By Martin Neumann posted on October 14, 2006 at 11:59 pm
Want an avatar? Get a gravatar! • You can link to this comment

Wow. I can’t believe it has it gone this far. It was an oral agreement and anyone that knows a little bit about copyright should know how almost impossible this is to enforce and that everything in publishing and I mean EVERYthing is written down so as not to cause confusion.

Me thinks that the publishers were pissed big time that she went somewhere else after losing confidence in them - and decided to drag her through the mud. Very spiteful seeing that it looks like they really hadn’t gone very far with her: ie: no royalty payments …

And yes, it seems to have been $150,000 in royalties - broken down over time.

Obviously there are 2 sides to this story, but for the publisher to drag this out says more about them than anything else.

Notice the effect this has had on the blogger - she hinted about suicide as a option during this period. And to include such a personal outline of the blogger’s history in the initial complaint just stinks for my liking. It smacks of plain spite.

I also understand that writers and editors work very closely at times - they often build into a very strong team - so when the editor who brought her in left she felt there was not much backing and support from the publishers - as seen by the lengthy delay in getting a contract delivered to her.

The documents are a useful insight into the workings of the publishing industry. Notice to bloggers and wannbe authors: research, be wary and seek advice.

I love the technical and legal jargon used by Kengsington in their lawsuit: “Kensington will suffer irreparable harm etc” Irreparable! They’ve been in business for 32 years and have 7% of a big market an this will harm them!!!

Yes, they have been harmed - because many will become wary of them if that’s the way they treat such issues.