, scrabbling and chattering of other
…
From: xxxx.penguingroup.com
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 1:02 PM
To: Jane Litte
Subject: New Cassie Edwards statement
Dear Jane,
Please find below a new statement from Signet re: the Cassie Edwards’ situation.
Our original comments were based on Signet’s review of a limited selection of passages. We believe the situation deserves further review. Therefore we will be examining all of Ms. Edwards’ books that we publish, and based on the outcome of that review we will take action to handle the matter accordingly. We want to make it known that Signet takes any and all allegations of plagiarism very seriously.
Jan 7, 2008 the Smart Bitches Trashy Books site post examples of text from several Cassie Edwards’ novels and the sources from which they might be copied. SB Sarah has combined all the comparisons into one easy to read PDF. List of links:
Jan 8, 2008 Jane urges the community to talk openly about Plagiarism.
Jan 9, 2008 Jane writes to publicity department of Penguin asking if there is a public response to the allegations. Signet responds with a reply:
Signet takes plagiarism seriously, and would act swiftly were there justification for such allegations against one of its authors. But in this case Ms. Edwards has done nothing wrong.
Jan 9, 2008AP reporter picks up story and gets statement from author Edwards.
“When you write historical romances, you’re not asked to do that,” Cassie Edwards told The Associated Press, speaking earlier this week from her home in Mattoon, Ill.
Jan 10, 2008 Jane posts her open letter to Penguin regarding her disappointment on its stance of plagiarism. Other readers provide copies of their eloquent statements.
Jan 10, 2008 …
I have been tempted so many times to boycott an author or publisher, especially when I come across 200 page $22 hardcovers or a serial lack of copyediting. But in this case, in the aftermath of Signet’s response to the revelations regarding Cassie Edwards, I do not think boycotting is the best choice.
It seems to me that what many of us want is for publishers to strive for a higher ethical standard with the books they publish and thereby offer a higher level of respect to readers and to the whole cultural enterprise of literacy and business of publishing in general. But if that’s the goal, will the selective boycotting of the publisher accomplish that? I don’t think it will.
Instead, I think it will negatively impact authors, and in my opinion we need authors to be as motivated as possible to actively support a high ethical standard within the Romance community. If authors were leading the boycott charge, I could see following the lead, but they are not, and I understand why. Authors, especially those who do not have the history and the clout of Nora Roberts, may suffer in ways that simply take them …
There are heated discussions on various loops and blogs regarding the accusations of plagiarism against a published romance author. Some questions have also been raised regarding RWA’s stand on the matter. To be clear, RWA does not condone plagiarism or any type of copyright infringement. (Please see RWA’s Code of Ethics http://www.rwanational.org/cs/code_of_ethics).
RWA takes all accusations of plagiarism very seriously. RWA also stands behind the idea that guilt or innocence should be determined after a thorough review of all documents and sources, not based on discussions or articles found on the internet or in other news media.
Within RWA, there is a process in place to examine claims of plagiarism made against RWA members. That process includes a set of procedures that affords the individual due process. Any member found to be in violation of RWA’s Code of Ethics is subject to disciplinary action including loss of membership.
According to information RWA has, Cassie Edwards was once a member of RWA and is listed on RWA’s Honor Roll; however, it appears she allowed her membership to lapse four or more years ago. If guilt is admitted or established, RWA will take appropriate steps with regard to the Honor Roll listing.
Members have raised questions …
Dear Mr. Shanks, CEO of Penguin, and Susan Peterson Kennedy, President of Penguin:
I am writing to share with you my disilllusionment with your publishing house after the response you gave to the allegations of plagiarism against Signet author, Cassie Edwards.
As a reader, when I buy a book, I assume that my money is spent paying for original work. I know that you believe this is important to readers because you have taken the time and cost to alert readers when books are “first time in print” from popular authors who have often have reprints out on the shelf such as Ms. Edwards.
It seems to me that not deceiving the public is an important thing for you and I sincerely applaud that. Many of the authors from your house are big favorites of mine. You recently published a historical romance by Joanna Bourne which was revelatory within the genre.
The troubling thing is that your defense of Ms. Edwards seems contrary to your stated position that you “take[] plagiarism seriously”. The specific part of the statement I find most troubling is this:
Signet takes plagiarism seriously, and would act swiftly were there justification for such allegations against one of …
 AP writer Hillel Italie obtain a statement and response from Cassie Edwards on the plagiarism charges.
“When you write historical romances, you’re not asked to do that,” Cassie Edwards told The Associated Press, speaking earlier this week from her home in Mattoon, Ill.
Edwards husband then chimed in with this defense:
“She doesn’t lift passages,” Charles Edwards said, adding that “you would have to draw your own conclusions” on how closely his wife’s work resembles other sources.
I’m not going to comment on this. I’ll let you all draw your own conclusions.
Importantly, the AP contacted a plagiarism expert, Dr. John M Barrie who “created the original architecture and fundamental technology behind iThenticate and Turnitin in 1994.” These programs are used by organizations to detect plagiarism. Dr. Barrie confirmed that the material was “lifted.” When contacted, RWA president, Sherry Lewis, claims that while the excerpts “raise some questions” that she (as a published author herself) says
“It’s not clear-cut to me,” she said. “You can see similarities in the passages, but I’m not qualified to make that assertion.”
I understand within the RWA that the Membership Committee makes a recommendation of exoneration or fault but the …
Edited to add my inquiry: Apparently some are taking umbrage that I posted the Signet response but not my own email inquiry. I will say that I had permission to post the Signet response but I don’t mind adding my inquiry:
Dear Mr. [name redacted at the request of the responder]:
I was writing to inquire whether Penguin had any response to the allegations of copying asserted against NAL author, Cassie Edwards. If so, is there one we can share with our readership? Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Jane Litte
http://dearauthor.com
***
The Response from Signet:
Date: January 9, 2008 11:12:46 AM CST
To: Jane Litte
Subject: RE: Regarding the Cassie Edwards situation
Dear Ms. Litte,
Please find attached – - -
Signet takes plagiarism seriously, and would act swiftly were there justification for such allegations against one of its authors. But in this case Ms. Edwards has done nothing wrong.
The copyright fair-use doctrine permits reasonable borrowing and paraphrasing of another author’s words, especially for the purpose of creating something new and original. Also, anyone may use facts, ideas and theories developed by another author, as well as any material in the public domain. Ms. Edwards’s researched historical
…
|
|
Open Threads at Dear Author. Want to know what new releases are out this month and what readers are excited about reading? Check out the threads below. 
We don’t like to censor comments nor do we endorse the comments of any poster. We do reserve the right to moderate comments but most of the time will not, believing, as Justice Brandeis did, that the greater good is in “more speech, not enforced silence.”
