# The plagiarism of Easy by Tammara Weber - Resolved (MERGED)



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

http://dearauthor.com/book-reviews/the-plagiarizing-of-tammara-webbers-easy-by-jordin-williams/?fb_source=pubv1

ETA (11/16/13) The Resolution: http://tammarawebber.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-one-about-plagiarism.html


----------



## Sara Fawkes (Apr 22, 2012)

Oh dear.... Sounds like the author had the book ghostwritten then didn't bother checking to make sure everything was kosher before publishing.

And she got so high on the charts with it. Wonder if it'll make it onto any lists this week, the book really killed it with sales...


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

The author was a ghostwriter herself. I have to say this stinks on ice. The author is deleting posts and things - that is not an innocent thing to do.


----------



## Sara Fawkes (Apr 22, 2012)

Monique said:


> The author was a ghostwriter herself. I have to say this stinks on ice. The author is deleting posts and things - that is not an innocent thing to do.


And I just noticed she had a KB posting up about her "success"! Oh man, this really isn't going to go well at all....


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Sara Fawkes said:


> Oh dear.... Sounds like the author had the book ghostwritten then didn't bother checking to make sure everything was kosher before publishing.


Sorry, I'm not believing that.

I don't see how they thought they would get away with this. People are bound to notice.


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

Amazon has acted. No longer available for sale.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

The good thing is that the "author" hasn't been paid by Amazon yet, so at least there's that.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

This made me so, so sad for the readers who got duped and the frigging SMUDGE this wannabe author put on the indie name.  The industry doesn't need backsteps like this.  Dammit.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

ellecasey said:


> This made me so, so sad for the readers who got duped and the frigging SMUDGE this wannabe author put on the indie name. The industry doesn't need backsteps like this. Dammit.


+1

As a writer who's dabbled with tradpub and actively working toward self-publishing titles this fall, it's incredibly disheartening to see someone make more material for the nay-sayers to throw around.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Glad the book is off sale.

I doubt it was ghostwritten. It's expensive to get something coherent. That's a convenient excuse from a ghostwriter.

M


----------



## Vivi_Anna (Feb 12, 2011)

Wow. We are sure seeing a lot more of this.

Makes me sick to see.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Vivi_Anna said:


> Wow. We are sure seeing a lot more of this.
> 
> Makes me sick to see.


I guess if there's a bright side it's that readers notice these things and can act quickly with the speed of the internet.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Harper Alibeck said:


> If it did well enough Mon-Sun on BN and Amazon, it might very well hit the USA Today list. I wonder how THAT is handled?


My guess is that there are people that would like to see this get on the USA today list so that it (and the self-publisher plagiarist story) gain a lot of traction. Wouldn't be surprised to see this hit the ticker on some of the 24hr news networks.


----------



## sbaum4853 (May 3, 2010)

It's amazing to me that somehow this person cobbled together giant chunks from other novels and somehow turned it into a book that people love and were showering with 5-star reviews (until they learned it was plagiarized - now it's getting skewered on Amazon). 

As I've been typing this post, it looks like Amazon is taking action. I can't get onto the book's page anymore. Kudos to the readers who discovered this and made things happen so quickly.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

Sara Fawkes said:


> And I just noticed she had a KB posting up about her "success"! Oh man, this really isn't going to go well at all....


That's just sad (as in it breaks my heart to hear that) because I so love whenever I read about a KB author announcing some success that it really hurts to find out that someone who did that might end up on the wrong side of the criticism pile.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Ghostwriter? Now I'm totally befuddled. Who originally wrote the words?


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

"Amazingly Broken" just seems like so ironic a title now...


----------



## Sara Fawkes (Apr 22, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Ghostwriter? Now I'm totally befuddled. Who originally wrote the words?


True enough. No matter if a GW did the story or the author, either way it was the author's responsibility to see this didn't happen. Because she published it, she's the culpable party.

I have no love for plagarizers, unintended or otherwise. I'm glad it's down, but REALLY hope it doesn't get onto any lists and give media outlets more fodder...


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

ellecasey said:


> This made me so, so sad for the readers who got duped and the frigging SMUDGE this wannabe author put on the indie name. The industry doesn't need backsteps like this. Dammit.


Yeah, I'm sure Salon will be shaming us all for this by this time tomorrow.

But just like with the Locke scandal, the truth is that most people are playing the game right. Because the writing itself is what matters to them. That's always going to win out with readers in the end.


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

It bothers me even more that "she" came to the kboards and befouled our ranks spread her false claims of success. There are good folk here who live, dream, and bleed writing. Your kind is not welcome.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

I almost feel as if the whole thing was one great big joke on the indie publishing world or maybe even worse.  Conspiracy theory anyone?

1. The title.  Every time I've read it, I thought how it seemed to me mocking the genre and the market.
2.  The artwork.  Those tatoos were the worst photoshop job I've ever seen.  Seriously, it was laughable.  I wondered why she didn't even try to make them look real.
3.  The promotion.  There was a humongous amount of effort put into launching this book.  More than one person could do, I think, and in a very short period of time.  She had every single book blogger I know about hyping her book.
4.  The content.  She took from several popular ones and didn't even bother to change the words in a lot of it.
5.  The author image.  "Ghostwriter"?  How ironic can you get?  She sure is a ghost now.  Her facebook, Twitter, Blog, and product page are all GONE.  Ghosts.

Who benefits from something like this, if it is a scam (and not just a stupid girl plagiarizing)?

1.  Anyone who wants to see indies get a bad rap.
2.  Anyone who wants to slow down the speed of NA Romance sales, or interfere in their ability to make it onto the NYT or USAT lists.

Or maybe I'm just paranoid.


----------



## Sara Fawkes (Apr 22, 2012)

Her Goodreads profile is still up, as is the GR book link:

Amazingly Broken: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17673542-amazingly-broken
Jordin Williams: http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/6886478.Jordin_Williams

Too bad they don't keep archives of blog posts/tweets.


----------



## Wansit (Sep 27, 2012)

So confused - her Twitter page says she hired a ghostwriter from Odesk.com but her author bio says she's ghostwritten successful novel for years. Lying across the board? Whatever the case this is really sad.


----------



## Alex Jace (May 6, 2013)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Ghostwriter? Now I'm totally befuddled. Who originally wrote the words?


The ghostwriter excuse sounds familiar - didn't Lanaia Lee claim that it was all her ghostwriter's fault that her book OF ATLANTIS plagiarised David Gemmell's DARK PRINCE?


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I really wish someone who has been plagiarized would sue the person who did it. Not sure if it's criminal, but that would be nice. I hate to see these people just fade away only to surface again with a new name and do it all over again. 

I want justice, I says!


----------



## KaryE (May 12, 2012)

There was another one recently, too. Tracey Alley (Witchcraft Wars) lifted a bunch of stuff from Mystara, a D&D/WotC property. When confronted, she claimed innocence and stridently threatened to sue her accusers for slander and libel. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=127959000550782&story_fbid=661935303819813

The books in question have since been removed from Amazon.

The original creators, as you might imagine, were some p*ssed. They worked under work-for-hire agreements. That means that the original creators cannot write in that world no matter how much they want to, no matter how much fans want them to, without WotC's say-so.


----------



## Lo/Roxie (May 11, 2011)

Ugh. I bought and started this book last week because it was everywhere and I try to keep up with all the new, popular books. As I read it, I kept thinking it was so familiar...but I couldn't figure out *why* it felt so familiar. I put it down to the popularity of that particular romance trope in most NA but there was just something...off. You know? But I got busy with two book releases back-to-back between my trad and indie pubbed stuff and never picked the book back up. And now I definitely won't be finishing it.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

Jamie McGuire author of Beautiful Disaster (one of the plagiarized books) says this on Twitter:

Interesting tidbit: Jordin B Williams is also Jordin Baker Bishop, who wrote Sparkle. I remember messaging her a few months ago asking her not to -..advertise on my author page without permission. I don't recall her writing back.


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

JimJohnson said:


> I guess if there's a bright side it's that readers notice these things and can act quickly with the speed of the internet.


Yep, this. That book came down with lightning speed! And I don't think plagiarism should be blamed on indies. Remember Stephen Ambrose? Alex Haley? Martin Luther King, Jr.? Doris Kearns Goodwin? I remember some university got in trouble for having plagiarized ... its plagiarism manual.


----------



## KerryT2012 (Dec 18, 2012)

OMG, some people are so silly, I mean what did she name the book - Uneasy


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Ugh, talk about leaving a bad taste in one's mouth (especially since I replied to her original post on KB).  Thankfully it appears that justice is not entirely blind.


----------



## sbaum4853 (May 3, 2010)

ellecasey said:


> I almost feel as if the whole thing was one great big joke on the indie publishing world or maybe even worse. Conspiracy theory anyone?
> 
> 1. The title. Every time I've read it, I thought how it seemed to me mocking the genre and the market.
> 2. The artwork. Those tatoos were the worst photoshop job I've ever seen. Seriously, it was laughable. I wondered why she didn't even try to make them look real.
> ...


I heart this post. Elle, you should use your freakish ability to write quickly to transform this theory into a novel about a book club who loves indie NA Romance and, working together, uncovers a giant conspiracy much like the one you've outlined above. It could be the _All The President's Men_ of indie lit.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

sbaum4853 said:


> I heart this post. Elle, you should use your freakish ability to write quickly to transform this theory into a novel about a book club who loves indie NA Romance and, working together, uncovers a giant conspiracy much like the one you've outlined above. It could be the _All The President's Men_ of indie lit.


Heh heh. I'm so on it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 26, 2013)

ellecasey said:


> I almost feel as if the whole thing was one great big joke on the indie publishing world or maybe even worse. Conspiracy theory anyone?


Yep, today we'll bury our heads and blame a conspiracy of the evil publisher cabal, because it is physically impossible for someone who calls herself an indie to do something wrong.

By tomorrow, people will be defending her. Probably claiming it was "fan fiction." or a "Mash-up." They will claim the authors who are plagiarized are overreacting because "its publicity for their books!" or some other nonsense. Just like when the Locke thing broke and after a day or two people started defending Locke and accusing others of overreacting. Just like whenever an indie does something unethical. It's always the same cycle: half day of "how horrible" followed by "conspiracy theories" that the whole thing was a set-up, followed by defending the person who did it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 26, 2013)

KaryE said:


> There was another one recently, too. Tracey Alley (Witchcraft Wars) lifted a bunch of stuff from Mystara, a D&D/WotC property. When confronted, she claimed innocence and stridently threatened to sue those who accused her for slander and libel.


You gotta be a special kind of stupid to try to plagiarize WoTC with their sue-happy track record. That's the literary equivalent of covering yourself in blood and jumping into a shark-infested bay.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

ellecasey said:


> Jamie McGuire author of Beautiful Disaster (one of the plagiarized books) says this on Twitter:
> 
> Interesting tidbit: Jordin B Williams is also Jordin Baker, who wrote Sparkle. I remember messaging her a few months ago asking her not to -..advertise on my author page without permission. I don't recall her writing back.


I can't find this book.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

sbaum4853 said:


> I heart this post. Elle, you should use your freakish ability to write quickly to transform this theory into a novel about a book club who loves indie NA Romance and, working together, uncovers a giant conspiracy much like the one you've outlined above. It could be the _All The President's Men_ of indie lit.


THIS!!

Elle, do this!!


----------



## KerryT2012 (Dec 18, 2012)

ellecasey said:


> I almost feel as if the whole thing was one great big joke on the indie publishing world or maybe even worse. Conspiracy theory anyone?
> 
> 1. The title. Every time I've read it, I thought how it seemed to me mocking the genre and the market.
> 2. The artwork. Those tatoos were the worst photoshop job I've ever seen. Seriously, it was laughable. I wondered why she didn't even try to make them look real.
> ...


Who knows it is all too strange.. wonder how she got found out? I mean she must have sold thousands before this happened - I get the impression this has been done before. Also, I would like to know what Amazon are going to do with the money if they are not paying her, they should give everyone a refund.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

A very alert reader figured it out and contacted the blogger to have them check it out too.  Kudos to that reader for being such a badass!


----------



## RoseInTheTardis (Feb 2, 2013)

It's so depressing and infuriating at the same time. I'm glad she was caught and that the book will be taken down and she won't see profits from it, but yikes.

Every time one of these piecemealed books that plagiarizes a dozen sources comes up, I can't help but think how much harder it seems to try and wedge that stuff into a coherent novel than to just write it yourself. (Obviously, to the plagiarist it's not.)

The ghostwritten defense is hilarious, at least. Especially since her bio claims she was a a successful ghostwriter, but then apparently she had her own book ghost-written, and then on Twitter claims "I can't write." What. Darling, just apologize and move on, you're making it worse.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

This sort of thing is really depressing, especially when we congratulated them on their success.

The person responsible clearly doesn't give a damn about the authors they've stolen from.

Hopefully the authors of the original books are also going after Kobo/B&N/etc. to get the book shut down there.


----------



## sarahdalton (Mar 15, 2011)

This is so weird. When I saw her posts on here about the book catapulting up the charts I thought it was weird from the beginning. Usually you see an author develop and increase sales through book releases. I remember someone asking her how she'd done it, and she just said something like 'oh, just got it onto a popular blog'. 

And then every blogger I'm connected to via Facebook posted reviews. 

Goodness, they must have chucked a ton of money at it. And all plagiarised work. 

Not good at all.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

Yeah, right? There were a couple responses from her that were written so poorly, I kept thinking she must be too busy to even look at the screen while she's typing.  Nothing was making sense.

My hindsight is frigging eagle-eye sharp.  lol


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

sarahdalton said:


> This is so weird. When I saw her posts on here about the book catapulting up the charts I thought it was weird from the beginning. Usually you see an author develop and increase sales through book releases. I remember someone asking her how she'd done it, and she just said something like 'oh, just got it onto a popular blog'.
> 
> And then every blogger I'm connected to via Facebook posted reviews.
> 
> ...


Yes, it never felt right. I hope all the bloggers that pimped this will post stories of the outcome.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

Monique said:


> I can't find this book.


Me either.


----------



## Wansit (Sep 27, 2012)

valeriec80 said:


> Me either.


It's already been removed from sale by Amazon. Zon has also closed her author account. Still up on Goodreads though.


----------



## Rachel Hanna (May 7, 2012)

I notice everyone referring to this person as "her" but on Goodreads, her profile shows male. Do we even know who we're dealing with?


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

sarahdalton said:


> This is so weird. When I saw her posts on here about the book catapulting up the charts I thought it was weird from the beginning.


This.
It seemed like pretty vapid self promotion, since she is new to this board, at least under that user name. I tend to ignore posts like that because there is a difference between marketing yourself here and just sharing your milestones.

I think I did chuckle at the cover though 

One thing that seems a little bright around the edges is how swiftly the reading and blogging community reacted to this.
Hopefully, it'll make other people think twice about this sort of thing.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Wansit said:


> It's already been removed from sale by Amazon. Zon has also closed her author account. Still up on Goodreads though.


I must be a dope. I can't find it.


----------



## NathanHaleJefferson (Apr 3, 2013)

Ok, so I see you are all getting on the conspiracy train... Lets crack out the Reynolds wrap and work this out.

Elle's points are all valid. Hmm.  More foil please.

I think we can use what happens next as the validation.  If salon or whatever news stream picks up the story starts pulling posts from KBoards or other indie writing boards she posted on that will be another sign.  They work their mole into the ranks, we congratulate, then they post out reply comments in their news stories - showing that indies support this kind of thing.


Hmm.  Shoot.  Are all of her posts and replies deleted yet? 

Also, if you do want to write an anti-indie writer conspiracy book I know a few you can borrow work from!


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

Monique said:


> Yes, it never felt right. I hope all the bloggers that pimped this will post stories of the outcome.


So, if the "author" loses the sales, then Amazon affiliates lose their commission from sales as well, one would assume? Ugh. This whole thing stinks.


----------



## Wansit (Sep 27, 2012)

Monique said:


> I must be a dope. I can't find it.


Here: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17673542-amazingly-broken


----------



## Nathalie Hamidi (Jul 9, 2011)

I was actually glad for him/her, and now I'm just really, really sad.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

Ugh, sorry to hear it, as I do cheer for new authors who make it big (while simultaneously envying them like crazy). I was following her posts with some interest and a good deal of curiosity. I am astonished, though, that anyone would try to rip off some of the very biggest and most recent successes in New Adult-- it just seems, well, dumb. Like no one's gonna notice??!


----------



## Lanie Jordan (Feb 23, 2011)

I'm sad for everyone involved--authors and readers.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

Wansit said:


> It's already been removed from sale by Amazon. Zon has also closed her author account. Still up on Goodreads though.


I meant Sparkle by Jordin Baker. When I google that, I just get some reviews of The Great Gatsby.


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

Her Goodreads page is still up: http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/6886478.Jordin_Williams
The book's Goodreads page: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17673542-amazingly-broken
Her website: http://authorjordinwilliams.blogspot.com/ -- As you can see, everything has been totally taken down all in one day.

This is her site on wayback machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20130616221102/http://authorjordinwilliams.blogspot.com

I remember reading something on one of her websites earlier today that SHE was a ghostwriter. Now that's been taken down. Sounds like the 'ghostwriter' she's been blaming for the plagiarism has been herself...


----------



## Al Dente (Sep 3, 2012)

This is absolutely horrendous. I can't believe scammers actually think this sort of thing will fly in the connected era in which we live.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Wansit said:


> Here: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17673542-amazingly-broken


Oh, thanks. I was talking about Sparkle referenced above.


----------



## sarahdalton (Mar 15, 2011)

I just randomly checked one of the other threads by Jordin Williams and they actually mention the word count of 'Easy'. So, how could they not realise their 'ghostwriter' plagiarised? They never read their own book before publication??

It all stinks to high hell, I tell ye.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

From DA comments it's looking more and more like they stole the story from fan fiction not realizing parts of it were plagiarized.

That makes way more sense to me than a ghostwriter.


----------



## fallswriter (Sep 11, 2012)

I have a question. While trolling Twitter, lots of flame is being thrown. Somebody gave a link to Goodreads where they charge Tammara Webber's book Easy plagiarizing Jamie McGuire's Beautiful Disaster. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I haven't read either book. If it's true, this goes way deeper. I don't trust the info though.


----------



## Wansit (Sep 27, 2012)

Monique said:


> Oh, thanks. I was talking about Sparkle referenced above.


Ooooh, sorry can't help you there.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

RM Prioleau said:


> I remember reading something on one of her websites earlier today that SHE was a ghostwriter. Now that's been taken down. Sounds like the 'ghostwriter' she's been blaming for the plagiarism has been herself...


This person tweeted she/he "can't write" yet they claimed here to be a ghostwriter, so bottom line, don't believe nada they say, since it's probably BS.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Here's the fan fiction it was stolen from:

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/9063496/1/Amazingly-Damaged

From first glance, it looks like the same story. (I still have the working Amazon page up.)

This is getting weird.


----------



## Guest (Jun 26, 2013)

swolf said:


> Here's the fan fiction it was stolen from:
> 
> http://www.fanfiction.net/s/9063496/1/Amazingly-Damaged
> 
> ...


Soooo let me update my scorecard:

The author of this train wreck stole a Twilight fan fiction that had plagiarized from two popular New Adult titles? 

I do NOT have enough coffee in me!


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> From first glance, it looks like the same story. (I still have the working Amazon page up.)
> 
> This is getting weird.


One of the comments on the fanfic mentioned the story used other characters at one point:



> I noticed in the earlier chapters that you referred to Edward as "Thayer" and Bella as "Quinn" so I'm hoping that you originally wrote this story with other names and didn't steal it from somewhere else. Because that would make me sad.


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

'50 Shades' attempt? >.>


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

*NOW* can we get the pitchforks out?










methinks we had some warning of this earlier today. http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,155242.msg2239731.html#msg2239731


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

It's a Twilight fanfic!! OMG, this is insane! You couldn't make this up if you tried.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

valeriec80 said:


> It's a Twilight fanfic!! OMG, this is insane! You couldn't make this up if you tried.


Why make it up when you can just plagiarize it?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

NathanWrann said:


> *NOW* can we get the pitchforks out?


No, but you can have a calm, civil discussion.


Betsy


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

NathanWrann said:


> methinks we had some warning of this earlier today. http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,155242.msg2239731.html#msg2239731


Rest assured we're monitoring all threads. . . .in the one you reference there was just one question: should I tell someone and, if so, who. And the OP has posted about what she decided. There is absolutely no evidence that it's the same title and it doesn't much matter if it is. If this discussion spills over there there may be locking and/or merging!


----------



## SandraMiller (May 10, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I do NOT have enough coffee in me!


Me, either...I'm beginning to wonder if there *is* enough coffee to make this make sense...


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I don't believe any of it. I mean anything about the personal info of this person. Fake name, fake bio, fake everything. Sad thing is, this person can just come back with another name and do it all over again. The NA genre is so hot right now that everyone and everything gloms onto it and readers and bloggers jump on anything that might be the next big thing. 

And if it was stolen from fan fiction, I don't believe for a second they didn't know about the plagiarism. This person is trying to play the victim now and I sure hope this doesn't turn out like Julie thinks. You know, poor widdle bullied author and such. He/she is now already trying to play dumb and even tweeting the wronged authors. Moi? I didn't know nothing. Even now claiming they can't write.  
I guess they don't want to be sued. I hope though someone does. 

This seems someone that sees all these NA selling like hotcakes so they think they can just jump right onto the NA gravy train. There was a lot of marketing going on in a very very short time, like this was planned out. 
Ellie I think does have a point too with the cover and name and such. 

I mean the titles in NA lately have become so cliched and so pretentiously emo, its laughable. I mean everyone is broken, on a edge, falling into something, sometimes never inevitably broken, etc.   

eta: sorry, repeating a lot here, my post took so long on my netbook and dropping internet.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

I'm wondering if Jordin Williams was the one who wrote the original fanfic?  After all, who rips off a fan fiction and keeps the same title?


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Until someone takes someone like this "author" to court and they are truly punished, people will keep doing this and repeat their offenses.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> No, but you can have a calm, civil discussion.
> 
> 
> Betsy


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

swolf said:


> I'm wondering if Jordin Williams was the one who wrote the original fanfic? After all, who rips off a fan fiction and keeps the same title?


That was my thought. Fanfic author plagiarized two books and then turned their fic into a real book.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/9063496/1/Amazingly-Damaged

BAM


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

Monique said:


> Until someone takes someone like this "author" to court and they are truly punished, people will keep doing this and repeat their offenses.


No kidding. Which reminds me that my new book 50 Greys of Shades is coming out really soon. Totally my own fiction. Totally.


----------



## Pnjw (Apr 24, 2011)

fallswriter said:


> I have a question. While trolling Twitter, lots of flame is being thrown. Somebody gave a link to Goodreads where they charge Tammara Webber's book Easy plagiarizing Jamie McGuire's Beautiful Disaster. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I haven't read either book. If it's true, this goes way deeper. I don't trust the info though.


I have read both of these books. I didn't see anything that raised a red flag. The stories are not the same at all unless you count the fact that they are both set on college campuses and have tattoo'd heroes.


----------



## Guest (Jun 26, 2013)

ellecasey said:


> http://www.fanfiction.net/s/9063496/1/Amazingly-Damaged
> 
> BAM


WOW.

They didn't even _*try*_ to not make it seem like complete plagiarism!

You really should be a detective, Elle.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> There was a lot of marketing going on in a very very short time, like this was planned out.
> Ellie I think does have a point too with the cover and name and such.


I thought the cover was deliberately reminiscent of an H.M. Ward book (I used the same stock photo, and so have others, but it's a little different when you're writing NA and you pick a bestselling NA image). I imagine this was a deliberate sort of thing, a way of going for that NA brand.



> I'm wondering if Jordin Williams was the one who wrote the original fanfic? After all, who rips off a fan fiction and keeps the same title?


Possible, but if you knew you'd plagiarized on a fanfic, surely you wouldn't publish it? It seems more likely that she swiped the fanfic and didn't realize it was actually pre-owned material.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

WynwoodPublishing said:


> WOW.
> 
> They didn't even _*try*_ to not make it seem like complete plagiarism!
> 
> You really should be a detective, Elle.


I can't take credit for that one. A reader sent it to me. She's scary how she finds stuff.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> You really should be a detective, Elle.


Not dissing anyone here, but I have to point out swolf pointed out the link on the previous page.  Also, if you Google "Amazingly Damaged" the fanfic comes up as numerous hits. The wonder is no one noticed this all earlier!


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Even the photo of Jordin Williams is fake. It's a stock photo: http://za.fotolia.com/id/43920638?by=release

Here is the photo of author Jordin Williams on a blog with the cover reveal: http://www.talkingsupe.com/2013/05/cover-reveal-giveaway-amazingly-broken.html


----------



## Zoe York (May 12, 2013)

fallswriter said:


> I have a question. While trolling Twitter, lots of flame is being thrown. Somebody gave a link to Goodreads where they charge Tammara Webber's book Easy plagiarizing Jamie McGuire's Beautiful Disaster. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I haven't read either book. If it's true, this goes way deeper. I don't trust the info though.


I think that's been misquoted - DearAuthor has pointed out that Amazingly Broken plagiarized *both* _Easy_ and _Beautiful Disaster_. And probably more works will be revealed over the the day.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

MegHarris said:


> Not dissing anyone here, but I have to point out swolf pointed out the link on the previous page.  Also, if you Google "Amazingly Damaged" the fanfic comes up as numerous hits. The wonder is no one noticed this all earlier!


And someone posted it to the DA thread.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

Jamie McGuire posted a correction.  The person who came to her site and tried to promo his books was Jordin Bishop.  And if you search "Jordin Bishop" on Google, it comes up with a Barnes and Noble product page for "Amazingly Broken" by Jordin Bishop with the same blurb.  

So it's Jordin Bishop (man?) and Jordin Williams (woman) and "TattooedEdward" on the fanfic site (man?).


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

MegHarris said:


> Not dissing anyone here, but I have to point out swolf pointed out the link on the previous page.  Also, if you Google "Amazingly Damaged" the fanfic comes up as numerous hits. The wonder is no one noticed this all earlier!


And I found out about it from mrv01d's comment about the story coming from fan fiction, as posted on the comments on DA's blog. So I just copied it back here.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> No, but you can have a calm, civil discussion.
> 
> 
> Betsy


How about a calm, civil discussion.... With small pitchforks. And little torches?


----------



## fallswriter (Sep 11, 2012)

Ok, on Twitter, there's a claim that the author's picture (of a woman) is actually a stock photo. But goodreads says Jordin is male on the author page.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

NathanWrann said:


> How about a calm, civil discussion.... With small pitchforks. And little torches?


Not even pickle forks and matches, sorry. Behave!


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Ok, on Twitter, there's a claim that the author's picture (of a woman) is actually a stock photo.


Mary mentioned this above. But in and of itself, this is meaningless. My "photo" isn't real either. Lots of authors choose not to put up real pictures of themselves for various reasons. And plenty of men who write in women-dominated genres choose not to announce the fact that they're male for marketing reasons.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

MaryMcDonald said:


> Even the photo of Jordin Williams is fake. It's a stock photo: http://za.fotolia.com/id/43920638?by=release
> 
> Here is the photo of author Jordin Williams on a blog with the cover reveal: http://www.talkingsupe.com/2013/05/cover-reveal-giveaway-amazingly-broken.html





fallswriter said:


> Ok, on Twitter, there's a claim that the author's picture (of a woman) is actually a stock photo. But goodreads says Jordin is male on the author page.


People need to read all the posts in between.


----------



## fallswriter (Sep 11, 2012)

Ann in Arlington said:


> People need to read all the posts in between.


Yeah, just realized that. Need to get back to my own writing anyway, so I'll check back in later!


----------



## KaryE (May 12, 2012)

Just a tiny FYI - when I was writing gossip and politics, I used both a pseudonym and a fake pic. Both topics inspired death threats from the kind of internet crazy who finds your real life address, posts it online and then invites people to make a 2nd amendment example of you.  

So, plagiarism = bad.

Fake pic = not a problem by itself.

Now when I need a pic, I tend to use my cat.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

MegHarris said:


> Mary mentioned this above. But in and of itself, this is meaningless. My "photo" isn't real either. Lots of authors choose not to put up real pictures of themselves for various reasons. And plenty of men who write in women-dominated genres choose not to announce the fact that they're male for marketing reasons.


I know people use photos that aren't of them as avatars. I had my bookcovers up for a long time on my amazon author page because I write using my initials, and in my genre, it's assumed I'm a man. (if you could see all the emails that call me Mr. McDonald. lol). I get that. I just didn't know that people put fake pictures of themselves up. There is a picture of a really hot older guy on a stockphoto site. I had thought about using him for a cover of a book I'm working on, but I'm not sure I can get the picture to work with the story. Maybe I should, instead, use it for my author pic?  Very tempted...it might help my sales.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

fallswriter said:


> Yeah, just realized that. Need to get back to my own writing anyway, so I'll check back in later!


It's a Very Fast moving topic! Even by Kboards standards.  I have more than once, typed something up, went to post, got the 'others have posted' message and revised (or deleted) my post. 

(Like, it happened just now. )


----------



## Donna White Glaser (Jan 12, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> How about a calm, civil discussion.... With small pitchforks. And little torches?


So, what? Forks and match sticks?


----------



## Amanda Brice (Feb 16, 2011)

Wow! I totally missed this entire thread, because I've been spending the day reading the Supreme Court decisions and grinning with glee all over Facebook.

But the second I saw this thread, I knew that the "reader" must have been our very own Kwalker. 

Wowza!


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

I guess I'm not so bothered by someone using a stock photo for an author pic. It's a bit disingenuous, sure, but I don't feel shocked. Maybe that's the erotica background? I'm not going to put my face up there either (although those really are my legs, and that's my real airline carry-on bag. The only thing fake there is the implication that I could walk in those heels for more than 10 minutes.). One of my authors shows just his arm. One has a stock photo of a typewriter. Another has a stock photo of a librarian. I also don't freak out if George Eliot turns out to be a woman.

Plagiarizing, though ... yup, that is just baaaaaaaaaaad.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Amanda Brice said:


> Wow! I totally missed this entire thread, because I've been spending the day reading the Supreme Court decisions and grinning with glee all over Facebook.
> 
> But the second I saw this thread, I knew that the "reader" must have been our very own Kwalker.
> 
> Wowza!


Well, I don't know that. She did post about a similar issue in a separate thread but she carefully named no names. For which I applaud her.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

David Stephens said:


> Wow, I take a nap and wake up to this!


In order to truly stay up to date, sleeping has to go.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

MaryMcDonald said:


> I know people use photos that aren't of them as avatars. I had my bookcovers up for a long time on my amazon author page because I write using my initials, and in my genre, it's assumed I'm a man. (if you could see all the emails that call me Mr. McDonald. lol). I get that. I just didn't know that people put fake pictures of themselves up. There is a picture of a really hot older guy on a stockphoto site. I had thought about using him for a cover of a book I'm working on, but I'm not sure I can get the picture to work with the story. Maybe I should, instead, use it for my author pic?  Very tempted...it might help my sales.


I rarely include a photo of myself. It is better that in HF most people assume I am male since I write war fiction.

I've never used a fake photo though. It seems to me to be going a bit too far.


----------



## AshMP (Dec 30, 2009)

I am blown away by this.  How many sneaky maneuvers it took to pull this off confounds me.


----------



## Amanda Brice (Feb 16, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Well, I don't know that. She did post about a similar issue in a separate thread but she carefully named no names. For which I applaud her.


True. I'm just engaging in wild speculation here.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

I blame the system. The system that puts so much pressure on poor authors to keep churning out New Adult books. The system that says that we MUST write a book every thirty days. The system that says there are only a few hot genres to write in. The system that makes everyone of us feel as though we're falling behind if we're not publishing 13 novels a year.


On second thought, nah, I blame the author.


----------



## merryxmas (Jun 21, 2012)

50 Shades of Theft.  A theft within a theft.


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

This story gets way more interesting if we discover that Jordin plagiarized the FanFic author... plagiarizing a plagiarizer is simply plagiarific!


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Amanda Brice said:


> Wow! I totally missed this entire thread, because I've been spending the day reading the Supreme Court decisions and grinning with glee all over Facebook.
> 
> But the second I saw this thread, I knew that the "reader" must have been our very own Kwalker.
> 
> Wowza!


I wasn't sure if we were allowed to mention the Supreme Court here? I've been doing a happy dance all over Twitter.


----------



## MorganKegan (Jan 10, 2013)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> You gotta be a special kind of stupid to try to plagiarize WoTC with their sue-happy track record. That's the literary equivalent of covering yourself in blood and jumping into a shark-infested bay.*vampire-infested YA paranormal romance novel.*


Fixed that for you.


----------



## Amanda Brice (Feb 16, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> I wasn't sure if we were allowed to mention the Supreme Court here? I've been doing a happy dance all over Twitter.


Meh, I figured I'd take my wrist slap if necessary. And you'll note all Ann commented on was my name-dropping and speculation as to who outed the plagiarism.


----------



## Guest (Jun 26, 2013)

MorganKegan said:


> Fixed that for you.


lol But there is no danger of actually being HURT in a vampire-infested YA paranormal romance! Aren't they all vegetarians?


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> lol But there is no danger of actually being HURT in a vampire-infested YA paranormal romance! Aren't they all vegetarians?


you were almost there... just a gentle nudge.


----------



## Hope Welsh (Mar 9, 2012)

I find it sad that being 'successful' would spark concern of dishonest activity, as it does happen to legitimate authors that have written good books and done promotion right.

It's a shame that it is another case of plagiarism. Unfortunately, it probably won't be the last.  Nora Roberts was plagiarized by another well-known NY author. 

It's certainly not just indie authors that sink to this level.  I'm thinking the day is going to come when Amazon and other large online retailers are going to run new books through a plagiarism detector (and I think it'd be an awesome idea)


----------



## brendajcarlton (Sep 29, 2012)

Someone with a writer's imagination could not imagine how this plot was going to end?  Ethics aside for the moment, some people are insulting the hammers when their intelligence is compared to a bag of hammers.  There is no cure for dumb.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

So let me see if I understand what's going on. 

A successful ghostwriter, tired of everyone else getting credit for her awesome books, hires a ghostwriter from some fishy-sounding site to write a book, which she publishes under her name. Except the ghostwriter's ghostwriter was hired from a different fishy-sounding site, and she is a he. Or maybe not. 

And the book was stolen not from one, but two different authors, except it was apparently stolen from a Twilight fan fiction that was actually stolen from two popular books. Or maybe not, as the fan ficcer was possibly the original ghostwriter, who now says he -- or she -- can't write, and who didn't bother to file off the serial numbers.



Ow. My head hurts. I need to lie down for a bit.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

Sheila_Guthrie said:


> So let me see if I understand what's going on.
> 
> A successful ghostwriter, tired of everyone else getting credit for her awesome books, hires a ghostwriter from some fishy-sounding site to write a book, which she publishes under her name. Except the ghostwriter's ghostwriter was hired from a different fishy-sounding site, and she is a he. Or maybe not.
> 
> ...


Basically, we just have to add an alien abduction and two sex scenes, and we have a bestseller! Or maybe a vampire and a werewolf. I forget what the cool in thing is these days.


----------



## Incognita (Apr 3, 2011)

sarbonn said:


> Basically, we just have to add an alien abduction and two sex scenes, and we have a bestseller! Or maybe a vampire and a werewolf. I forget what the cool in thing is these days.


I vote for the alien abduction with sex scenes.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

The more I think about this situation, the weirder it gets. The author knew enough about NA to emulate a popular cover in the genre, and also knew enough about NA marketing to get the book out to a bunch of blogs in advance. S/he managed the marketing successfully enough that the book took off like a rocket. And yet s/he didn't realize that readers were almost certain to recognize two of the most famous NA books out there? Or alternatively, swiped a fanfic without covering his/her arse and checking its content? Either way, it makes absolutely no sense to me *scratches head*.


----------



## thesmallprint (May 25, 2012)

Amazon must have a set of contact details for this person - those details might be false, but at least they are a start. Perhaps Amazon ought to amend its terms for authors, to include the threat of litigation by Amazon themselves if any 'stolen' work is published for sale.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)




----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

swolf said:


>


"WEB OF LIES!"

Said as only Brad Pitt can from Mr. & Mrs. Smith.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

I'm guessing this book was published by the same people who publish the Artisan Bread in 5 Minutes books that I can't seem to get off my feed, linked to my name and constantly haunting my dreams.


----------



## Incognita (Apr 3, 2011)

MegHarris said:


> The more I think about this situation, the weirder it gets. The author knew enough about NA to emulate a popular cover in the genre, and also knew enough about NA marketing to get the book out to a bunch of blogs in advance. S/he managed the marketing successfully enough that the book took off like a rocket. And yet s/he didn't realize that readers were almost certain to recognize two of the most famous NA books out there? Or alternatively, swiped a fanfic without covering his/her arse and checking its content? Either way, it makes absolutely no sense to me *scratches head*.


It was all a social experiment!


----------



## Bree Roberts (Dec 1, 2012)

Steeplechasing said:


> Amazon must have a set of contact details for this person - those details might be false, but at least they are a start. Perhaps Amazon ought to amend its terms for authors, to include the threat of litigation by Amazon themselves if any 'stolen' work is published for sale.


Amazon does have this information and in a plagiarism case they will send the info to the author that calls foul. I know this for a fact because my novella was being sold on Amazon (in select! for $2.99 when I had it up for perma free!). The person selling it didn't even bother to change the cover, title, or author name. When I contacted Amazon, they pulled the book and sent me an email with the seller's complete contact information. Only problem was that it was someone in China, so there wasn't much I could do. Not like I lost any money on a book I was giving away for free anyway.


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

Bree Roberts said:


> Amazon does have this information and in a plagiarism case they will send the info to the author that calls foul. I know this for a fact because my novella was being sold on Amazon (in select! for $2.99 when I had it up for perma free!). The person selling it didn't even bother to change the cover, title, or author name. When I contacted Amazon, they pulled the book and sent me an email with the seller's complete contact information. Only problem was that it was someone in China, so there wasn't much I could do. Not like I lost any money on a book I was giving away for free anyway.


This sounds equally disturbing. How do they verify the correct owner of the rights to the property?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Yep, today we'll bury our heads and blame a conspiracy of the evil publisher cabal, because it is physically impossible for someone who calls herself an indie to do something wrong.
> 
> By tomorrow, people will be defending her. Probably claiming it was "fan fiction." or a "Mash-up." They will claim the authors who are plagiarized are overreacting because "its publicity for their books!" or some other nonsense. Just like when the Locke thing broke and after a day or two people started defending Locke and accusing others of overreacting. Just like whenever an indie does something unethical. It's always the same cycle: half day of "how horrible" followed by "conspiracy theories" that the whole thing was a set-up, followed by defending the person who did it.


That will be an easy prediction to test.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Amanda Brice said:


> Wow! I totally missed this entire thread, because I've been spending the day reading the Supreme Court decisions and grinning with glee all over Facebook.
> 
> But the second I saw this thread, I knew that the "reader" must have been our very own Kwalker.
> 
> Wowza!


I started celebrating yesterday.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

MegHarris said:


> The more I think about this situation, the weirder it gets. The author knew enough about NA to emulate a popular cover in the genre, and also knew enough about NA marketing to get the book out to a bunch of blogs in advance. S/he managed the marketing successfully enough that the book took off like a rocket. And yet s/he didn't realize that readers were almost certain to recognize two of the most famous NA books out there? Or alternatively, swiped a fanfic without covering his/her arse and checking its content? Either way, it makes absolutely no sense to me *scratches head*.


Completely agree! This is the weirdest case of plagiarism I've seen! Although it makes sense when I remind myself that some people are just really really dumb - that is, dumb enough to plagiarize two popular NA titles in a fanfic, then publish it with all that hype.

But I like Elle's conspiracy theory! Let's go back to that!


----------



## allanairish (Oct 3, 2012)

Looking at an old KB post by the "author," he/she appears to refer to NA romance as "new age" romance. Simple mistake, or...?


----------



## MorganKegan (Jan 10, 2013)

You know, if one of us had written this series of events into a novel and submitted it to a publisher, I'm betting it would have quickly earned a "plot too confusing and unbelievable" rejection letter.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

Weirdest of all is that the dude is a kboards member EDIT: based on their familiarity with the ins and outs of things around here.


----------



## Incognita (Apr 3, 2011)

Bree Roberts said:


> Amazon does have this information and in a plagiarism case they will send the info to the author that calls foul. I know this for a fact because my novella was being sold on Amazon (in select! for $2.99 when I had it up for perma free!). The person selling it didn't even bother to change the cover, title, or author name. When I contacted Amazon, they pulled the book and sent me an email with the seller's complete contact information. Only problem was that it was someone in China, so there wasn't much I could do. Not like I lost any money on a book I was giving away for free anyway.


I had almost the same thing happen to me. Amazon did send me the copyright violator's info. But, as they were also in China, there wasn't much I could do about it. So I'm guessing the authors whose work was plagiarized do know who was responsible.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Steeplechasing said:


> Amazon must have a set of contact details for this person - those details might be false, but at least they are a start. Perhaps Amazon ought to amend its terms for authors, to include the threat of litigation by Amazon themselves if any 'stolen' work is published for sale.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2


They would have to have their social security number for their tax ID.


----------



## Hope Welsh (Mar 9, 2012)

Bree Roberts said:


> Amazon does have this information and in a plagiarism case they will send the info to the author that calls foul. I know this for a fact because my novella was being sold on Amazon (in select! for $2.99 when I had it up for perma free!). The person selling it didn't even bother to change the cover, title, or author name. When I contacted Amazon, they pulled the book and sent me an email with the seller's complete contact information. Only problem was that it was someone in China, so there wasn't much I could do. Not like I lost any money on a book I was giving away for free anyway.


Not always. Two of the books I had up under a pen name were up being sold by 'someone' -- Amazon did PULL the titles, but did NOT give me any information. I never received a dime for those books that were 'borrowed', and can only assume the people that listed it did.


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

swolf said:


>


I've been seeing that picture everywhere. Is that really her or just a stock image?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Amanda Brice said:


> Meh, I figured I'd take my wrist slap if necessary. And you'll note all Ann commented on was my name-dropping and speculation as to who outed the plagiarism.


Good point.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Steeplechasing said:


> Amazon must have a set of contact details for this person - those details might be false, but at least they are a start. Perhaps Amazon ought to amend its terms for authors, to include the threat of litigation by Amazon themselves if any 'stolen' work is published for sale.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2


When will you have more books out? I've read all of them.


----------



## Maya Cross (May 28, 2012)

ellecasey said:


> I almost feel as if the whole thing was one great big joke on the indie publishing world or maybe even worse. Conspiracy theory anyone?
> 
> 1. The title. Every time I've read it, I thought how it seemed to me mocking the genre and the market.
> 2. The artwork. Those tatoos were the worst photoshop job I've ever seen. Seriously, it was laughable. I wondered why she didn't even try to make them look real.


I have to say, these two things really did stick out to me when I read her initial post on here. I check the charts pretty regularly, and whenever my eyes scanned past the title, I found myself cringing a little.

The whole situation is depressing, both in the fact that it happened, and the fact that the book must have sold close to ten thousand copies before anyone noticed. I still can't quite wrap my head around exactly what happened. You'd have to be incredibly stupid to rip off two of the biggest books in the genre and expect it to go unnoticed. Even stealing word for word from a fairly insignificant piece of fan fic is treading dangerously in the Google age. The cynic in me is almost inclined to agree with Elle, but I guess we'll see in the coming days.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Wow, that sure puts the concerned emails I get once a month about some chick biting a scene out of one of my X-men fics in a new light. I won't be so annoyed next time.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

The book has an adverb in the title for [Pete's] sake.

_Edited. --Betsy_


----------



## Clare K. R. Miller (Apr 6, 2011)

Okay, I've got a small thing to add to the weirdness... When I looked at this thread, I thought the title sounded familiar, so I clicked on the Goodreads link. There I realized that this was a book listed as a group read for a Goodreads group that I was vaguely interested in. I remembered that there had been a thread about the book before it came out--people discussing whether they were going to read it and such. I commented saying I might read it, but wondering how it became a group read. (In my other groups that do group reads, there are nominations and then polls--books don't just randomly show up. I was prepared for there to be a reasonable explanation, but I was also prepared for it to be some weird author promo.) Unfortunately, I then forgot about the thread, so I hadn't checked it for a few weeks to see if there had been any response.

So after seeing that this plagiarized book is the same book from the group, I went to that group to see if anyone had already pointed out the plagiarism, and to share the link to the DA post if not. But when I got there I discovered that not only did the book no longer appear on the group's page, the thread had been deleted with no explanation that I could see.

I really wonder what was going on there... other than some sort of misguided promotion, I guess.


----------



## Kalen ODonnell (Nov 24, 2011)

NA books tend to sell really well right out of the gate.  Their overall success and longevity is determined by word of mouth and how many review it positively or recommend it to their friends, but a seemingly well written NA with a professional cover and pre-release buzz in the right places can rack up some great sales figures in just the first couple of weeks.  Its possible that this person knew perfectly well that they'd be found out eventually, but was just hoping to make a quick payday off a couple weeks of strong initial sales before it was taken down.  Amazon doesn't really have a consistent track record on how they've handled plagiarism cases in the past, so he/she might have figured there was at least a chance of getting the royalties off their early sales before Amazon shut them down and got everything sorted out.

Ton of what-if's there and a huge gamble anyway you look at it, but its the only explanation I can think of for why they thought this had a chance in hell of working out well for them.  I don't get people who know how to use the internet and social media as well as anyone else, and yet still seem to think it won't catch on to stuff like this.


----------



## Alex Owens (Mar 24, 2011)

I can't even fathom the cajones it would take to even *think* about doing something like that. Shoot, when a cop gets behind me on the highway for more than a few seconds I break out in a sweat and start to get paranoid that someone's hidden a body in my trunk. (Of course, I wouldn't put a body there. Everyone knows they go in the pig pen  )

Also, she posted in the NA promo thread the same day the book went live and I checked it out that day (and tweeted about it-- for which I'm irritated that I helped to some small degree).

In less than 24 hours (probably more like 12 hours total) the book was getting ready to crack the top 500 and already had a bunch of 4 and 5 star reviews. Either someone was extremely organized and proactive about booking up promo slots for the day AND had numerous people committed to posting reviews within hours of the book going live...or (cue the conspiracy music) the massive promo push was the work of more than one person, or the work of one person pretending to be many...

Or maybe I'm just seeing things that aren't there. (Like the time I swore I danced with Dan Cortese of old-MTV fame at a frat party.)


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Either someone was extremely organized and proactive about booking up promo slots for the day AND had numerous people committed to posting reviews within hours of the book going live...


Whether or not all those reviews were legit, s/he does seem to have been very "organized and proactive" about getting advance reviews lined up. Once again, I wonder why on earth you'd put that kind of effort into marketing a book, but not writing it. And how you could understand NA marketing so well, but not suppose that readers would notice if you ripped off two major NA authors. "Weird" is the only term I seem able to come up with.


----------



## Alex Owens (Mar 24, 2011)

MegHarris said:


> Whether or not all those reviews were legit, s/he does seem to have been very "organized and proactive" about getting advance reviews lined up. Once again, I wonder why on earth you'd put that kind of effort into marketing a book, but not writing it. And how you could understand NA marketing so well, but not suppose that readers would notice if you ripped off two major NA authors. "Weird" is the only term I seem able to come up with.


That's another thing that's been bugging me. Severe marketing is no cake walk.

I just read through a couple of threads she started here, and what struck me most about her posts is that she seemed rather "young" in some of them... Someone asked how she got so many bloggers on board and her response was very nonchalant and a bit naive... I'm not coming up with the right way to describe it, but it all seems off re-reading the threads. So I can't wrap my head around how _that _girl from those posts was able to fool so many people into thinking she was the next big thing.


----------



## Nathalie Hamidi (Jul 9, 2011)

Kpfowler said:


> That's another thing that's been bugging me. Severe marketing is no cake walk.
> 
> I just read through a couple of threads she started here, and what struck me most about her posts is that she seemed rather "young" in some of them... Someone asked how she got so many bloggers on board and her response was very nonchalant and a bit naive... I'm not coming up with the right way to describe it, but it all seems off re-reading the threads. So I can't wrap my head around how _that _girl from those posts was able to fool so many people into thinking she was the next big thing.


Yeah, and *I* am the next big thing, so, you know, that was also a lie!


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Is it wrong that I hope that this turns out to be the most complex sequence of events possible out of this chaos?

To wit:
- Jordin [Insert Last Name] Really hired a ghostwriter who...
- Stole from someone-else-entirely's fan fiction that...
- Plagiarized from the two popular NA books that...
- Somehow [And I acknowledge that this was just a throw-away twitter accusation] somehow stole from each other?

And also the person in question is in fact a woman posing as a man, posing as a woman using a stock photo that is ACTUALLY a woman dressed as a man who is in turn dressed as a woman (ala Shakespeare in Love)?


----------



## elalond (May 11, 2011)

I think it was last year, or the year before that, when friend of mine got a offer for one of her 30,000 words long fanfiction. 250 $ for all rights, including the right to change the author name. Of course, she refused. 
Maybe this is the same case. Jordan William bought the fanfiction in question, changed the names of main characters and put it on Amazon. But the real author of the story forgot to tell her that the fanfiction was plagiarized.  That would explain some things.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

I would certainly 'forget' that too with $250 on the line.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

elalond said:


> I think it was last year, or the year before that, when friend of mine got a offer for one of her 30,000 words long fanfiction. 250 $ for all rights, including the right to change the author name. Of course, she refused.
> Maybe this is the same case. Jordan William bought the fanfiction in question, changed the names of main characters and put it on Amazon. But the real author of the story forgot to tell her that the fanfiction was plagiarized. That would explain some things.


She said she bought it from an Australian ghostwriter she hired on oDesk. True/false, who knows, but that was the excuse, not buying fan fiction.


----------



## elalond (May 11, 2011)

Alan Petersen said:


> She said she bought it from an Australian ghostwriter she hired on oDesk. True/false, who knows, but that was the excuse, not buying fan fiction.


I'm not saying that it's true. It's just a possibility that would explain some things. And you know, there's a whole thread dedicated to this (how to get stories for cheap and sell them on Amazon) :http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-special-offers-forum/577997-kindle-x-video-proof-8-300-march.html Now tell me, if you were part of this and you bought fanfiction, would you admit it or use it as an excuse?


----------



## Kia Zi Shiru (Feb 7, 2011)

elalond said:


> I'm not saying that it's true. It's just a possibility that would explain some things. And you know, there's a whole thread dedicated to this (how to get stories for cheap and sell them on Amazon) :http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-special-offers-forum/577997-kindle-x-video-proof-8-300-march.html Now tell me, if you were part of this and you bought fanfiction, would you admit it or use it as an excuse?


After reading that thread I'm actually really curious about the guide in question.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Kpfowler said:


> I can't even fathom the cajones it would take to even *think* about doing something like that. Shoot, when a cop gets behind me on the highway for more than a few seconds I break out in a sweat and start to get paranoid that someone's hidden a body in my trunk. (Of course, I wouldn't put a body there. Everyone knows they go in the pig pen  )
> 
> Also, she posted in the NA promo thread the same day the book went live and I checked it out that day (and tweeted about it-- for which I'm irritated that I helped to some small degree).
> 
> ...


Although I think it likely she wasn't alone in this, it's not that crazy to think she might break 500 in the first 24 hours. It happens often and even with people who did little to no marketing. I had an author I contacted after reading who had major success on her first book without any marketing at all (same idea 500 within the first 24 hours). We got to chatting and I found that she really knew little about the biz. Just wrote a book that people liked and shot right up.

Like I said, I think she had help though and obviously had the buzz at release. I'm just surprised no one noticed right away. When I read the blurb I thought it was just a mash up of several book. lol Guess it was right. Just glad I didn't waste time or money on it.


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

elalond said:


> I'm not saying that it's true. It's just a possibility that would explain some things. And you know, there's a whole thread dedicated to this (how to get stories for cheap and sell them on Amazon) :http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-special-offers-forum/577997-kindle-x-video-proof-8-300-march.html Now tell me, if you were part of this and you bought fanfiction, would you admit it or use it as an excuse?


I looked that thread over and whole thing made me queasy. There are a lot of young and naive fanfiction authors (and original fiction writers on Wattpad) who are going to be ripped off badly by these scam artists, and I see one heck of big, fat legal mess headed their way. The schemes that these people are planning are worse than the very worst that trad pub ever dished up.


----------



## 41352 (Apr 4, 2011)

deleted


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

Well, on Twitter the 'author' blamed it first on a ghostwriter they hired through guru.com - then they changed their story to odesk.  

On the blog post about it, the comments seem to suggest that the fanfiction was left unfinished.  I haven't checked - but if the fanfic was published by the 'author' as opposed to a different plagiariser, then they might have been using that as a way to test how likely it was that someone would instantly recognise the theft before they put time and money behind a publicity push for a paid-for book.

Since at least one of the books plagiarised is now trad pubbed - I hope that the publisher's legal department goes after the person responsible and shuts them down, especially since it sounds as if this might be something they've done before.  The trad pub probably has the international contacts to go after someone regardless of which country they are based in.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

Goodness me, the linked thread is really an eyeopener. No doubt I'm naive, but I tend to assume that most sellers of fiction on Amazon are actually writing their own stuff. (I've known for a long time that a lot of nonfiction is swiped from various sources.) But just like nonfiction, apparently a lot of fiction "writers" are buying off Odesk or somewhere even shadier. To quote someone on the thread about the supposed method being touted: "Pure GOLD for anyone wanting to get into publishing fiction but that doesn't really have the skills or time to write their own book." 

Um... okay. So there are people who think publishing fiction is a goldmine, because they read Konrath's blog, or forums like these where we talk about sales, but don't want to be troubled to actually learn how to write. I think this gives a much clearer view into this whole mess. "Authors" are scraping content from various sources and selling it, and "Jordin Williams" was probably a determined fiction packager, rather than a writer. This would explain why s/he didn't realize the content was plagiarized. I wonder how many other books are out there that have been lifted from various sources? Now I am really kind of creeped out.


----------



## Justawriter (Jul 24, 2012)

Glynn James said:


> Scared the jeepers out of me. It nearly made me abandon indie publishing before I even got started.
> Anyway, that's kinda off-thread-ish but I thought it poignant to mention that this is pretty common, just maybe not so public as the current drama.
> 
> I think what is bad with this particular instance - with "Amazingly Stolen" - is that it could potentially hurt a bucketload of other indie authors because readers could stop buying indie books. I hope not, but I suspect that more damage than a double plagiarism case has been done here.


This shouldn't have ANY effect on other indie authors. Sadly, traditionally published authors have a long history of doing this. It's not an indie thing. Just a few years ago, this story was in the news. First there was loads of buzz about this hot new book coming out by a young Harvard graduate....and then it was discovered that she'd plaigarized from two top authors, Sophie Kinsella and Megan McCafferty. Her publisher pulled the book a week after publishing it. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/02/books/02auth.html?_r=0


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

What's scary about this is how easy it would have been for her/him to change the story enough to make the stealing less apparent.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> What's scary about this is how easy it would have been for her/him to change the story enough to make the stealing less apparent.


Yeah, but if you think about this in the context of that scary forum thread linked above, it makes some sense. People are trying to make money doing this. They aren't writers. They're swiping stuff and changing names. That's pretty much the extent of their abilities. They've taken the advice they see on forums like this one ("the best way to make sales is to write lots of books") and perverted it into "the best way to make money is to publish lots of books you didn't write." Obviously this doesn't allow time to edit a book into something it isn't. If you pay a hundred bucks to a ghostwriter, you're not going to mess around with editing the thing. That isn't what you paid for!



> I think it's a shame she's blaming a ghostwriter, and I'm very skeptical about that. If I were duped, I don't know that I'd be spending all day feverishly deleting all evidence of myself on the Internet. I'd be out to kick some ghostwriter butt.


Maybe, but as someone said above, s/he did seem very young in his/her posts. Might just be a panic reaction. I don't know what happened, obviously, but the ghostwriter thing does seem to explain a lot-- though it makes the author no less culpable in this mess.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Check out the note this blogger wrote on the righthand side


From that note:



> This is me rolling my eyes at your audacity, you want to have a ghostwriter that's fine, but when you put your name on a book, you take ownership of it.


Exactly, and brilliantly put. I hope the people who are selling fiction procured from dubious sources begin to realize they could be letting themselves in for some serious legal trouble.


----------



## Redbloon (Mar 27, 2013)

PamelaKelley said:


> This shouldn't have ANY effect on other indie authors. Sadly, traditionally published authors have a long history of doing this. It's not an indie thing. Just a few years ago, this story was in the news. First there was loads of buzz about this hot new book coming out by a young Harvard graduate....and then it was discovered that she'd plaigarized from two top authors, Sophie Kinsella and Megan McCafferty. Her publisher pulled the book a week after publishing it. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/02/books/02auth.html?_r=0


I remember reading a Mills & Boon back in 1996 (I think) that was word for word Georgette Heyer. How that was allowed I'll never know. There are no depths to which people won't sink if they believe they'll get some money. Makes me sick.


----------



## thesmallprint (May 25, 2012)

Why are so many bemoaning the effect on indies/self-pubbers? This was the work of a scammer, not a writer.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

MegHarris said:


> Goodness me, the linked thread is really an eyeopener. No doubt I'm naive, but I tend to assume that most sellers of fiction on Amazon are actually writing their own stuff. (I've known for a long time that a lot of nonfiction is swiped from various sources.) But just like nonfiction, apparently a lot of fiction "writers" are buying off Odesk or somewhere even shadier.


Yeah, I don't think one can make that assumption. There are are over 1.9 million books available in the Amazon Kindle catalog. Even if you just look at fiction titles (maybe 800K) that's still a LOT of books. I think it is safe to say that a very very large majority -- probably 99% or more -- are not plagiarized. It's just that this one instance is getting a lot of current buzz in certain corners of the internet.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> I think it is safe to say that a very very large majority -- probably 99% or more -- are not plagiarized.


Absolutely, and I didn't intend to suggest otherwise. Of course most of us are real writers. But given how many indie books are uploaded in the course of a year, even 1% could amount to a lot of books. And I'm sure most of what comes out of Odesk and similar places is original, too (even if it winds up attributed to a different author). But you can also imagine that as the pressure to produce grows and as new sources of "great content" are looked for, some unethical few might get their material from stolen sources. The only good thing about this situation is that it may discourage this sort of behavior, because such people may understand more clearly that they will get caught.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

I'd also suggest that, if you're going to sell something you've stolen, you really don't want it to be a blockbuster.  Much bigger target that way.  Better to stay under the radar.  O'course that won't make you as much money.  

As to the 'pressure to produce', it seems to me that traditionally published authors would feel more of this.  The publisher is taking a chance on them, maybe gave them an advance.  They have a vested interest in getting something Out There to sell and it better be good, darn it all. And they want it NOW.

I feel like an author who works for him/herself is better able to take their time and not stress if they're having an uninspired patch.  

Of course, I suppose if it is legitimately your livelihood/sole support -- and I know there are some here who've been able to make that transition -- putting food on the table for your family does add pressure.  One hopes they thought it through and have a back up plan/cash cushion just in case.

I do recognize that, in this case, it appears to be someone who was either remarkably naive or remarkably greedy.  Or both.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

Steeplechasing said:


> Why are so many bemoaning the effect on indies/self-pubbers? This was the work of a scammer, not a writer.


I don't think this is a condemnation of indies. I think it is a condemnation of both Amazon and the promotional complex that has sprung up. But it WILL hurt indies indirectly.

Why is Amazon not using anti-plagiarism software? The software is not that expensive. Colleges use it all the time. So are a lot of publishers. Amazon could even build their own in-house. It isn't like they don't have all the digital files to scan and compare to!

What does this say about the bloggers who promoted the book with all of those stellar reviews? This is getting lost. The bloggers who gave this book such rave reviews have no credibility at this point. And this will hurt indies because we depend on a lot of these sites. If these sites lose their credibility and audience, they are useless. Every time something like this happens, more people become suspicious of five star reviews.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Steeplechasing said:


> Why are so many bemoaning the effect on indies/self-pubbers? This was the work of a scammer, not a writer.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2


I was thinking this last night. We don't know anything about this person. We are all saying she, but honestly, we don't even know if it was even a woman. Her fake author picture was a woman, but it could have been a man. It could have been someone who has never written a thing in their life and just figured ff.net was a low risk place to swipe a story from. Did they even know that the story on ff.net was plagiarized from the other books? Are they the author of the story on ff.net? We'll probably never know. Since I'm assuming they used a fake name, chances are, they could do it again unless Amazon blocks their ss#--but then they could do it using a spouse's number or even a stolen one. Kind of scary.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> As to the 'pressure to produce', it seems to me that traditionally published authors would feel more of this.


Again, I'm not talking about authors here, but people who package other people's writing. And in this case I meant places that sell such writing-- ghostwriters. If more people start coming to them and saying, "Hey, I need a New Adult book in the style of Tammara Webber," how are the ghostwriters going to come up with the material quickly? We may hope they'll write it legitimately. But some may make an easy buck by swiping it, especially if the purchasers are kind of naive and don't know to check for that.



> What does this say about the bloggers who promoted the book with all of those stellar reviews? This is getting lost. The bloggers who gave this book such rave reviews have no credibility at this point.


It is astounding to me that this book got so many reviews from bloggers and readers (something like 700 on Amazon, last I checked) and presumably sold thousands of copies before anyone noticed. It doesn't seem like that sort of thing could get past rabid readers of the genre so easily.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

MegHarris said:


> It is astounding to me that this book got so many reviews from bloggers and readers (something like 700 on Amazon, last I checked) and presumably sold thousands of copies before anyone noticed. It doesn't seem like that sort of thing could get past rabid readers of the genre so easily.


It's something I've seen brought up elsewhere, but I'm wondering how many of those were in fact paid reviews. We know Locke paid for tons of reviews, and there are services that actively promote themselves as a way to manipulate the Amazon system.


----------



## NicoleSwan (Oct 2, 2011)

Regarding the idea of Amazon having a plagerism filter, it's entirely possible they choose not to have one, because if something should slip through at some point they could be held accountable for the slippage.

Besides, they already have good filters, the readers


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

NicoleSwan said:


> Regarding the idea of Amazon having a plagerism filter, it's entirely possible they choose not to have one, because if something should slip through at some point they could be held accountable for the slippage.
> 
> Besides, they already have good filters, the readers


No, there is nothing in the law that would make them accountable. In fact, it would protect them by showing they were taking good faith measures to prevent theft. By doing nothing, they are complicit in the crime because they are profiting from it. Sure, they are offering refunds...to those who request it. But they aren't issuing a mass mandatory refund (they did that with _1984_, if anyone remembers, and people flipped out). Congress has been trying for years to hold retailers and websites accountable for piracy, plagiarism, and copyright violations by claiming they turn a blind eye and do nothing. So it is in Amazon's best interest, both ethically and legally, to put some sort of safeguards in place to show good faith in preventing this from happening.

And no, the readers are not a good filter. The damage is already done. The damage is done to Amazon's credibility, indie author credibility, blogger credibility. The damage is already done to the authors who had their work stolen. Playing Whack-a-mole with this nonsense after the fact is ridiculous in 2013. The technology exists to mitigate this stuff.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

DDark said:


> Does anyone (who has purchased the book) know if Amazon offered a refund?


That's my question. I have no clue about this book or any other in this "NA" category, whatever that is, so I never bought it. But, in the past, when people have offered books that they were not authorized to sell, Amazon has contacted purchasers and refunded the money and removed the title from MYK. And asked the purchaser to remove the title from their kindles, too. I had it happen with _The Little Prince_ and _1984_. And, no, we don't need to get into the fact that they skipped the step of notifying purchasers before deleting it with _1984_.  Even then, they made everyone more than whole.

Point is, it would be smart of them to do a similar thing here. At the least, I'm sure anyone who purchased it contacts Amazon, they'll refund it even if it's been more than the usual week they allow.


----------



## NicoleSwan (Oct 2, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> And no, the readers are not a good filter. The damage is already done. The damage is done to Amazon's credibility, indie author credibility, blogger credibility. The damage is already done to the authors who had their work stolen. Playing Whack-a-mole with this nonsense after the fact is ridiculous in 2013. The technology exists to mitigate this stuff.


It seems that [large scale] credibility damage is something that rarely lasts, too many other scandals to take precedence in the forefront of the minds of the majority. Yes, for some elite members there's going to be a permanent mental scar and the damage is significant, but I doubt the cost will ever outweigh the profits for Amazon. Even after the 1984 recalls and other Kindle recalls before it Amazon continues to grow at an almighty pace.

Idealistically everyone would take notice, realistically only a small handful of people care and for everyone else it's "someone else's problem".


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

NicoleSwan said:


> It seems that [large scale] credibility damage is something that rarely lasts,


Tell that to Paula Dean...


----------



## Isabelking (Jan 16, 2012)

You know what I'm wondering - what was this person's long term plan? 

This person put a lot of time and money into coming up with what was clearly a brilliant marketing campaign - I mean, at his/her peak he was ranking in the 30s in the Kindle store overall, within a week of release as a brand new pen name.    But this person also now admits they're not a writer. So either they hired a ghostwriter, or did the plagiarizing themselves.

And obviously this person was trying to rank as high as possible and get as much visibility as possible. How were they going to follow up with that? What would they say to the agents and publishers who would come calling? How would they create their NEXT book, and the book after that?

Side note: I thought the title "Amazingly Broken" sounded like taking a word from one bestseller in the genre, and a word from another bestseller in the genre, and randomly pasting them together. Really dumb title.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Isabelking said:


> You know what I'm wondering - what was this person's long term plan?
> 
> This person put a lot of time and money into coming up with what was clearly a brilliant marketing campaign - I mean, at his/her peak he was ranking in the 30s in the Kindle store overall, within a week of release as a brand new pen name. But this person also now admits they're not a writer. So either they hired a ghostwriter, or did the plagiarizing themselves.
> 
> ...


Now that you mention it, maybe this person should offer their marketing skills to authors completely devoid of them.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

Isabelking said:


> You know what I'm wondering - what was this person's long term plan?


You assume a sociopath has long-term plans.

The more I read about this case, the more it strikes me as classical sociopathic behavior. I know because of Hollywood we tend to assume all sociopaths are also killers, but most are not violent. It is characterized by deception, lying, and cheating for personal gratification, impulsiveness and inability to engage in long-term planning (though they can construct exceptional short term plans), lack of remorse, indifference to or rationalization of the harm they cause, and a "victim" mentality where everything is the fault of someone else.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

You know, all conspiracy theories aside, this whole thing could be as simple as some marketing professional attempting to gauge just how successful a marketing strategy might be. There was a recent article on Salon from a reporter who wanted to show how easy it was to create a fake persona and make that name extremely famous and popular. For all we know, it could be something as simple as that, except it was discovered before the person managed to produce the "aha" moment.

At the beginning, I thought this might have been someone who simply stole some text from writers and then tried to produce it as his own but didn't expect immediate success like he achieved, which meant a lot more scrutiny. But it seems much more likely not the case because this person also put forth a great deal of effort at marketing this work as well, which indicates that there was a desire to achieve success, which begs the question of how did they suspect they wouldn't get caught after all of the success, unless the plan was to make it big and then jump out quickly.


----------



## David J Normoyle (Jun 22, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> You assume a sociopath has long-term plans.
> 
> The more I read about this case, the more it strikes me as classical sociopathic behavior. I know because of Hollywood we tend to assume all sociopaths are also killers, but most are not violent. It is characterized by deception, lying, and cheating for personal gratification, impulsiveness and inability to engage in long-term planning (though they can construct exceptional short term plans), lack of remorse, indifference to or rationalization of the harm they cause, and a "victim" mentality where everything is the fault of someone else.


I go along with the sociopathic behavior theory. There's likely also to have been a desire to be caught (at least on some level). For example, she even compares her book to Easy in the thread she created.

[quote author=jordinwilliams]
It's 70,000 words which the popular book Easy was 69,000 so it's definitely possible. I think Damaged by H.M. Ward is around that too.
[/quote]


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Isabelking said:


> You know what I'm wondering - what was this person's long term plan?


Option A) purchase a block of social security numbers, rinse, repeat

Option B) compose a tell all and sell it

Option C) create another company like RS, hang up a shingle here, and have authors lining up to pay you to do their marketing

B.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "And no, the readers are not a good filter. The damage is already done. The damage is done to Amazon's credibility, indie author credibility, blogger credibility. The damage is already done to the authors who had their work stolen. Playing Whack-a-mole with this nonsense after the fact is ridiculous in 2013. The technology exists to mitigate this stuff."


We heard about that same damage from purchased reviews, John Locke, sock puppets, authors responding to reviews, poor editing, Mom's reviews, the tsunami of junk, and the use of adverbs. Yet independent books continue to increase their market share.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Steeplechasing said:


> Why are so many bemoaning the effect on indies/self-pubbers? This was the work of a scammer, not a writer.


We are a people who have cultivated out persecution complex to such a level of immaculate perfection that we actually eagerly await and hope for it to come at this point.

A completely negligible number of the people who count (the readers) with know or care about this. In all honesty, the cover could have said it was plagiarized from those books and people would have still bought it because what they care about is getting their entertainment.

It's a bad thing for someone to have done and I hope the person who did it loses a chunk of flesh over it, but this is honestly only a scandal in out little sliver of the world.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

sarbonn said:


> You know, all conspiracy theories aside, this whole thing could be as simple as some marketing professional attempting to gauge just how successful a marketing strategy might be. There was a recent article on Salon from a reporter who wanted to show how easy it was to create a fake persona and make that name extremely famous and popular. For all we know, it could be something as simple as that, except it was discovered before the person managed to produce the "aha" moment.
> 
> At the beginning, I thought this might have been someone who simply stole some text from writers and then tried to produce it as his own but didn't expect immediate success like he achieved, which meant a lot more scrutiny. But it seems much more likely not the case because this person also put forth a great deal of effort at marketing this work as well, which indicates that there was a desire to achieve success, which begs the question of how did they suspect they wouldn't get caught after all of the success, unless the plan was to make it big and then jump out quickly.


You give them way too much credit. It's just simply a person that didnt have the ability to write a book so they either bought a fan fiction piece or hired someone from Odesk (who bought or stole a fan fiction piece) that had plagiarized passages in it. Then they sent out digital arcs to every NA book blogger they could find. No marketing mastermind or devious plan behind it.


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

Vaalingrade said:


> We are a people who have cultivated out persecution complex to such a level of immaculate perfection that we actually eagerly await and hope for it to come at this point.
> 
> A completely negligible number of the people who count (the readers) with know or care about this. In all honesty, the cover could have said it was plagiarized from those books and people would have still bought it because what they care about is getting their entertainment.
> 
> It's a bad thing for someone to have done and I hope the person who did it loses a chunk of flesh over it, but this is honestly only a scandal in out little sliver of the world.


I said almost the exact same thing to another KBer yesterday. This is a sad story, but will blow over before long and everything will return to normal.

I find its implications, with regards to reviewers, bloggers, and the readers themselves, much more fascinating than the fact that someone plagiarized someone else. I don't mean to belittle the plagiarism, but, to me, it's the boring part of the story.


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME


----------



## Lanie Jordan (Feb 23, 2011)

To me, the worst thing about this whole situation, is the fact that bloggers are taking a hit for it, like they should have somehow known parts of this book were plagiarized. I'm calling BS on that. 

If anything hurts indies, it's going to be that.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

Lanie Jordan said:


> To me, the worst thing about this whole situation, is the fact that bloggers are taking a hit for it, like they should have somehow known parts of this book were plagiarized. I'm calling BS on that.


Doesn't seem remotely odd to you that dozens of bloggers who specialize in this genre missed such HUGE amounts of stolen content? It's not like the stolen content was an obscure author buried at the 500,000 rank. Nor are these older titles that the bloggers may have just forgotten about. This is the equivalent of releasing a action movie and using huge sections of _Iron Man 3_ and _Man of Steel_ and expecting people not to notice. And the real problem is that many of these bloggers themselves are acting suspicious. Instead of saying "I feel rotten for not catching this" and apologizing to their readers (which would be the normal response if it genuinely was just something you didn't notice) they are deleting all references to the book on their sites and pretending their reviews never happened. I think THAT is what has got some people questioning the bloggers.

Sometimes it isn't what happens, but how we respond to what happens, that makes or breaks our credibility. If you gave a good review to this book and didn't realize it was plagiarized and said "I feel so stupid that I didn't realize this" or "no wonder I liked it...I already read it!" (throw in some humor) then people would support you. But to try to erase the evidence looks bad.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> You give them way too much credit. It's just simply a person that didnt have the ability to write a book so they either bought a fan fiction piece or hired someone from Odesk (who bought or stole a fan fiction piece) that had plagiarized passages in it. Then they sent out digital arcs to every NA book blogger they could find. No marketing mastermind or devious plan behind it.


Thank you! The marketing plan this person did is not some sort of super secret she/he discovered. It's mentioned here on the forums all the time, and anyone can follow it like a blueprint if you have a well-written book in a popular genre. Since she/he stole from popular books the book bloggers ran with it because they liked it, until finally some of them began to recognize that the writing was very familiar.

People look for the magic wand for sales. This person did the arduous and tedious work of contacting bloggers (or she/he outsourced it), sending out ARCs, etc. A lot of indie authors upload to KDP and sit back and wait, and then wonder why they're not getting sales. Unless your extremely lucky, you're going to have to get out there and sell, seems like this person had that part down pat, but she forgot another important component, the writing is the most important thing to the forumla.


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

David J Normoyle said:


> There's likely also to have been a desire to be caught (at least on some level). For example, she even compares her book to Easy in the thread she created.


I doubt the scammer wanted to be caught. Narcissists just think everyone else is stupid. Scam artists are not necessarily people who like to read, and they don't understand what the serious reading public is like. Most reading is done by a small percentage of the population who reads a lot of books, and people who like to read are, on average, at the higher end of the IQ scale. A subset of the reading public reads absolute mountains of books, and a small subset of those 'mountainous readers' have eidetic memories or memories that are almost that good. They will catch plagiarism if you commit it. Scam artists never, ever understand that you can't fool people en masse, because a few of those 'people en masse' have remarkable mental gifts that makes them tough to scam.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Doesn't seem remotely odd to you that dozens of bloggers who specialize in this genre missed such HUGE amounts of stolen content? It's not like the stolen content was an obscure author buried at the 500,000 rank. Nor are these older titles that the bloggers may have just forgotten about. This is the equivalent of releasing a action movie and using huge sections of _Iron Man 3_ and _Man of Steel_ and expecting people not to notice.


My assumption is that not all of the book bloggers actually read the book, just as I think not all of the talk show hosts who have movie stars on to talk about their movies have actually seen the movie being promoted. But that was my assumption before this story broke, so my opinion hasn't changed....

Betsy


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> My assumption is that not all of the book bloggers actually read the book, just as I think not all of the talk show hosts who have movie stars on to talk about their movies have actually seen the movie being promoted. But that was my assumption before this story broke, so my opinion hasn't changed....
> 
> Betsy


I was talking specifically about the blogs that posted reviews. I understand and agree with your point. I host people all the time on my blog when I haven't read the book, but I don't post glowing reviews of books I never read (I don't count the reviews my dog has been posting on my blog... )


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> And the real problem is that many of these bloggers themselves are acting suspicious. Instead of saying "I feel rotten for not catching this" and apologizing to their readers (which would be the normal response if it genuinely was just something you didn't notice) they are deleting all references to the book on their sites and pretending their reviews never happened. I think THAT is what has got some people questioning the bloggers.
> 
> Sometimes it isn't what happens, but how we respond to what happens, that makes or breaks our credibility. If you gave a good review to this book and didn't realize it was plagiarized and said "I feel so stupid that I didn't realize this" or "no wonder I liked it...I already read it!" (throw in some humor) then people would support you. But to try to erase the evidence looks bad.


I think this is the part that bothers me. I can see those that read it not recognizing the pilfered parts, but sweeping it all under the rug is what bothers me. I have no idea who all the bloggers are. Some of them may well be doing what was suggested above. I have, however, seen many say they are just deleting the post. No follow-up, nothing. That does bother me a little. I don't know what the bloggers could have done differently, honestly, but this book was pushed to prominence in large part by their efforts. I wish they would spread the word about Jordin and this book as loudly now as they did then.


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> My assumption is that not all of the book bloggers actually read the book,


Yes, that does happen a lot, and that in itself is lying to readers. Thing is, sometimes it's hard to determine if they really did read it based on the detailed review they gave. It's a slippery slope all around. Indie authors need reviews and we will do anything we can to get them, but one has to wonder what the credibility of some of these reviews are?


----------



## Dee Ernst (Jan 10, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Doesn't seem remotely odd to you that dozens of bloggers who specialize in this genre missed such HUGE amounts of stolen content? It's not like the stolen content was an obscure author buried at the 500,000 rank. Nor are these older titles that the bloggers may have just forgotten about. This is the equivalent of releasing a action movie and using huge sections of _Iron Man 3_ and _Man of Steel_ and expecting people not to notice. And the real problem is that many of these bloggers themselves are acting suspicious. Instead of saying "I feel rotten for not catching this" and apologizing to their readers (which would be the normal response if it genuinely was just something you didn't notice) they are deleting all references to the book on their sites and pretending their reviews never happened. I think THAT is what has got some people questioning the bloggers.


Yes, I think this is very odd, because if you look at the Goodreads reviews, the first half dozen or so mention how much the book was like 'Beautiful Disaster'. You'd have thought that one or two of them would have taken a closer look.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I was talking specifically about the blogs that posted reviews.


I was, too.  

And I like Chewie's reviews...


Betsy


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

Dee Ernst said:


> Yes, I think this is very odd, because if you look at the Goodreads reviews, the first half dozen or so mention how much the book was like 'Beautiful Disaster'. You'd have thought that one or two of them would have taken a closer look.


Sometimes I wonder if these 'bloggers' are actually Jordin, too.


----------



## Lanie Jordan (Feb 23, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:



> Doesn't seem remotely odd to you that dozens of bloggers who specialize in this genre missed such HUGE amounts of stolen content? It's not like the stolen content was an obscure author buried at the 500,000 rank. Nor are these older titles that the bloggers may have just forgotten about. This is the equivalent of releasing a action movie and using huge sections of _Iron Man 3_ and _Man of Steel_ and expecting people not to notice. And the real problem is that many of these bloggers themselves are acting suspicious. Instead of saying "I feel rotten for not catching this" and apologizing to their readers (which would be the normal response if it genuinely was just something you didn't notice) they are deleting all references to the book on their sites and pretending their reviews never happened. I think THAT is what has got some people questioning the bloggers.
> 
> Sometimes it isn't what happens, but how we respond to what happens, that makes or breaks our credibility. If you gave a good review to this book and didn't realize it was plagiarized and said "I feel so stupid that I didn't realize this" or "no wonder I liked it...I already read it!" (throw in some humor) then people would support you. But to try to erase the evidence looks bad.


No, it doesn't really seem that odd to me. Reviewers and bloggers read a lot of books--maybe more than most people, especially the popular ones. If it'd been the whole book that had been copied, word for word, that'd be something else, but a few scenes? I'm sorry, but no, I don't think they did anything wrong by not noticing it.

How long have the others books been out? How long has it been since those reviewers read it? They're expected to remember every single book they read, word for word? My memory isn't the greatest. I can barely remember what I read last week, let alone entire passages from it. I can't even do that with my own work most times. I'm not going to damn a whole list of bloggers and reviewers for something I probably wouldn't have been able to do myself.

Maybe they're deleting their posts because of the things people are saying? They're being blamed for this. I know plenty of bloggers who've said "I feel bad for this" and taken their reviews/spotlights/posts down. They feel guilty enough as it is without being blamed for it.

I'm sticking with what I said. If anything hurts us, it's that attitude toward them.


----------



## Zoe York (May 12, 2013)

I agree with Lanie - the damage to indie authors, or at least romance/NA authors, will be that bloggers are now super wary of taking on any unknown author. Even for an interview/cover reveal. I saw at least 3 posts about that last night: sorry, but we're now closing to submissions except for publishers and authors we've previously worked with. That's brutal for me, and a death knell to a new NA author ready to release a book in the next few weeks. 

These are people for whom this is a hobby, a personal passion - they don't need to put up with any crap. And why should they?


----------



## Hope Welsh (Mar 9, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I don't think this is a condemnation of indies. I think it is a condemnation of both Amazon and the promotional complex that has sprung up. But it WILL hurt indies indirectly.
> 
> Why is Amazon not using anti-plagiarism software? The software is not that expensive. Colleges use it all the time. So are a lot of publishers. Amazon could even build their own in-house. It isn't like they don't have all the digital files to scan and compare to!
> 
> What does this say about the bloggers who promoted the book with all of those stellar reviews? This is getting lost. The bloggers who gave this book such rave reviews have no credibility at this point. And this will hurt indies because we depend on a lot of these sites. If these sites lose their credibility and audience, they are useless. Every time something like this happens, more people become suspicious of five star reviews.


Sorry--but this is just wrong. I am a writer. I'm also a reviewer for my own blog and for The Kindle Reviews and the newer Kindle Romance Reviews site.

I read literally hundreds of books. I read more than thirty a month most months. To assume that it is in ANY way a bloggers responsibility to be the 'plagiarism police' is absurd. There is no possible way I can remember every line from every book. I've never read "Easy" but I've read Beautiful Disaster and I'd bought and read the book that was plagiarized, apparently. I didn't catch it--but then, I didn't read them back to back where it would have been apparent to me. The storylines were not nearly the same in my opinion--other than "College and troubled backgrounds" = which is a common NA/YA theme.

How in the world could it be any responsibility of the reviewers/bloggers? Apparently some very alert reader noted the issue--and had apparently read the books back-to-back, as I understand it.

In any case--without review bloggers we are sunk. They are what help all authors, traditional and indie, succeed. They do a free service for us for nothing more than a book to read.


----------



## Nebula (May 29, 2013)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Doesn't seem remotely odd to you that dozens of bloggers who specialize in this genre missed such HUGE amounts of stolen content? It's not like the stolen content was an obscure author buried at the 500,000 rank. Nor are these older titles that the bloggers may have just forgotten about. This is the equivalent of releasing a action movie and using huge sections of _Iron Man 3_ and _Man of Steel_ and expecting people not to notice. And the real problem is that many of these bloggers themselves are acting suspicious. Instead of saying "I feel rotten for not catching this" and apologizing to their readers (which would be the normal response if it genuinely was just something you didn't notice) they are deleting all references to the book on their sites and pretending their reviews never happened. I think THAT is what has got some people questioning the bloggers.
> 
> Sometimes it isn't what happens, but how we respond to what happens, that makes or breaks our credibility. If you gave a good review to this book and didn't realize it was plagiarized and said "I feel so stupid that I didn't realize this" or "no wonder I liked it...I already read it!" (throw in some humor) then people would support you. But to try to erase the evidence looks bad.


I don't remember entire passages from the books I read. I suppose that if I came across a passage that was copied, it would be familiar but I'd put it down to the fact that most NA books are similar anyway.

I think the person who pointed out the plagiarism had only just read the original book the day before she read Amazingly Stolen, so it was easier for her to detect the plagiarism. Book bloggers read, on the average about three books per week. Many of then have full time jobs. They're not literature professors or big magazine fiction reviewers busy cramming entire passages of the books they read so they can repeat them at dinner parties.... so it's entirely possible that even though many of them sensed the similarities, they didn't think too much about it. (Hey... nobody reads books expecting them to be total copies of other books...)

I think it's unfair to blame book bloggers. As soon as they knew about this issue, they broadcast it to all their followers on their blogs, Facebook and twitter, notified Amazon and called on people to do the same, cancelled all their promotions of the book and practically brought it down. They were the first to change their reviews on Amazon and Goodreads...I think they should be applauded.


----------



## Hope Welsh (Mar 9, 2012)

Serena Grey said:


> I don't remember entire passages from the books I read. I suppose that if I came across a passage that was copied, it would be familiar but I'd put it down to the fact that most NA books are similar anyway.
> 
> I think the person who pointed out the plagiarism had only just read the original book the day before she read Amazingly Stolen, so it was easier for her to detect the plagiarism. Book bloggers read, on the average about three books per week. Many of then have full time jobs. They're not literature professors or big magazine fiction reviewers busy cramming entire passages of the books they read so they can repeat them at dinner parties.... so it's entirely possible that even though many of them sensed the similarities, they didn't think too much about it. (Hey... nobody reads books expecting them to be total copies of other books...)
> 
> I think it's unfair to blame book bloggers. As soon as they knew about this issue, they broadcast it to all their followers on their blogs, Facebook and twitter, notified Amazon and called on people to do the same, cancelled all their promotions of the book and practically brought it down. They were the first to change their reviews on Amazon and Goodreads...I think they should be applauded.


Exactly!


----------



## Justawriter (Jul 24, 2012)

Hope Welsh said:


> Sorry--but this is just wrong. I am a writer. I'm also a reviewer for my own blog and for The Kindle Reviews and the newer Kindle Romance Reviews site.
> 
> I read literally hundreds of books. I read more than thirty a month most months. To assume that it is in ANY way a bloggers responsibility to be the 'plagiarism police' is absurd. There is no possible way I can remember every line from every book. I've never read "Easy" but I've read Beautiful Disaster and I'd bought and read the book that was plagiarized, apparently. I didn't catch it--but then, I didn't read them back to back where it would have been apparent to me. The storylines were not nearly the same in my opinion--other than "College and troubled backgrounds" = which is a common NA/YA theme.
> 
> ...


Agree totally. This is not Amazon's fault and it's not the blogger's fault. It's the writer's fault. This has received a ton of attention, as it should, but it's particularly buzzworthy because it so rarely happens. It's not like it's an epidemic that Amazon needs to find a cure for, stat. It's an unfortunate choice made by a greedy author and if anything it shows that someone, somwhere will likely catch the next person who does this, so maybe they'll think twice before doing it!

I really don't think it's an Indie issue as this has happened with traditionally published authors too and it's important to remember that this hardly ever happens. Thankfully.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

Hope Welsh said:


> How in the world could it be any responsibility of the reviewers/bloggers? Apparently some very alert reader noted the issue--and had apparently read the books back-to-back, as I understand it.


I think folks miss my point. The issue is not if a blogger didn't catch the plagiarism. The issue is that after it was revealed, the blogger went and deleted all evidence of the book and doesn't even post a statement on the matter. When you screw up, _you have to own it._ You don't pretend it didn't happen. Particularly if you have built a reputation doing something. Some bloggers have done this. They have posted to their blogs that they were just as much tricked as everyone else and apologized to their readers. People don't understand the value and importance of the words "I'm sorry." They hem and haw and deflect and do everything in their power to simply avoid saying those words, when in truth they are the only words that really resolve most problems.

Nobody expects anyone to remember 100% of what they read. But I do think people expect those who place themselves in the public eye and build reputations and businesses promoting books to own up if they miss one. Remember, we are not talking about low-traffic private blogs from casual readers. We are talking about some serious heavyweights who have thousands of followers and have set themselves up as part of the new "gatekeepers" telling people what they should be reading.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

PamelaKelley said:


> Agree totally. This is not Amazon's fault and it's not the blogger's fault. It's the writer's fault. This has received a ton of attention, as it should, but it's particularly buzzworthy because it so rarely happens. It's not like it's an epidemic that Amazon needs to find a cure for, stat.


Tell that to all of the erotica authors last year who were having their works stolen and resold on Amazon. This has actually been going on for a while with erotica, from what I understand from folks who have been impacted. It's only seems like this is rare because this specific case is a mainstream book.


----------



## Justawriter (Jul 24, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think folks miss my point. The issue is not if a blogger didn't catch the plagiarism. The issue is that after it was revealed, the blogger went and deleted all evidence of the book and doesn't even post a statement on the matter. When you screw up, _you have to own it._ You don't pretend it didn't happen. Particularly if you have built a reputation doing something. Some bloggers have done this. They have posted to their blogs that they were just as much tricked as everyone else and apologized to their readers. People don't understand the value and importance of the words "I'm sorry." They hem and haw and deflect and do everything in their power to simply avoid saying those words, when in truth they are the only words that really resolve most problems.
> 
> Nobody expects anyone to remember 100% of what they read. But I do think people expect those who place themselves in the public eye and build reputations and businesses promoting books to own up if they miss one. Remember, we are not talking about low-traffic private blogs from casual readers. We are talking about some serious heavyweights who have thousands of followers and have set themselves up as part of the new "gatekeepers" telling people what they should be reading.


That's an interesting take on it. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I think if I were a blogger and reviewed this book I would make a statement, as I'd be pissed that I wasted my time reading a stolen story, but I'm not sure the blogger has anything to apologize for if they gave an honest review and enjoyed the book. They can post that they're outraged that they were tricked, but why do they need to apologize? It does seem that a number of these bloggers enjoyed the story, before realizing it wasn't original. But is that their fault? I don't think so.

I think it's up to each blogger to handle this however they choose.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

PamelaKelley said:


> That's an interesting take on it. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I think if I were a blogger and reviewed this book I would make a statement, as I'd be p*ssed that I wasted my time reading a stolen story, but I'm not sure the blogger has anything to apologize for if they gave an honest review and enjoyed the book. They can post that they're outraged that they were tricked, but why do they need to apologize? It does seem that a number of these bloggers enjoyed the story, before realizing it wasn't original. But is that their fault? I don't think so.
> 
> I think it's up to each blogger to handle this however they choose.


I agree with this, but pretending it never happened... That might save them embarrassment, but it's hardly helping their readers.


----------



## Lanie Jordan (Feb 23, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think folks miss my point. The issue is not if a blogger didn't catch the plagiarism. The issue is that after it was revealed, the blogger went and deleted all evidence of the book and doesn't even post a statement on the matter. When you screw up, _you have to own it._ You don't pretend it didn't happen. Particularly if you have built a reputation doing something. Some bloggers have done this. They have posted to their blogs that they were just as much tricked as everyone else and apologized to their readers. People don't understand the value and importance of the words "I'm sorry." They hem and haw and deflect and do everything in their power to simply avoid saying those words, when in truth they are the only words that really resolve most problems.
> 
> Nobody expects anyone to remember 100% of what they read. But I do think people expect those who place themselves in the public eye and build reputations and businesses promoting books to own up if they miss one. Remember, we are not talking about low-traffic private blogs from casual readers. We are talking about some serious heavyweights who have thousands of followers and have set themselves up as part of the new "gatekeepers" telling people what they should be reading.


That's just it, they didn't screw up, so they have nothing to 'own' and they have nothing to be sorry about. They were duped as much as readers.

So what exactly should they apologize for? For putting their time and effort into helping promote an author who, in the end, screwed THEM over? For getting duped? For getting the blame for the actions of a selfish, plagiarizing author?


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

PamelaKelley said:


> That's an interesting take on it. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I think if I were a blogger and reviewed this book I would make a statement, as I'd be p*ssed that I wasted my time reading a stolen story, but I'm not sure the blogger has anything to apologize for if they gave an honest review and enjoyed the book. They can post that they're outraged that they were tricked, but why do they need to apologize? It does seem that a number of these bloggers enjoyed the story, before realizing it wasn't original. But is that their fault? I don't think so.
> 
> I think it's up to each blogger to handle this however they choose.


Fair enough. . . if they honestly gave a positive review and now realize they were hoodwinked, there's no problem.

But it is, I think, in their own best interest, to write a follow up post and say, "hey folks, here's what happened." Their readers are going to respect them more for that than if they just quietly take down the original review without comment. THAT makes it look like they have something to hide; like maybe they knew it was bogus to start with.

But in most cases I doubt that's the case -- it was an honest mistake and I agree with you that they are not 'at fault'. But I also agree with Julie that they shouldn't just ignore the issue.

Maybe 'apologize' is the wrong word. Maybe just 'explain'.


----------



## Bree Roberts (Dec 1, 2012)

I googled 'Jordin B Bishop' and saw this link and underneath it said "Jordin B Williams=Jordin Bishop=James Bishop=Liz Thomas=Emily Curran. Under Curran, wrote Finding Cassilia." ETA I can find no Emily Curran or "Finding Cassilia" on Amazon. Curiouser and curiouser.

The link was http://lunch.publishersmarketplace.com/2013/06/a-plagiarist-is-caught-online-and-kindle-worlds-opens-for-business/. It's for a site titled Publishers Lunch and you have to subscribe to read the full article (which I didn't do so I didn't get to see the rest of the blurb that I mentioned in the paragraph above).


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

Bree Roberts said:


> I googled 'Jordin B Bishop' and saw this link and underneath it said "Jordin B Williams=Jordin Bishop=James Bishop=Liz Thomas=Emily Curran. Under Curran, wrote Finding Cassilia." ETA I can find no Emily Curran or "Finding Cassilia" on Amazon. Curiouser and curiouser.


Emily Curran has almost 3900 friends on Goodreads. She appears to have been mass friending people all over on that site.


----------



## Bree Roberts (Dec 1, 2012)

DDark said:


> http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1152912-same-book-two-different-authors


Here's one of the things somebody wrote at that link:
I was also wondering about this book. I actually found this thread by googling the titles. The author of Finding Cassilia, Emily Curran, has spammed me like crazy from multiple fake accounts, and today I got a friend request from the author of Saving Cassilia, Liz Thomas. That really makes me suspicious.


----------



## Bree Roberts (Dec 1, 2012)

Another nugget from the link DDark provided:

(quote)
Thank you to everyone who has noticed the Emily Curran/Liz Thomas confusion. I am so happy to see the duplicate book listing thing being resolved. I reported this to GR customer service after receiving multiple friend requests from author and reader profiles that looked suspiciously alike. Customer service was very helpful. These two authors are also linked to a similar third author profile - Beth Klein. I'm not sure if these are all pen names of the same person or a group of authors working together, but they are so seem to be engaging in some questionable marketing tactics.
(endquote)

This person's rabbit hole goes deep indeed.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "Doesn't seem remotely odd to you that dozens of bloggers who specialize in this genre missed such HUGE amounts of stolen content? "


I'd say it's odd to expect anyone to recognize that what they are reading today is partially copied from something they once read in the past. The more books they have read, the odder it becomes.


----------



## Rachel Hanna (May 7, 2012)

That all seems to match up here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/335195779910777/

That is a Beth Klein Facebook fan page with, guess who? Someone named Liz Thomas and someone named Jordan Bishop.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks, some of the discussion here is straying well into WHOA territory. . . . . the overall issue is a valid discussion but maybe we don't need to keep trolling the web and gleefully reporting what we find, eh?  'Cause it's feeling a lot like piling on.


----------



## Wansit (Sep 27, 2012)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Folks, some of the discussion here is straying well into WHOA territory. . . . . the overall issue is a valid discussion but maybe we don't need to keep trolling the web and gleefully reporting what we find, eh? 'Cause it's feeling a lot like piling on.


Ohh  I had a good blog post on this author ring subject too


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I don't see how investigating the situation and reporting what more is discovered in a mature way is piling on. Unless you think Watergate was piling on.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think folks miss my point. The issue is not if a blogger didn't catch the plagiarism. The issue is that after it was revealed, the blogger went and deleted all evidence of the book and doesn't even post a statement on the matter. When you screw up, _you have to own it._ You don't pretend it didn't happen. Particularly if you have built a reputation doing something. Some bloggers have done this. They have posted to their blogs that they were just as much tricked as everyone else and apologized to their readers. People don't understand the value and importance of the words "I'm sorry." They hem and haw and deflect and do everything in their power to simply avoid saying those words, when in truth they are the only words that really resolve most problems.
> 
> Nobody expects anyone to remember 100% of what they read. But I do think people expect those who place themselves in the public eye and build reputations and businesses promoting books to own up if they miss one. Remember, we are not talking about low-traffic private blogs from casual readers. We are talking about some serious heavyweights who have thousands of followers and have set themselves up as part of the new "gatekeepers" telling people what they should be reading.


I think (judging from the comments on the blog that exposed the whole thing) that many of the blogger/reviewers that pulled their posts down, did it as a knee jerk reaction so that they didn't continue to promote a book that was plagiarized. There could also have been some level of embarrassment if they were using affiliate links and actually profiting from the insidious lie of a book. I don't think that there was any coverup or saving face intended. I just think it was a quick, knee jerk reaction. Keep in mind that many of these bloggers/reviewers are not professionals. They do it for fun. They don't have PR departments or spin rooms with the ability to crank out a "statement" in response to the news tha broke yesterday. They're not Oprah interviewing and promoting James Frey.

I would have put up a statement had I promoted this book on a blog but I don't fault those that didn't.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Yeah, both Liz Thomas and Curran have spammed me and many of my friends on goodreads too. Liz Thomas that happened a while back. It was mass spamming and trying to friend on a mass scale. They are both one and the same, it even shows both names on the book listed as authors on goodreads. 

The author pages of all of them, including this Jordan looked very similar. The way the blog stuff was listed etc. Most of it is gone now, but I remember it. 

There is also the similarity in trying to emulate other popular books, Liz Thomas one doing the Rock star trope so popular in NA, Curran (Liz) having a cover that uses the Easy couple etc. I think they are all one person. 

Now I wonder what other books are from this person. 

As to the blogger issue, I agree with Monique and Julie here. I don't expect the bloggers to remember every word of every book they read. But they among with the readers and authors created a community for NA. They push books up by sending their reviews and spotlights out to their readers. They build a certain trust with the readers. 
Its the decent thing to do to at least have a conversation about this. Everyone is trying to push this on someone else. Its not just about who's fault it is, its about how you deal with this in the aftermath. 

And being open about it will always get more respect from me than brushing it under the rug and pretending it never happened. Sorry, that makes those blogs look so silly when the readers are talking about it everywhere. 

Its a chance to open conversations in the communities and maybe how to look at things just a tad more careful in the future. 

And to be totally honest, it will affect me as a reader how I go about picking new authors in NA to pick. I will be way more careful and strictly look at reader reviews, those names I have seen before and not really pay much attention to the gazillion of blogs that seem to review these books. 

I am really turned off by these attempts of brushing this under the rug. I think that is disrespectful to the readers.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Since this person probably isn't going to be facing any legal ramifications, this is the only way we have of 'punishing' them.  And to send a message to others who may be thinking about trying something similar.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

swolf said:


> Since this person probably isn't going to be facing any legal ramifications, this is the only way we have of 'punishing' them. And to send a message to others who may be thinking about trying something similar.


Of course this "punishment" is worthless because they'll just make up another pseudonym and try to do it again without getting caught. Who knows, maybe they're posting in this very thread already.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> Of course this "punishment" is worthless because they'll just make up another pseudonym and try to do it again without getting caught. Who knows, maybe they're posting in this very thread already.


*looks at Nathan warily*


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

swolf said:


> *looks at Nathan warily*


*looks at Swolf warily*


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> My assumption is that not all of the book bloggers actually read the book, just as I think not all of the talk show hosts who have movie stars on to talk about their movies have actually seen the movie being promoted. But that was my assumption before this story broke, so my opinion hasn't changed....
> 
> Betsy


Oh My Goat.
Bloggers review books they actually didn't read by writers who didn't actually write them for buyers who won't actually buy them but pirate them because they are readers who don't actually read books but hoard them.
Ain't it a great country?


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Since this can all be traced back to Stephenie Meyer, I'm blaming it on her.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Andrew Ashling said:


> Oh My Goat.
> Bloggers review books they actually didn't read by writers who didn't actually write them for buyers who won't actually buy them but pirate them because they are readers who don't actually read books but hoard them.
> Ain't it a great country?


I think one can never overestimate the laziness of some people or their willingness to take shortcuts. Bloggers, writers, readers (ever hear of Cliff notes)--none are exempt.

Betsy


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

swolf said:


> Since this can all be traced back to Stephenie Meyer, I'm blaming it on her.


I blame her father.

You've been one-upped, sir.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

Lanie Jordan said:


> So what exactly should they apologize for?


Sometimes you apologize simply to show empathy. You've never said "I'm sorry" to someone to empathize with their situation? "I'm sorry you got laid off" or "I'm sorry about your mother passing" or anything like that? You didn't cause the person to get laid off nor did you cause anyone to die, but you apologize to show empathy. A lot of readers are angry right now. They bought this book based on buzz. And instead of showing empathy for those readers, the knee jerk reaction is to pretend it didn't happen.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

sarbonn said:


> Basically, we just have to add an alien abduction and two sex scenes, and we have a bestseller! Or maybe a vampire and a werewolf. I forget what the cool in thing is these days.


Werefrogs. Trust me on this.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

Sheila_Guthrie said:


> Werefrogs. Trust me on this.


Well, it worked for the fairy tales.

I hear wereslugs are particularly sexy these days.

Edited to add: We should have a forum anthology of stories featuring the least sexy were-creatures that people can think of.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

swolf said:


> *looks at Nathan warily*





NathanWrann said:


> *looks at Swolf warily*


oops, did I plagiarize that?


----------



## Christopher Bunn (Oct 26, 2010)

Zelah Meyer said:


> Well, it worked for the fairy tales.
> 
> I hear wereslugs are particularly sexy these days.


Ah. Are you referring to ready-to-wear-slugs? They drape quite nicely.


----------



## Zoe York (May 12, 2013)

Here's why I think it's important to share this digging. Yesterday, a number of readers in a Goodreads group were discussing how to get a refund for their Amazingly Broken purchases. Today, that thread was deleted. Why? Because Beth Klein is the moderator of the group. I just blogged about it, because it was a group that I got a lot of my own reviews from, and that makes me want to vomit. Not because of the readers - the reviews were all honest, thoughtful and balanced. And as far as I can tell, none were by anyone connected to this drama, except for joining Beth's group on Goodreads. But given how much misinformation has been spread and active deception perpetrated, it's only fair to those readers that now that we know, we share.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

It's like people don't get how the internet works... including how other people who don't know how the internet works work.

Think back to every celebrity social media gaffe. What did all the people who might have been put into a negative light do _instantly_? Deleted the evidence, ignorant of the knowledge that no matter what you write ever, some jackass will have taken a screen-cap. That's the first thing people do because back in the day, evidence wasn't magic and immortal and burning it made it stop existing.

Also, this will hurt blog-shopping for ~maybe~ a month. You know why? Because some people do like indie books if only to say that they read indie books and once the current major bloggers drop indies, they'll make their own book blogs with blackjack and hookers (probably not with those things).

Blogs, even blogs with huge followings, are a dime a dozen and it costs zero dollars and zero cents to start one and just as much to poach the famous guy's now jilted readers.

The sky is not falling people. This was not an earth shattering occurrence. We've all had bouts with hiccups that had longer term effects on life on this planet and this industry than this will.


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

zoeyork said:


> Here's why I think it's important to share this digging. Yesterday, a number of readers in a Goodreads group were discussing how to get a refund for their Amazingly Broken purchases. Today, that thread was deleted. Why? Because Beth Klein is the moderator of the group. I just blogged about it, because it was a group that I got a lot of my own reviews from, and that makes me want to vomit. Not because of the readers - the reviews were all honest, thoughtful and balanced. And as far as I can tell, none were by anyone connected to this drama, except for joining Beth's group on Goodreads. But given how much misinformation has been spread and active deception perpetrated, it's only fair to those readers that now that we know, we share.


My head hurts. So much work.

http://tinyurl.com/pdyklck


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

zoeyork said:


> Here's why I think it's important to share this digging. Yesterday, a number of readers in a Goodreads group were discussing how to get a refund for their Amazingly Broken purchases. Today, that thread was deleted. Why? Because Beth Klein is the moderator of the group. I just blogged about it, because it was a group that I got a lot of my own reviews from, and that makes me want to vomit. Not because of the readers - the reviews were all honest, thoughtful and balanced. And as far as I can tell, none were by anyone connected to this drama, except for joining Beth's group on Goodreads. But given how much misinformation has been spread and active deception perpetrated, it's only fair to those readers that now that we know, we share.


Just to add to what Ann said earlier: as you all might suspect, we've been discussing this in the smoke-filled Admin caves. Links that are to sites that provide additional information or insight into this sad situation, and discussion remains civil are fine. What we don't want to see are links that only serve as "popcorn," drawing members to a site as spectators and/or participants in a virtual mob. Most of the links (I haven't checked all of them personally) seem to fall in the first category and are OK.

Thanks for keeping everything civil.

Betsy
KBoards Moderator


----------



## Zoe York (May 12, 2013)

Okay, in that case, here's a different version of what Michael posted (I think that was Teresa's working draft of her blog post). This has an eye-opening infographic at the end.

http://www.teresamummert.com/1/post/2013/06/plagiarism.html


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

DDark said:


> Anyone who thinks this chain of events isn't going to p*ss off a lot of ppl, including book bloggers, is mistaken. This may be the last straw for a lot of readers who are delving into the indie scene.


Far fewer than we imagine and/or hope (in a strange way). I would put dollars to donuts that less than ten percent of the people who bought the book are even aware of it and of them, most of them again, don't really case because they got their money's worth in entertainment.

Yeah, the bloggers who got burned are going to smart over this, but if they back out of the indie scene, they will be almost instantly replaced. This was a very, very minor ablation if that.



> But it's an ugly mark.


A mark that will have faded by the time this thread hits page 5 of the Cafe.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

zoeyork said:


> Okay, in that case, here's a different version of what Michael posted (I think that was Teresa's working draft of her blog post). This has an eye-opening infographic at the end.
> 
> http://www.teresamummert.com/1/post/2013/06/plagiarism.html


My head hurts just looking at the flow chart!


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> A mark that will have faded by the time this thread hits page 5 of the Cafe.


As indie writers, we're already so covered with marks it looks like we just staggered out of a leper colony. What's one more festering wound?


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

MichaelWallace said:


> As indie writers, we're already so covered with marks it looks like we just staggered out of a leper colony. What's one more festering wound?


So many self-inflicted or old scabs we love to pick at.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Sometimes you apologize simply to show empathy. You've never said "I'm sorry" to someone to empathize with their situation? "I'm sorry you got laid off" or "I'm sorry about your mother passing" or anything like that? You didn't cause the person to get laid off nor did you cause anyone to die, but you apologize to show empathy. A lot of readers are angry right now. They bought this book based on buzz. And instead of showing empathy for those readers, the knee jerk reaction is to pretend it didn't happen.


I just wanted to add that media puts retractions in all the time when they get facts wrong or a story turns out to be something else. Sometimes it's as simple as saying, hey I was tricked just like the rest of you and therefore retract my previous thoughts on this book.

Not that I think bloggers have anything to be ashamed of but since they have chosen to make their thoughts on books public, there is a sense of duty that comes with this.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Bethany B. said:


> I just wanted to add that media puts retractions in all the time when they get facts wrong or a story turns out to be something else. Sometimes it's as simple as saying, hey I was tricked just like the rest of you and therefore retract my previous thoughts on this book.
> 
> Not that I think bloggers have anything to be ashamed of but since they have chosen to make their thoughts on books public there is a sense of duty that comes with this.


And let's not forget the dread double reversal!






B.


----------



## Remington Kane (Feb 19, 2011)

Funny! 
http://www.validationpublishing.com/book-covers.html


----------



## Desmond X. Torres (Mar 16, 2013)

I am sooo glad I joined this site and check it every day.
My heart stopped when I started to read this thread and saw: 


sbaum4853 said:


> I heart this post. Elle, you should use your freakish ability to write quickly to transform this theory into a novel about a book club who loves indie NA Romance and, working together, uncovers a giant conspiracy much like the one you've outlined above. It could be the _All The President's Men_ of indie lit.





ellecasey said:


> Heh heh. I'm so on it.


AAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!! I am now strapped to my desk. Just so you know- I had a hunch last January when I saw a similar thing happen on 'The Zon'- same genre, similar tattoos&#8230; got me thinking. Then I started writing&#8230;

My novel "The Sock Puppet" is going up within two weeks. I started it in January, and am final editing it as we speak. I don't write as quickly as Elle, so I'm just, y'know... giving up sleep. 
Erin Lark's doing the cover! Yay!

And I didn't steal a single word!Honest.


----------



## NicoleSwan (Oct 2, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> Far fewer than we imagine and/or hope (in a strange way). I would put dollars to donuts that less than ten percent of the people who bought the book are even aware of it and of them, most of them again, don't really case because they got their money's worth in entertainment.
> 
> Yeah, the bloggers who got burned are going to smart over this, but if they back out of the indie scene, they will be almost instantly replaced. This was a very, very minor ablation if that.


My sentiments as well. Not condoning what was done, but it's not like effect of this is to shake the foundation of our world, not even close.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

Zelah Meyer said:


> Well, it worked for the fairy tales.
> 
> I hear wereslugs are particularly sexy these days.
> 
> Edited to add: We should have a forum anthology of stories featuring the least sexy were-creatures that people can think of.


I actually wrote a short story about twenty years ago called "Were-snails of the Abyss" and sent it out. The editor of one of the better known horror magazines wrote me back stating: "Please tell me you're not serious with this one."


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

So, this is my theory on how all this went down.

A while ago, people were talking about how there were these new erotica scammers who stole stories from free sites like literotica.com and uploaded them to kdp as their own.

Judging from some of those earlier titles, like "Cherry Popper," and the fact that "Rock Me" was blasted in reviews for having overly raunchy sex scenes, I'm pretty sure it's a good bet that that's what this writer was doing. We'll call him James and assume he's a dude, even though we have no way of knowing that. Since that's the name on the paypal account, it seems a vaguely reasonable assumption.

So James steals a bunch of erotic stories from websites where they are published for free, makes really hot covers, and uploads them under a myriad of pen names.

It's going okay, but James is not getting the blockbuster success that he hopes for. Nor is he rolling in dough.

So, he thinks, maybe erotica is not the place to find a blockbuster seller. No, he needs a New Adult romance. Where to find one?

Fanfiction!

He finds one that fits the bill, changes the names, makes a hot cover, and uploads it. He's done this before, of course, with the erotica, so he's probably a little less careful and little more brazen than he might have been to start off with.

Of course, he doesn't realize that parts of this fanfiction are plagiarized. When he gets called out on that--_not_ on stealing from a fanfiction site, he blames his "ghostwriter," because in a sense, it's true. He didn't write the story. He didn't know portions of it were lifted from other published works (in the grand fan fiction tradition of Cassandra Claire). It's also true that he "can't write," as all of this has been a scam from the beginning.

Now, who wants to prove my theory and go find the original "Cherry Popper," "Rock Me," and "Finding Cassilia" ?


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Not a bad theory.


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

It looks like the plagiarist is about to release another book (erotica). He's gone under another name: K.A. Andrews, and the name of the book is 'Cherry Popper" http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17306487-cherry-popper

He made a post today on the book's page (scroll down to the second post).



> K.A. added it
> So the final release date is July 20th. Sorry! I got picked up by a publisher and they wanted to do edits and setup a tour. It's annoying but I think you'll really like the final result.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

I don't think this is going to ruin the reputation of indie authors with book bloggers at all. 

What do people love to find in great stories? Conflict and drama. High stakes. Now, this story has it all! Many people are enjoying the heck out of the entertainment value in all this, and let's remember--nobody got murdered here. I think we're all a little pissed that some scam artist is running a better business than most of us, but there's plenty to learn.

I'm a little concerned people are going to find out the truth about me, though--that I am not a person, but a stack of squirrels in a trenchcoat.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

RM Prioleau said:


> It looks like the plagiarist is about to release another book (erotica). He's gone under another name: K.A. Andrews, and the name of the book is 'Cherry Popper" http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17306487-cherry-popper
> 
> He made a post today on the book's page (scroll down to the second post).


Sorry, I haven't been following this as closely as you all...we know KA Andrews is AKA Jordin Williams because? (Sincerely..)

Betsy


----------



## R.V. Doon (Apr 1, 2013)

valeriec80 said:


> So, this is my theory on how all this went down.
> 
> A while ago, people were talking about how there were these new erotica scammers who stole stories from free sites like literotica.com and uploaded them to kdp as their own.
> 
> ...


Wow! You've got a detective's mindset. Makes sense.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Sorry, I haven't been following this as closely as you all...we know KA Andrews is AKA Jordin Williams because? (Sincerely..)
> 
> Betsy


I think it's the trail as detailed in this blog post: http://www.teresamummert.com/1/post/2013/06/plagiarism.html


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Sorry, I haven't been following this as closely as you all...we know KA Andrews is AKA Jordin Williams because? (Sincerely..)
> 
> Betsy


http://www.teresamummert.com/1/post/2013/06/plagiarism.html


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

Dalya said:


> I'm a little concerned people are going to find out the truth about me, though--that I am not a person, but a stack of squirrels in a trenchcoat.


I've taken a screenshot and the jig is up!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Monique said:


> I think it's the trail as detailed in this blog post: http://www.teresamummert.com/1/post/2013/06/plagiarism.html





RM Prioleau said:


> http://www.teresamummert.com/1/post/2013/06/plagiarism.html


I had read that, and just re-read it....and I don't see where it proves they are the same person and not perhaps more than one person acting together to promote each others' books...what did I miss?

Betsy


----------



## Raquel Lyon (Mar 3, 2012)

RM Prioleau said:


> It looks like the plagiarist is about to release another book (erotica). He's gone under another name: K.A. Andrews, and the name of the book is 'Cherry Popper" http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17306487-cherry-popper
> 
> He made a post today on the book's page (scroll down to the second post).


Hmm... Reading the synopsis on Goodreads, I was immediately reminded of a book I recently read.

Losing It by Cora Carmack


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Rachel Hanna said:


> That all seems to match up here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/335195779910777/
> 
> That is a Beth Klein Facebook fan page with, guess who? Someone named Liz Thomas and someone named Jordan Bishop.


If you look at the friends list, not only does Liz Thomas show up, but another book by Sarah Jordan called "Crazy Ones." The account was started in 10/12. Someone should take a shot of this friend list and go through and see if there are more pen names and novels.

Catfish the Author.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks,

As I said earlier, links that provide additional insight or information will be allowed.  I have issue with links to books on Amazon and Goodread pages--those strike me as crossing over into WHOA territory.  If you know of a suspect Goodreads page or Amazon book, the place to deal with it is on those sites.  

This is under discussion in Admin.  I want to leave this thread open as I know it is an important topic.

Betsy
KBoards Moderator


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

My feelings are hurt that none of my words were stolen for this project.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Does anyone know how many reviews the title garnered pre-launch?

B.phone


----------



## 90daysnovel (Apr 30, 2012)

My feelings are hurt that none of my words were stolen for this project.  

Sorry, someone had to.


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

As Andre Santhomas remarked in an email to me, we should have put Goodreads members on the trail of Osama Bin Laden. They'd have had him in half the time.

I remember all that erotica/literotica piracy stuff! I got an NPR interview segment out of it. Sigh. My 15 minutes of fame, that was, and I couldn't even use my real name. No sending the link to mom.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Dalya said:


> I'm a little concerned people are going to find out the truth about me, though--that I am not a person, but a stack of squirrels in a trenchcoat.


Wait a minute...

*stares hard*

My. God.

Dalya is really... Superman!


----------



## Sarah M (Apr 6, 2013)

Dalya said:


> I'm a little concerned people are going to find out the truth about me, though--that I am not a person, but a stack of squirrels in a trenchcoat.


There's a nut joke in there, but I am a lady with tender sensibilities and never would think such thing.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> My feelings are hurt that none of my words were stolen for this project.


Join the club!!! I guess you need to get a little more popular. Try getting your name out there, Hugh.  LOL


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

RM Prioleau said:


> It looks like the plagiarist is about to release another book (erotica). He's gone under another name: K.A. Andrews, and the name of the book is 'Cherry Popper" http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17306487-cherry-popper
> 
> He made a post today on the book's page (scroll down to the second post).


I wanted to follow up with my last post. 
If you go to the link again, you will see that her/his comment has been removed. I suspect s(he) was the one who removed it once everyone started posting there. I think that alone should confirm that K.A. is indeed the plagiarist.

This was what the comment said: 


> K.A. added it
> So the final release date is July 20th. Sorry! I got picked up by a publisher and they wanted to do edits and setup a tour. It's annoying but I think you'll really like the final result.


Unless the Goodreads Admins deleted it. Because Librarians can't delete comments on book pages, can they?


----------



## Maya Cross (May 28, 2012)

Hugh Howey said:


> My feelings are hurt that none of my words were stolen for this project.


What you could do to get revenge though, Hugh, is write about it. A story about someone who delves into virtual worlds and steals the choicest works. You could even put in an awesome subplot about words stolen within words! Give it a snazzy title like The Book Thief, or maybe The Plagiarist, and you'd definitely have a winner.


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

After looking through some of those flow charts, I'm convinced that Palahniuk could turn this and convince me that, somehow, we're all Jordin Williams. The entire Indie publishing movement has been an elaborate plot masterminded by one man. The authors... the bloggers... even the readers... all funded and led with a single purpose.

I'm Jordin Williams' sense of entitlement.


----------



## KristenDaRay (Aug 4, 2012)

The person who created a beta readers thread for Cherry Poppers, their account has been deleted.

Doesn't Prove anything but it sure does look suspicious. 

Btw this is my first time posting about this, but I am very very disheartened. I spent a year writing my first book and I am busting my butt off trying to finish up my second book before the end of next month and this person just takes off with other peoples HARD words, sweat, and fingers bleeding (A bit exaggerated BUT ITS NOT THE POINT) and made tons of money off of it? 

FREAKING FRUSTRATING! 

You know... if someone broke into my house and stole from me, I can call the police and they get throne in jail for robbery..... how is this not stealing enough to be punishable by jail? I don't get it?

Either way, I hope Amazon sucks up all his/her money and sends it back to the buyers.


----------



## Desmond X. Torres (Mar 16, 2013)

Having read some of the book blogger sites- particularly Dear Author, which I think broke this wide open, more than a few bloggers were angry, sure; but the ones that struck me were the ones who felt betrayed in that they personally corresponded with Jordin what it's name. 

Someone mentioned here that they believe many of the readers won't know nor care- they got their entertainment in, and that's that. Which is true. But it's the bloggers have done a LOT to help writers reach success by praising their books and advocating them. And they do it for free. For the love of it.


----------



## thesmallprint (May 25, 2012)

Might be best to back off this 'scamming mastermind' stuff. If the media picks this up and tracks down 'Jordin', how will you feel about her/his $100,000 deal for 'my story'?

Oh, hold on, would it be Jordin's story?



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Christa Wick (Nov 1, 2012)

While I'd never give them my money now - think if this industrious gang had opened a book promotion service instead.


----------



## laceysilks (Mar 11, 2013)

I've been following this thread, and while I rarely post here I can no longer keep away.

I purchased a copy the day he/she left a post on KB to support a fellow KBer (which I usually do). I contacted Amazon yesterday re: refund but I'm still waiting for a reply (perhaps it's because I gifted it to my mom's kindle which I'm currently using).

My stomach is twisted as to how something like this could be done. I wanted to help someone, and this is what happens. I think of this board as a "safe zone" for authors (and that hasn't changed) so whoever this was just stabbed us all. It will affect everyone and it's already affecting me. I'm in the midst of contacting bloggers regarding my release on July 22nd and a few of them clearly state on front page they no longer accept indie published works for reviews due to the recent plagiarism case. 

I feel duped but what can you do... ...brush yourself off and keep going. Every industry, job, career etc has cheaters, liars and scammers. Fraud happens everyday in $millions, not thousands. Hopefully the indie community can stick together (and I have all the faith they will) and move forward.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

laceysilks said:


> I've been following this thread, and while I rarely post here I can no longer keep away.
> 
> I purchased a copy the day he/she left a post on KB to support a fellow KBer (which I usually do). I contacted Amazon yesterday re: refund but I'm still waiting for a reply (perhaps it's because I gifted it to my mom's kindle which I'm currently using).


This is the right thing to do. BUT. . . . since you gifted it to your mom (I'm assuming she's got her own account separate from yours), you essentially only bought a gift certificate from Amazon and they won't refund that.

BUT your mom, on her account, 'bought' the book _with_ that gift certificate. So your mom should be able to contact them and get the money refunded. To identify the book accurately, you'll want to have mom look at her order history to get the order number for the title and reference that number when she contacts them. (Or when you do so on her behalf.  )

Likely, given the visibility of the situation just now, you will be able to do it all by email if you wish. There may even be a 'contact us' link right on the order page; there's certainly one on the Kindle Support page.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

This really is not a case of plagiarism-it's more than that. It's catfishing. Where someone is deliberately setting up fake personas with the intention to deceive. This has been happening in other business models (finance) and the dating world for a long time. This person does not to be prosecuted for their crime.

They've hurt the original author(s), and self publisher reputations (which yes, does have value [take screen shots of the blogger's pages that won't accept your book because of this case.]) 
When you take something (work and reputation) with the purpose of defrauding others financially-I'm pretty sure it's a crime, (though I'm not a lawyer or a cop.)


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> This really is not a case of plagiarism-it's more than that. It's catfishing. Where someone is deliberately setting up fake personas with the intention to deceive. This has been happening in other business models (finance) and the dating world for a long time. This person does not to be prosecuted for their crime.


Yes, but for what reason would they have to do that? How do they benefit from catfishing? If they deliberately plagiarized the book hoping/knowing people will take notice, then how do they benefit? Their 'catfishing' scheme has only helped boost the victims' book sales and credibility because of the amount of publicity their books are getting from all this chaos.

Or is this person just that bored out of their minds they wanted to do something intentionally stupid?


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

RM Prioleau said:


> Yes, but for what reason would they have to do that? How do they benefit from catfishing? If they deliberately plagiarized the book hoping/knowing people will take notice, then how do they benefit? Their 'catfishing' scheme has only helped boost the victims' book sales and credibility because of the amount of publicity their books are getting from all this chaos.
> 
> Or is this person just that bored out of their minds they wanted to do something intentionally stupid?


When I flip on the lights and discover a single cockroach, I worry less about how the foolish creature got there, and more about what's in my walls.

B.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

RM Prioleau said:


> Their 'catfishing' scheme has only helped boost the victims' book sales and credibility because of the amount of publicity their books are getting from all this chaos.


*casts a suspicious eye at Tammara Webber and Jamie McGuire*

I kid, but that would be a great way to promote your book. Create a fake name and plagiarize your own book, then anonymously turn yourself in.

Well, not 'great', but you know what I mean.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Catfish basically deep-down don't like themselves, and don't think they are good enough—which is why they hide behind personalities and pictures of who they would like to be. They are constructing a "fantasy" world, in the real world. The last thing they think about when building their fake personality and all the other fake friends of that person to back up the lie, is how elaborate it needs to get to keep it going. They don't think about getting "caught" because this fake persona is who they want to be...and they spend all their resources on becoming that person. Which of course, will only work for so long, because eventually they will get caught.

This person's want was to be a writer. To be respected as a writer and have readers. They built a fantasy world to support it, even though they didn't think they had the skills to be a writer. For all we know it's a thirteen-year-old boy with access to his parents' credit cards. Watch the movie Catfish or the MTV show "Catfish" and you'll see what great lengths people go to when they want to hide themselves and live their fantasy life.

I have lots of Youtube videos of me out so people can *see* me, I'm willing to Skype, or Google+, so everyone can know who I am. I can see how this would be very hard for erotica writers who don't want their picture out there.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

sarbonn said:


> I actually wrote a short story about twenty years ago called "Were-snails of the Abyss" and sent it out. The editor of one of the better known horror magazines wrote me back stating: "Please tell me you're not serious with this one."


----------



## Desmond X. Torres (Mar 16, 2013)

To LisaGraceBooks- As a former cop, the crimes I see are copyright violations and conspiracy to commit fraud, and fraud. The copyright violations would be a federal, not local rap. I was a patrolman- a detective or DA would be able to nail down the specifics, and probably tack on other charges. But, yeah, definitely criminal action- enough burden of proof for an arrest anyway. As to indictment, prosecution and conviction, that I don’t know. 

I want to comment on the bloggers’ responses here. I’m going to paint in broad strokes, but I think you’ll see what I mean.

The bloggers’ responses generally fall into two categories. One being that they are well and truly angry at being duped, and the other is that they have deleted all references to this author. Yes, some are no longer accepting indie works, I’m not sure where that falls in the above spectrum.

My point is that both are valid responses to being victimized. I met victims hundreds (literally) of times, either right at or within minutes of a crime being committed. Anger or avoidance are normal responses. 

Some of those bloggers are stung on a lot of levels. They’re victims of a con game. 

I can’t count how many times I met victims of crimes who blamed themselves. Or who even had family members blame them. As in ‘Why did you walk down that dark street alone?’ or some such stuff. What I always said in dealing with that was:

“You’re the victim here. You are absolutely entitled to go about your day, your life in good faith. The person that ripped you off is the bad guy. You’re NOT stupid, you’re NOT anything but someone who was violated. The bad guy did not have the right. Are there bad guys out there that we could be aware of? Sure. But let’s just realize who the jerk is here, and it’s NOT you.”

The bloggers dealt in good faith that’s now shaken pretty badly. Whatever way they decide to deal with being taken in by a professional con is fine and dandy with me. Yeah, it’s not the end of the world; but it sure stings. Especially if blogging about books is a big part of your life. I compare their experience with coming out of a supermarket and finding their car crunched in the parking lot. Or maybe broken into.

Finally... 'weresnails'? ... I'm seeing a hit there!


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2013)

Desmond X. Torres said:


> To LisaGraceBooks- As a former cop, the crimes I see are copyright violations and conspiracy to commit fraud, and fraud. The copyright violations would be a federal, not local rap. I was a patrolman- a detective or DA would be able to nail down the specifics, and probably tack on other charges. But, yeah, definitely criminal action- enough burden of proof for an arrest anyway. As to indictment, prosecution and conviction, that I don't know.


As a former cop, you should know that copyright is predominately a civil issue, not a criminal issue. The handful of criminal statutes surrounding copyright are so narrowly focused as to be pointless. No prosecutor is going to go after this person. She or he isn't going to be arrested by the feds. Fraud? The only crime here is plagiarism. Using a pen name is not a crime. Using multiple pen names is not a crime. Using multiple pen names and having them all friend each other and review each other is not a crime (though its a TOS violation on some sites). Using a stock art photo as an author photo is not a crime. Unethical? Yes. Slimy? Yes. Manipulative? Yes. Remotely risking federal charges? Hardly.

The bloggers were not "victimized." Some of them accepted money to promote this book. Many of them got affiliate sales by promoting this book. "Victims" are women who are sexually assaulted, or people who have their life savings stolen, or children that get abused, or someone who gets carjacked, or mugged. Those are victims. The bloggers are not victims. That's not placing blame. It's merely a statement of fact. As someone else mentioned upthread: other forms of media print retractions all the time based on new information. It's called journalistic integrity. If as a blogger, I share information that turns out to be fals, I should retract the false information and issue a correction. It's not about blame. It's about having a responsibility as a member of the media (and bloggers are part of the media whether they like it or not.) if you realize you issued erroneous information you should correct it. Not pretend it didn't happen.


----------



## 31842 (Jan 11, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> As a former cop, you should know that copyright is predominately a civil issue, not a criminal issue. The handful of criminal statutes surrounding copyright are so narrowly focused as to be pointless. No prosecutor is going to go after this person. She or he isn't going to be arrested by the feds. Fraud? The only crime here is plagiarism. Using a pen name is not a crime. Using multiple pen names is not a crime. Using multiple pen names and having them all friend each other and review each other is not a crime (though its a TOS violation on some sites). Using a stock art photo as an author photo is not a crime. Unethical? Yes. Slimy? Yes. Manipulative? Yes. Remotely risking federal charges? Hardly.


http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506

I believe that where this gets to be a bigger deal is that this falls under section 506 as a criminal infringement because she/he had sales which equaled greater than $1000. Also, "Easy" (the book ripped off) was published by Penguin. I would be surprised if the lawyers of a large publishing company like that are going to go, "Oh well..." We'll see where the cards fall.


----------



## Soothesayer (Oct 19, 2012)

She (he?) should have simply cherry picked the words she liked and remixed them, going into different directions than cutting ENTIRE sentences and pasting verbatim. Big no-no. There is stealing words, and stealing the book. Big difference. Idea vs. Design.


----------



## fallswriter (Sep 11, 2012)

Soothesayer said:


> She (he?) should have simply cherry picked the words she liked and remixed them, going into different directions than cutting ENTIRE sentences and pasting verbatim. Big no-no. There is stealing words, and stealing the book. Big difference. Idea vs. Design.


Even if the person was clever enough to hide the plagiarism, it's all still plagiarism. Even taking the idea of the sentence - if it's close enough, it's plagiarism. Harder to find, but plagiarism. If you are implying that in order to get away with it, they needed to do a better job of hiding the plagiarism, that's what's scarier about the situation. Because that's the big question - has someone hidden it better and gotten away with it?


----------



## Katherine Roberts (Apr 4, 2013)

This is a long thread! I've only read through half the posts, so it's possible someone has already said this but (at the risk of getting my head bitten off by the more business-minded authors on these boards... ) I think it highlights the difference between people who want to write and reach readers, and people who simply want to make money at any cost. To me, the main joy of writing a book is the creation part, so I find it difficult to understand why someone would want to steal another author's words or ideas.

As for pressure to produce, I suppose there can be pressure to deliver the next book if you're a big name, but if anything my experience of publishing is that I write more words (or at least come up with more sample chapters and concepts) than publishers buy... that's why I consider myself a slower writer than many here, because I do a lot of messing around up blind alleys before hitting on something marketable. Again, that's all part of my own creative process and I wouldn't have it any other way.

I feel sorry for the original author - though I'd probably be flattered if the same thing happened to one of my books!


----------



## sbaum4853 (May 3, 2010)

swolf said:


> *casts a suspicious eye at Tammara Webber and Jamie McGuire*
> 
> I kid, but that would be a great way to promote your book. Create a fake name and plagiarize your own book, then anonymously turn yourself in.
> 
> Well, not 'great', but you know what I mean.


Ha! It's funny to see a bunch of novelists discuss this. Y'all can't help but come up with great story ideas.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2013)

KateDanley said:


> http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506
> 
> I believe that where this gets to be a bigger deal is that this falls under section 506 as a criminal infringement because she/he had sales which equaled greater than $1000. Also, "Easy" (the book ripped off) was published by Penguin. I would be surprised if the lawyers of a large publishing company like that are going to go, "Oh well..." We'll see where the cards fall.


The problem is, generally speaking, an act of plagiarism is not the same thing as outright piracy or infringement. This isn't the same thing as a bit torrent distributing books for free or taking another person's book and uploading it to Amazon. It will be hard to prove this book COST the original author sales. Proving damages would be an uphill battle with this. Did people by this book instead of _Easy_? Probably not. If anything, people bought _Easy_ and then went looking for similar stuff.


----------



## jabeard (Apr 22, 2011)

Have there even been any recent criminal charges for plagiarism or fraud related to publishing of individual books recently? I mean there have been many high-profile plagiarism cases in recent years that entered the national media discussion and none those people ended up with any sort of criminal prosecution.

Note the _Opal Metha Got Kissed Scandal,_ which may have even involved ghost writers or whatever, didn't exactly end with Kaavya Viswanathan charged with anything or even at the end of a significant civil complaint to the best of my knowledge.

And Viswanathan was plagiarizing everybody from Meg Cabot to Salman Rushdie, people published by large publishers with hungry lawyers.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The problem is, generally speaking, an act of plagiarism is not the same thing as outright piracy or infringement. This isn't the same thing as a bit torrent distributing books for free or taking another person's book and uploading it to Amazon. It will be hard to prove this book COST the original author sales. Proving damages would be an uphill battle with this. Did people by this book instead of _Easy_? Probably not. If anything, people bought _Easy_ and then went looking for similar stuff.


If the copyright is registered they can get punitive damages awarded.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I'm amazed that a person can take big chunks of other works and put them together to make sense. And if you're talented enough to do that, why aren't you talented enough just to write your own story. Wouldn't it have taken less time?


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The problem is, generally speaking, an act of plagiarism is not the same thing as outright piracy or infringement. This isn't the same thing as a bit torrent distributing books for free or taking another person's book and uploading it to Amazon. It will be hard to prove this book COST the original author sales. Proving damages would be an uphill battle with this. Did people by this book instead of _Easy_? Probably not. If anything, people bought _Easy_ and then went looking for similar stuff.


Uh. This is an act of outright copyright infringement. They directly copied passages of the book, and there's no fair use argument that can be made for that copying.

And you're just wrong about copyright damages. You don't have to prove that the book cost the author sales for copyright damages, even if you aren't making a claim for statutory damages.

Section 17 USC 504 provides:


> (b) Actual Damages and Profits.- The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer's profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of the infringer's gross revenue, and the infringer is required to prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work.


So the authors could claim as damages the gross revenue received, and yes, that would include ALL of it. There are cases where one musician has been found to infringe on another artist's rights for a short space in a song, and has been able to recapture ALL of the income.

In terms of criminal copyright infringement, you don't need to prove $1000 in damages (what you usually need to prove for uploaders in some filesharing cases under 506(1)(1)(B) of the copyright act) because the act is criminal under 17 USC 506 (a)(1)(A) simply because it was committed for commercial purposes:



> (1) In general.- Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed-
> (A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;


This is CLEARLY a criminal act. It might never be prosecuted, but it's a criminal act.

Setting aside the question of statutory damages (which are significant), this is a case where if I found someone had copied that much of one of my books, that they'd hit #39 on Amazon or however high this book went, I would already have a lawyer, and we'd already have subpoenaed Amazon/B&N/everyone involved for as much information as we could get them to divulge, including information about what other accounts/books were posted from that IP address/KDP account.

I seriously hope that is happening behind the scenes right now.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Victorine said:


> I'm amazed that a person can take big chunks of other works and put them together to make sense. And if you're talented enough to do that, why aren't you talented enough just to write your own story. Wouldn't it have taken less time?


It takes me six months to write a novel. I guarantee that in thirty days a determined individual could:

1) Nab a torrent with the top 100 novels in a particular genre
2) Divide and label each scene by type: [action sequence - car chase], [love scene - girl on werewolf], [action sequence - gondola fight], [resolution - fleeting kiss]
3) Copy one of the outlines provided in one of the many formulaic guides available
4) Select scenes that fit that outline
4) Alter names and minor details
5) Flip around a few words using a thesaurus
6) Add a few descriptions borrowing from Wikipedia
7) Repeat x5
8 ) Illegally acquire 5 tax ID numbers
9) Come up with 5 pen names
10) Pay reviewers
11) Release x5

It ain't legal. It ain't right. But just like Medicare fraud, I'm sure it is quite profitable.

B.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2013)

Courtney Milan said:


> Uh. This is an act of outright copyright infringement. They directly copied passages of the book, and there's no fair use argument that can be made for that copying.


I wasn't talking about civil law. I was specifically referring to the criminal (i.e. getting arrested and going to jail) side of things.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Legal Dictionary definition of fraud:
http://dictionary.law.com/default.aspx?selected=785


> fraud
> 
> n. the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. A party who has lost something due to fraud is entitled to file a lawsuit for damages against the party acting fraudulently, and the damages may include punitive damages as a punishment or public example due to the malicious nature of the fraud. Quite often there are several persons involved in a scheme to commit fraud and each and all may be liable for the total damages. Inherent in fraud is an unjust advantage over another which injures that person or entity. It includes failing to point out a known mistake in a contract or other writing (such as a deed), or not revealing a fact which he/she has a duty to communicate, such as a survey which shows there are only 10 acres of land being purchased and not 20 as originally understood. Constructive fraud can be proved by a showing of breach of legal duty (like using the trust funds held for another in an investment in one's own business) without direct proof of fraud or fraudulent intent. Extrinsic fraud occurs when deceit is employed to keep someone from exercising a right, such as a fair trial, by hiding evidence or misleading the opposing party in a lawsuit. Since fraud is intended to employ dishonesty to deprive another of money, property or a right, it can also be a crime for which the fraudulent person(s) can be charged, tried and convicted. Borderline overreaching or taking advantage of another's naiveté involving smaller amounts is often overlooked by law enforcement, which suggests the victim seek a "civil remedy" (i.e., sue). However, increasingly fraud, which has victimized a large segment of the public (even in individually small amounts), has become the target of consumer fraud divisions in the offices of district attorneys and attorneys general.
> 
> See also: constructive fraud exemplary damages extrinsic fraud fraud in the inducement fraudulent conveyance intrinsic fraud


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I wasn't talking about civil law. I was specifically referring to the criminal (i.e. getting arrested and going to jail) side of things.


Yes, and I was saying that you were wrong and it is clearly a crime. Which is why I quoted the CRIMINAL statute saying that it is a CRIME to infringe for commercial gain, period, no other proof required.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Courtney Milan said:


> Yes, and I was saying that you were wrong and it is clearly a crime. Which is why I quoted the CRIMINAL statute saying that it is a CRIME to infringe for commercial gain, period, no other proof required.


This. Eventually some D. A. is going to go after people who do this to stop others from considering it. Frankly, this would be a good case to consider because bloggers, authors, and readers were affected. The first two groups as interested parties, would naturally help spread the word that when you're caught, you will pay.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

_Plagiarism is not a crime per se but in academia and industry it is a serious ethical offense,[7][8] and cases of plagiarism can constitute copyright infringement._

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

Bethany B. said:


> _Plagiarism is not a crime per se but in academia and industry it is a serious ethical offense,[7][8] and cases of plagiarism can constitute copyright infringement._
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism


What I am trying to say is that this is also clearly a case of criminal copyright infringement. I think it's really important to make that clear in case someone is watching this and thinks it's a good idea.

It's CLEARLY a case of criminal copyright infringement. It might not be prosecuted--but I have to say, if I found someone copying my work (even a portion of it) and selling it commercially and it appeared that it was part of a larger commercial scheme with multiple pen names, I would definitely be calling my friend at the DOJ.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Courtney Milan said:


> What I am trying to say is that this is also clearly a case of criminal copyright infringement. I think it's really important to make that clear in case someone is watching this and thinks it's a good idea.
> 
> It's CLEARLY a case of criminal copyright infringement. It might not be prosecuted--but I have to say, if I found someone copying my work (even a portion of it) and selling it commercially and it appeared that it was part of a larger commercial scheme with multiple pen names, I would definitely be calling my friend at the DOJ.


I guess I just don't see much purpose in pursuit in court. It's just going to cost you money and, unlike with large companies, you aren't likely to get much out of it. And I've just being going through court cases, chances for jail time are at just about zero. As a matter of fact, I haven't found one.

Not to say that it's right but this isn't the first time someone has done this. Everyone is acting like publishing didn't start until a few years ago. In this industry, someone violates the moral code and we drum them out. That's how this goes.


----------



## Desmond X. Torres (Mar 16, 2013)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> This. Eventually some D. A. is going to go after people who do this to stop others from considering it. Frankly, this would be a good case to consider because bloggers, authors, and readers were affected. The first two groups as interested parties, would naturally help spread the word that when you're caught, you will pay.


IMHO It would have to get seriously out of hand for a DA to want to pursue such a case. And if she did, her boss would in all likelihood can it. Clogged court systems and all would come into play.

And Julie, I respect the heck out of you, but our definition of victims don't line up. The bloggers I mentioned are as much victims as the subjects of 'catfishing' Lisa described earlier in the thread. Did they lose anything of material value? No, not at all. But judging from my correspondence with several bloggers, they did experience the emotions of embarrassment and a sense of betrayal. A similar experience someone who falls victim to a street scam. So yeah, there's an element of victim response there.

There seems to be a bunch of people here with some degree of legal background. I said enough evidence for an arrest only, and yes, I was leaning towards the commercial enrichment aspect put up by Courtney. I'm not experienced with USC, my experience was with the NYS Penal Code insofar as how we took down fencing operations. Even so, yeah, it is a criminal act. YMMV with each state's current statutes.

B. Justin Shire's scenario works pretty good. I'd just change steps 1-7 with:
- buy a 30 year old romance novel published in the UK, or even a 40 year old one. 
- type it out 
- publish on Amazon


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

Bethany B. said:


> I guess I just don't see much purpose in pursuit in court. It's just going to cost you money and, unlike with large companies, you aren't likely to get much out of it. And I've just being going through court cases, chances for jail time are at just about zero. As a matter of fact, I haven't found one.
> 
> Not to say that it's right but this isn't the first time someone had done this. Everyone is acting like publishing didn't start until a few years ago. In this industry, someone violates the moral code and we drum them out. That's how this goes.


We don't even know who this is. How could we possibly drum them out?

This is someone who had the know-how and the wherewithal to, as a new author, get their book jumped into the top 100 on Amazon within a few days of release. This is not someone who has nothing. There's a (relatively) deep pocket behind this, someone who has been around the block on this and has money to toss into buying reviews and shills.

I'm confident that I'd be able to at least get attorneys' fees from the person--which I would be eligible for as the prevailing party in the suit--and for me, it's the principle of the thing.

I don't give a damn about piracy, but I have absolutely no hesitation about bringing people who are commercially profiting from my work down, as hard as I can. And even if it's not jail time, if they can get a mark that shows up on their permanent record, one that shows up anytime someone runs a background check... Well, that will keep them out of sensitive jobs where they could do more harm later.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

I don't find the blogger's actions in the aftermath of this scandal surprising or suspicious. Anyone who accepted money for promoting this book should retract their endorsement. But those who were hobby bloggers have no obligation to do that. It'd be helpful if they did but in their situation my knee-jerk response would probably be the same as theirs - immediately deleting posts to prevent the book getting any more sales or publicity from them. Those bloggers were duped, just like everyone else who bought the book. A natural response is anger, embarrassment, and quick reaction without thought, which is what I think we're seeing in these deletions. 

Over the coming week some may speak out if given time but I'm not surprised many are choosing instead to disassociate themselves. That's what people do when they're embarrassed or afraid of being hassled or blamed. Not everyone is tough enough to tackle subjects like plagiarism. Bloggers like Jane at Dear Author are remarkable precisely because they're not the norm. But Jane is also a lawyer who knows what she can and can't be held legally liable for and that may be part of what's keeping these others quiet. If I recall correctly, Dear Author has received threats of being sued in the past for some of the publishing scandals they've brought to light. How might a hobby blogger with no legal experience react to that concern?


----------



## jabeard (Apr 22, 2011)

Desmond X. Torres said:


> I
> B. Justin Shire's scenario works pretty good. I'd just change steps 1-7 with:
> - buy a 30 year old romance novel published in the UK, or even a 40 year old one.
> - type it out
> - publish on Amazon


In practical reading terms, I'd argue that's actually a bad scheme for other reasons.

The tastes and style have changed as such that, in general, the average romance reader isn't going to like a romance written in 1973 or 1983, especially if we're talking anything remotely category romance, which is even more tightly bound to the prevailing tastes of the day.

EDIT: And the few examples of older books that still have power to draw readers (e.g., Heyer), the parties would get flagged pretty quickly.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2013)

Courtney Milan said:


> I would definitely be calling my friend at the DOJ.


Perhaps you should call your friend anyway. A crime is a crime. Justice shouldn't depend on who we are friends with, after all.

I would personally LOVE to see someone go to jail for this. But nobody ever has that I know of. In a time where a book like _50 Shades of Gray_ can become a major movie and bestseller when everyone knows it is a fan fiction based off of _Twilight_, maybe someone going to jail would be the perfect way to slam the breaks on this nonsense.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Courtney Milan said:


> We don't even know who this is. How could we possibly drum them out?
> 
> This is someone who had the know-how and the wherewithal to, as a new author, get their book jumped into the top 100 on Amazon within a few days of release. This is not someone who has nothing. There's a (relatively) deep pocket behind this, someone who has been around the block on this and has money to toss into buying reviews and shills.
> 
> ...


This and everything Courtney has said x 10!


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Dara England said:


> I don't find the blogger's actions in the aftermath of this scandal surprising or suspicious. Anyone who accepted money for promoting this book should retract their endorsement. But those who were hobby bloggers have no obligation to do that. It'd be helpful if they did but in their situation my knee-jerk response would probably be the same as theirs - immediately deleting posts to prevent the book getting any more sales or publicity from them. Those bloggers were duped, just like everyone else who bought the book. A natural response is anger, embarrassment, and quick reaction without thought, which is what I think we're seeing in these deletions.
> 
> Over the coming week some may speak out if given time but I'm not surprised many are choosing instead to disassociate themselves. That's what people do when they're embarrassed or afraid of being hassled or blamed. Not everyone is tough enough to tackle subjects like plagiarism. Bloggers like Jane at Dear Author are remarkable precisely because they're not the norm. But Jane is also a lawyer who knows what she can and can't be held legally liable for and that may be part of what's keeping these others quiet. If I recall correctly, Dear Author has received threats of being sued in the past for some of the publishing scandals they've brought to light. How might a hobby blogger with no legal experience react to that concern?


I don't know. If they respect their readers at all, they owe them the truth about what happened. They don't have to write treatise on plagiarism or go into great detail, but sweeping it under the rug is a disservice to their readers, imo.


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Perhaps you should call your friend anyway. A crime is a crime. Justice shouldn't depend on who we are friends with, after all.
> 
> I would personally LOVE to see someone go to jail for this. But nobody ever has that I know of. In a time where a book like _50 Shades of Gray_ can become a major movie and bestseller when everyone knows it is a fan fiction based off of _Twilight_, maybe someone going to jail would be the perfect way to slam the breaks on this nonsense.


I don't have enough to go on to make that call.

I don't think I would have called her until I had started the civil side of getting a subpoena/filing a suit/getting discovery--they're not going to start investigating until they know they have a person and a serious case. But if I uncovered enough through subpoena that I found out it was someone doing this for profit, multiple times, using multiple pseudonyms. At that point, I'm handing her a criminal investigation with a subject, multiple accounts of wrongdoing, and lots of profit.

But until I have a name in hand and proof that the problem went beyond one act, I don't think I could get anything from her besides, "Ick, gross."


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Courtney Milan said:


> We don't even know who this is. How could we possibly drum them out?
> 
> This is someone who had the know-how and the wherewithal to, as a new author, get their book jumped into the top 100 on Amazon within a few days of release. This is not someone who has nothing. There's a (relatively) deep pocket behind this, someone who has been around the block on this and has money to toss into buying reviews and shills.
> 
> ...


I get the whole vengeance things right. I'm the person who tells everyone about how much they hate Kia because of poor business practices.

See my thought on all this is that the courts aren't going to do justice to this. They can't and everything gets lost in legal mumbo-jumbo. It would be much better to rally the public on this (much like is currently being done). A black mark on their record isn't going to do near as much as making sure no one ever buys from them again.

And this isn't directed at you Courtney but can I just say I hate the use of the term catfishing in this? We're talking about pen names here and marketing strategy. I really don't care if they have 15 pen names and write as both a man and woman. Hell, there are a number of people here on KB who do all of the above. I just think we need to stick to the facts and issues here. Hunting out someone who _could_ be linked seems like a poor idea and we all know that these sorts of witch hunts can sometimes hurt nice people. Lendlink being a prime example.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I would personally LOVE to see someone go to jail for this. But nobody ever has that I know of. In a time where a book like _50 Shades of Gray_ can become a major movie and bestseller when everyone knows it is a fan fiction based off of _Twilight_, maybe someone going to jail would be the perfect way to slam the breaks on this nonsense.


Part of the problem with this is that there are a number of books that have used another as inspiration. I'd go so far as to say there isn't a book out there that wasn't inspired by another. As long as they change enough about the story, then it's a whole new book as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2013)

Bethany B. said:


> Part of the problem with this is that there are a number of books that have used another as inspiration. I'd go so far as to say there isn't a book out there that wasn't inspired by another. As long as they change enough about the story, then it's a whole new book as far as I'm concerned.


But this is part of the problem. We're reaching a point where, if clear rules aren't enforced, that people don't know the diffrence between inspiration and outright plagiarism/copyright infringement.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Copyright infringement IS a crime. Other ideas, in case it is not a sticky enough crime:

Identity theft - are they using fake tax IDs in order to open multiple un-connected Amazon accounts?

Tax evasion - are they paying taxes on all those fake tax IDs?

Using the US mail to defraud the public - You never know. This one comes up in 1970s cop shows a lot.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> But this is part of the problem. We're reaching a point where, if clear rules aren't enforced, that people don't know the diffrence between inspiration and outright plagiarism/copyright infringement.


I just don't buy that they didn't know that copying someone else's work was illegal. This is primary school stuff that even my severely autistic daughter gets. I just don't know that going to court is going to make much a difference. Truth is, something like this isn't seen that often and when it is the author is beaten with public outcry. I'm not against anyone here, the author is clearly bad, but there is only so much we should spend on this.


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

Bethany B. said:


> See my thought on all this is that the courts aren't going to do justice to this. They can't and everything gets lost in legal mumbo-jumbo. It would be much better to rally the public on this (much like is currently being done). A black mark on their record isn't going to do near as much as making sure no one ever buys from them again.


How can we do that? We don't even know who this person really is. All we know is that it's clear they were operating under at least one level of pseudonym. What's to stop them from starting to write as someone completely different?

I mean, not to be paranoid or anything, but it wouldn't shock me if the person behind this is a regular on Kboards under some other pseudonym. They just knew too much about how the business operated and how to jump start a book out of the gate.

I bet the person who did this dismantled their few pseudonyms that got caught up in this, but that they've got a handful more that are still in place and still making money.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Fun word origin story from the writings of Marcus Valerius Martialis (40 AD - 102 AD)

+​
XXIX. TO FIDENTINUS.

Report says that you, Fidentinus, recite my compositions in public as if they were your own. If you allow them to be called mine, I will send you my verses gratis; if you wish them to be called yours, pray buy them, that they may be mine no longer.

XXXVIII. TO FIDENTINUS.

The book which you are reading aloud is mine, Fidentinus-but, while you read it so badly, it begins to be yours.

LIII. TO FIDENTINUS.

One page only in my books belongs to you, Fidentinus, but it bears the sure stamp of its master, and accuses your verses of glaring theft. Just so does a Gallic frock coming in contact with purple city cloaks stain them with grease and filth; just so do Arretine pots disgrace vases of crystal; so is a buck crow, straying perchance on the banks of the Cayster, laughed to scorn amid the swans of Leda; and so, when the sacred grove resounds with the music of the tuneful nightingale, the miscreant magpie disturbs her Attic plaints. My books need no one to accuse or judge you: the page which is yours stands up against you and says, "You are a thief."

LXXII. TO FIDENTINUS, A "KIDNAPPER."

Do you imagine, Fidentinus, that you are a poet by the aid of my verses, and do you wish to be thought so? Just so does Aegle think she has teeth from having purchased bone or ivory. Just so does Lycoris, who is blacker than the falling mulberry, seem fair in her own eyes, because she is painted. You too, in the same way that you are a poet, will have flowing locks when you are grown bald.

+​
Source: Martial, Epigrams. Book 1. Bohn's Classical Library (1897)

Basically, Martial got so exasperated with Fidentinus' word theft that he called him as a "kidnapper of words." In Latin, a kidnapper is called a _plagiarius_, which appeared in Samuel Johnson's dictionary. My favorite definition comes from Webster's 1828, though: "PLA''GIARIST, n. One that purloins the writings of another and puts them off as his own"

B.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Courtney Milan said:


> I bet the person who did this dismantled their few pseudonyms that got caught up in this, but that they've got a handful more that are still in place and still making money.


Wouldn't those other pseudonyms (have to) operate from the same IP and wouldn't Amazon be able to ban those as well?


----------



## fallswriter (Sep 11, 2012)

Courtney Milan said:


> I bet the person who did this dismantled their few pseudonyms that got caught up in this, but that they've got a handful more that are still in place and still making money.


^This. This is the more worrying factor. Chances are this person, who clearly posted on here to drum up support, is well aware of how sites like this can be helpful. In this discussion, while they may be learning of our ire and desire to see justice done, they may be learning just what threats they are up against.

This was not a drive by instance. Whoever did this knew exactly what they were doing. And my guess is that they are learning what works and what doesn't work. Chances are, they have already or will do this again and do it stealthier. I like seeing how business-savvy many people who post here are, and I'm glad that we can discuss things. But at this point, it's out of our hands and in the hands of those who are directly involved.

I'm inspired by those who are here, and hope we continue to be the best writers and publishers we can be so that the products we put out attract readers that will love us so much that they'll catch any other imposters who try to plagiarize our own stuff.


----------



## jabeard (Apr 22, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> Wouldn't those other pseudonyms (have to) operate from the same IP and wouldn't Amazon be able to ban those as well?


Well, there are ways to get around that, but this scheme is getting increasingly elaborate, especially for something that, in functional terms, appears to not necessarily have worked. That is, was this book even out for two months for royalty payouts? I can't tell because I can't even find it on GR anymore.

If not, then a lot of effort (and given what some have suggested) money was expended on something that's been a failure because it's not like Amazon's going to turn that money over to them vs. just refunding it.

That's kind of the object lesson more than anything: complicated literary schemes get caught quicker these days than they did back in the say the Opal Metha case.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> Wouldn't those other pseudonyms (have to) operate from the same IP and wouldn't Amazon be able to ban those as well?


Sadly, here in the USA, spoofing IPs has become an important part of protecting our Fourth Amendment rights.

B.

ETA:



jabeard said:


> Well, there are ways to get around that, but this scheme is getting increasingly elaborate, especially for something that, in functional terms, appears to not necessarily have worked. That is, was this book even out for two months for royalty payouts? I can't tell because I can't even find it on GR anymore.
> 
> If not, then a lot of effort (and given what some have suggested) money was expended on something that's been a failure because it's not like Amazon's going to turn that money over to them vs. just refunding it.
> 
> That's kind of the object lesson more than anything: complicated literary schemes get caught quicker these days than they did back in the say the Opal Metha case.


This assumes that this example is a type specimen, rather than the one that got a bit too close to the fire. The technical means of detecting plagiarism, etc, have improved, but so have their methods of evasion. One could argue that the "problem" with this endevour was that the marketing proved _too_ successful.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Courtney Milan said:


> I don't give a d*mn about piracy, but I have absolutely no hesitation about bringing people who are commercially profiting from my work down, as hard as I can. And even if it's not jail time, if they can get a mark that shows up on their permanent record, one that shows up anytime someone runs a background check... Well, that will keep them out of sensitive jobs where they could do more harm later.


 

*scuttles his plans to publish 'Unblocked' by Mourtney Cilan*


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> But this is part of the problem. We're reaching a point where, if clear rules aren't enforced, that people don't know the diffrence between inspiration and outright plagiarism/copyright infringement.


THIS. Earlier you mentioned 50 Shades. People hear about selling fanfiction, about "filing the serial numbers off" and making a huge profit. To me that's a slippery slope. For people unfamiliar with the world of fanfic and the world of professional writing, who come into the self-pub thing having heard that you can make a buck and it doesn't even have to be entirely *your* work/ideas, I can see how they'd think either a) they won't be caught, or b) this is acceptable. We as writers are in a bubble. Lots of people don't understand what EL James did - that she wrote an AU story to begin with, for example. And they don't realize that she is often reviled for capitalizing on SMeyer's fan base.

It could still be that this person stole a Twilight fanfic without realizing it plagiarized Easy and BD, in which case there are two levels of line-crossing that need to be addressed in a decisive and public way. There need to be consequences for this person(s).

The present situation is very elaborate, and with the alleged sock puppets I don't think this is an accidental kind of thing at all. It's either one morally bankrupt person with too much time on their hands, or it's a scheme. I would be concerned with additional victims - are there other books out there we don't know about? Those writers deserve to know. That would be the first step in getting some kind of justice.

I agree with Dalya that it stings to see that this person manipulated his/her way up the charts. We tell ourselves all the time that you can't manufacture success, but this person did exactly that. As comfort, I would like to remind the board of *confirmation bias* (!!!) and point out that there are probably people who do the same abhorrent things and are still languishing in the 1-million rank range.


----------



## jabeard (Apr 22, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Sadly, here in the USA, spoofing IPs has become an important part of protecting our Fourth Amendment rights.
> 
> B.
> 
> ...


Well, there's really no strong basis for assuming one way or another, really.

I don't know how important technology even necessarily is. Note, this person was caught because of an alert reader (as has really been the case with say the Opal case I mentioned earlier). For them to make any serious money (and justify an outlay of time and resources associated with pushing to all the blogs), they need a certain amount of sales to justify it. That further raises the risk of them getting caught. In some cases last year, for instance, some books/material being plagiarized weren't blazing up the charts, and they still got caught.

Staying under the radar too much means not enough money to justify the effort. If they try to be the Plagiarized Super Library of Organized Cybercrime or something and just spew out a lot of stuff, it further raises the risk of them getting caught.

Though if some of the more convoluted schemes suggested on this thread are correct or even partially correct, there's no reason to squint at copyright law so hard. Stealing tax payer IDs to open bank accounts under false pretenses, for example, is already subject to considerably worse criminal penalty (actively prosecuted mind you) than any variations on possible criminal charges for plagiarism.

Of course, again, we don't know that happened. Maybe it was DPRK cybersquads trying to stick it to the Running Dog West while simultaneously boosting the Kim family cognac budget.  <--- there's a novel in there. One of you thriller people write that. Maybe, I don't know, CIA is allowing it because it's some sort of sting. Some poor author gets caught in the middle. Gun battles ensue. Jeremy Renner shows up in the movie version.

It'll be interesting to see what comes out when all the tree shaking is said and done.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Anyone think this is an isolated instance?


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Anyone think this is an isolated instance?


Not necessarily isolated but rare that a book will make it as far as this did. Seems like every 2-3 years we hear about a big one like this. But considering how many books are published in that time, it's pretty good numbers.


----------



## Desmond X. Torres (Mar 16, 2013)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Anyone think this is an isolated instance?


I for one think it's more common than we think.

The needle in the haystack. You pick up a haystack (the hundreds of thousand of romance/NA books published) and a needle (a plagiarized work backed up by a system of promotion) pops out, well, the odds are more likely that the haystacks filled with needles than you are at being lucky.

I think the greedy one got caught and that there's a number of other books selling, a bunch of copies a day, enough to stay under the radar, but enough to make the enterprise worthwhile. I'd look at the other genres for other books that come out of nowhere with a solid base of online fans right out of the gate.

Now correct me if I'm wrong or you disagree with me (no, really, feel free!  ) but my opinion regarding this kind of scenario would require some computer know how and time to set up the first time. After that, wouldn't it be somewhat automated?


----------



## Jill James (May 8, 2011)

I worry about writers using a pseudonym for legitimate reasons. Will they be forced to disclose their real names to prove they are real, which kind of defeats the purpose of a pen name?


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Jill James said:


> I worry about writers using a pseudonym for legitimate reasons. Will they be forced to disclose their real names to prove they are real, which kind of defeats the purpose of a pen name?


Depends on who they have to disclose them to. The distributors already know who we are, since they have to cut us checks and report our earnings to the IRS.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Jill James said:


> I worry about writers using a pseudonym for legitimate reasons. Will they be forced to disclose their real names to prove they are real, which kind of defeats the purpose of a pen name?


Why would they be "forced" to disclose their real names? And how would that prevent further incidents of plagiarism?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Wonder who would do the forcing?


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

This is already having a small backlash against authors using pseudonyms (at least in one case that I saw come up yesterday). 

I'm still of the mind that, in 2 weeks, this will be a, mostly, nonissue. I'm not terribly worried about the bloggers, because they're still held to the demands of the readers. And I think, by and large, a microscopic percentage of readers are even aware of this issue, and an even smaller subset actually have strong feelings about it either way.

My only hope is that the witch hunters actually have proof that a pseudonym floats on water before they start crying foul.


----------



## Jill James (May 8, 2011)

I'm not saying we would be "forced" but that we will be looked upon as suspect, like "why do you need a fake name if you have nothing to hide?" kind of thing.


----------



## kCopeseeley (Mar 15, 2011)

Bethany B. said:


> can I just say I hate the use of the term catfishing in this? We're talking about pen names here and marketing strategy. I really don't care if they have 15 pen names and write as both a man and woman. Hell, there are a number of people here on KB who do all of the above. I just think we need to stick to the facts and issues here. Hunting out someone who _could_ be linked seems like a poor idea and we all know that these sorts of witch hunts can sometimes hurt nice people. Lendlink being a prime example.


I can see your point about not calling it catfishing, since that is usually used to fool someone into having an online relationship with you, but this isn't a case of merely writing under a pen name, either.

This person went to the time and effort of hunting down photos of other people (without their permission, of course) to create a specific persona and setting up a ring of sock puppet author accounts. They created a goodreads group, for goodness sakes! It may not be catfishing, but it is clearly something just as nefarious. We should coin a new term for it...


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

catfish + sock puppetry + plagiarism = 

catsockism

catpupism

sockfishism


----------



## 25803 (Oct 24, 2010)

Courtney Milan said:


> I bet the person who did this dismantled their few pseudonyms that got caught up in this, but that they've got a handful more that are still in place and still making money.


I suspect you're right, Courtney. And that thought really annoys me.

But I hope the discovery process would ask the distributors (Amazon, B&N, etc) to check whether there are other accounts set up using the same payment credentials. I suspect that whoever set up this scheme was knowledgeable about social media, but perhaps not quite so knowledgeable when it comes to covering his/her financial tracks (thinking about how the paypal payments for the various author names for advertising on the blog sites apparently came from one account). At least, this is my hope -- that the financial house of cards will also come tumbling down on this person.

Even though I wasn't affected by this in a literal sense, in a very real emotional sense, I'm feeling victimized.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

KathyCarmichael said:


> I suspect you're right, Courtney. And that thought really annoys me.
> 
> But I hope the discovery process would ask the distributors (Amazon, B&N, etc) to check whether there are other accounts set up using the same payment credentials. I suspect that whoever set up this scheme was knowledgeable about social media, but perhaps not quite so knowledgeable when it comes to covering his/her financial tracks (thinking about how the paypal payments for the various author names for advertising on the blog sites apparently came from one account). At least, this is my hope -- that the financial house of cards will also come tumbling down on this person.
> 
> Even though I wasn't affected by this in a literal sense, in a very real emotional sense, I'm feeling victimized.


Why would/should the violations of this book extend to any/all other books and/or pen names of the author? Do we automatically assume that everything else this publisher has published is plagiarized also? If so, how does the publisher _prove_ that it is not. How do you prove that your books aren't plagiarized?

Should it be taken a step further? Harvey can locate "Jordin Williams" IP address. Kboards has been known to block offending users at th ip level. Why don't we get out the torches and call for Harvey to block Jordin Williams, or at the very least expose any other pen names/handles used for that IP address on kboards.

I think that whoever is behind Jordin Williams is pretty shady and participates in some shady practices (sock puppetry etc) and at least in one case some illegal practices but to suggest that all of the booksellers do some sort of investigation into every aspect of this person's digital business is taking the crucifixion a bit far.


----------



## KellyHarper (Jul 29, 2012)

Tales of the Catsocks

"_True stories from the seedy underbelly of Literature's past, present, and future._ Hold onto your socks as we dive into the mysterious events swirling around in the world of elite fiction writing. If you think the plot's they weave have you questioning what is real and what is fake, wait until you see what we have in store for you..."



Spoiler



Pun intended.


----------



## KerryT2012 (Dec 18, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Anyone think this is an isolated instance?


No way, it can't be - the only thing that baffles me is how did she get so high up the chart so quickly. That still doesn't make sense. Sure, she had loads of reviews, but I have seen other authors do that - they say the same thing they sent it bloggers first, so they can get the reviews as soon as it was published...


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> Should it be taken a step further? Harvey can locate "Jordin Williams" IP address. Kboards has been known to block offending users at th ip level. Why don't we get out the torches and call for Harvey to block Jordin Williams, *or at the very least expose any other pen names/handles used for that IP address on kboards*.


I have no problem with that. We're on here willingly sharing information, helping each other out. If someone is abusing that, I think we should know. If someone's playing games with multiple accounts, I'd want to know about it. Or at least know it wasn't going on.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

swolf said:


> I have no problem with that. We're on here willingly sharing information, helping each other out. If someone is abusing that, I think we should know. If someone's playing games with multiple accounts, I'd want to know about it. Or at least know it wasn't going on.


Then should the owners of all anonymous handles be revealed? As far as I know, Jordin Williams violated no rules of the kboards so there would be just as much justification in revealing their identity/ies as any others'.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> I think that whoever is behind Jordin Williams is pretty shady and participates in some shady practices (sock puppetry etc) and at least in one case some illegal practices but to suggest that all of the booksellers do some sort of investigation into every aspect of this person's digital business is taking the crucifixion a bit far.


So, looking into how a thief acquired his other stuff (other than what we know for certain they stole) is crucifixion now? Yeah, seems harsh. Let's just wait until some reader finds out by accident what other books they plagiarized.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> Then should the owners of all anonymous handles be revealed?


Not sure how you're arriving at that from what I posted.



NathanWrann said:


> As far as I know, Jordin Williams violated no rules of the kboards so there would be just as much justification in revealing their identity/ies as any others'.


I was discussing users of this board who had multiple accounts, which is a violation.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> So, looking into how a thief acquired his other stuff (other than what we know for certain they stole) is crucifixion now? Yeah, seems harsh. Let's just wait until some reader finds out by accident what other books they plagiarized.


Acquired what "other stuff"?


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

swolf said:


> I was discussing users of this board who had multiple accounts, which is a violation.


Pretty sure you are allowed to have multiple accounts on here as long as the mods approve it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Stepping in here to address a point briefly. (I slept in this morning, a rare occasion, and am playing catchup....)

As has been stated, multiple accounts here are not allowed, except in situations where the author has pen names and contacts us for an exception. (While I'm at it, if you have a secondary account for a pen name and haven't been in touch with us, please PM me.)

I do checks of members periodically and delete secondary accounts when found; the member may or may not be contacted in advance of the deletion, depending on our analysis of the situation. I think there are members in otherwise good standing here who can attest to that.  (Another reason to contact us if you have a pen name account.) It's also one of the first things I check when I find other behavior that is against forum decorum.

Note that IP address alone does not determine sock puppet accounts as we have many members who also have family members here. We look at the totality of the member's posts and other behaviors as well as IP address.

Finally, it is not our policy to announce moderation of members. Any changes to that policy will come from Harvey after discussion in the smoke-filled Admin caves.

Now, off to my much-delayed walk....

Betsy
KBoards Moderator


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Sorry, I did mean to say pens. Glad you all don't just look at IEPs since hubby and I are both on here. Of course, I doubt anyone could mistake my writing for his.


----------



## katherinef (Dec 13, 2012)

I still have some fanfics and even original fiction posted on the net, so it worries me that someone could simply take it and try to sell it, even though the stories are bad, like really bad.   What's even more alarming is how easy it is to do this. I have my theories, but I won't post anything because I don't want someone to get any ideas how he/she could steal and sell someone's book. So will someone sue this Jordin Williams? Because if this person gets away with this and even gets all the money because he/she pulled the book before anyone could do anything, others might try to do the same.   But what do we even know about this person? Where is he/she from? Was he/she smart enough to use different IPs (or has a dynamic IP), names, bank accounts, etc.? Still, I think it's possible to track him/her down and I hope someone is working on that.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

swolf said:


> I have no problem with that. We're on here willingly sharing information, helping each other out. If someone is abusing that, I think we should know.


Thing is, this is a public board. ANYONE can access all the information we share here. They don't have to be a member to see it. Everyone please remember this is not a private club. You are out in public.


----------



## 25803 (Oct 24, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> Why would/should the violations of this book extend to any/all other books and/or pen names of the author? Do we automatically assume that everything else this publisher has published is plagiarized also? If so, how does the publisher _prove_ that it is not. How do you prove that your books aren't plagiarized?


Hi Nathan,

I'm assuming the publisher of one of the authors who was plagiarized will be taking further legal steps regarding this person. Some of those steps will likely include requesting information from B&N, Amazon, etc. We likely will never be privy to what happens down the line.

Certain violations of Amazon's TOS have resulted in shutting down accounts. I think plagiarism may be one of those violations (I seem to recollect that copyright infringement has been). I've seen instances where someone has uploaded for sale non-fiction information they scraped from the Internet and I think I remember Amazon having closed those accounts. I don't think the person has to prove all of their works aren't stolen -- violating the TOS is enough to trigger the account closure. Why should any distributor have to investigate more instances when one instance of violating the TOS should be enough?

Are you saying that if you violate Amazon's TOS by uploading not-owned-by-you copyrighted information and are caught, that you should still be allowed to continue uploading there by virtue of setting up a different account name?


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

KathyCarmichael said:


> Hi Nathan,
> 
> I'm assuming the publisher of one of the authors who was plagiarized will be taking further legal steps regarding this person. Some of those steps will likely include requesting information from B&N, Amazon, etc. We likely will never be privy to what happens down the line.


As well we shouldn't be. People, even those that commit crimes have a right to privacy. If this does go to court, those records will likely be open to the public. But I doubt that the publisher(s) will take it that far. Unless they want to set an example.



KathyCarmichael said:


> Certain violations of Amazon's TOS have resulted in shutting down accounts. I think plagiarism may be one of those violations (I seem to recollect that copyright infringement has been). I've seen instances where someone has uploaded for sale non-fiction information *they scraped from the Internet and I think I remember Amazon having closed those accounts.* I don't think the person has to prove all of their works aren't stolen -- violating the TOS is enough to trigger the account closure. Why should any distributor have to investigate more instances when one instance of violating the TOS should be enough?


The part that I bolded might ease the minds of others who have fan fiction, or fiction posted to public places. Amazon has, in the past, sent out inquiries about copyright infringement and request for proof of ownership for those types of work.



KathyCarmichael said:


> Are you saying that if you violate Amazon's TOS by uploading not-owned-by-you copyrighted information and are caught, that you should still be allowed to continue uploading there by virtue of setting up a different account name?


Individual businesses (Amazon, B&N etc) are allowed to do whatever they want, as they should be. If they choose to ban-for-life publishers that are caught plagiarizing, then so be it, but I think that would probably result in the banning of every major publisher. Personally I think that the violations of this publisher, to the currently known extent, are a forgivable offense. Scarlett letters should be reserved for things like pedophilia and rape.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

katherinef said:


> I still have some fanfics and even original fiction posted on the net, so it worries me that someone could simply take it and try to sell it, even though the stories are bad, like really bad.  What's even more alarming is how easy it is to do this. I have my theories, but I won't post anything because I don't want someone to get any ideas how he/she could steal and sell someone's book. So will someone sue this Jordin Williams? Because if this person gets away with this and even gets all the money because he/she pulled the book before anyone could do anything, others might try to do the same.  But what do we even know about this person? Where is he/she from? Was he/she smart enough to use different IPs (or has a dynamic IP), names, bank accounts, etc.? Still, I think it's possible to track him/her down and I hope someone is working on that.


I don't think there's any proof that the fanfic was stolen. My assumption would be that "Jordin Williams" purchased the fanfic from the writer, scrubbed it and published it without knowing that there were plagiarized passages (or rewrote some of it, putting the plagiarized passages in). Since the first "defense" that s/he publicly stated was that the book was ghostwritten.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Internet Justice: Blind and armed with a Gatling gun.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> This really is not a case of plagiarism-it's more than that. It's catfishing. Where someone is deliberately setting up fake personas with the intention to deceive. This has been happening in other business models (finance) and the dating world for a long time. This person does not to be prosecuted for their crime.
> 
> They've hurt the original author(s), and self publisher reputations (which yes, does have value [take screen shots of the blogger's pages that won't accept your book because of this case.])
> When you take something (work and reputation) with the purpose of defrauding others financially-I'm pretty sure it's a crime, (though I'm not a lawyer or a cop.)





LisaGraceBooks said:


> Catfish basically deep-down don't like themselves, and don't think they are good enough-which is why they hide behind personalities and pictures of who they would like to be. They are constructing a "fantasy" world, in the real world. The last thing they think about when building their fake personality and all the other fake friends of that person to back up the lie, is how elaborate it needs to get to keep it going. They don't think about getting "caught" because this fake persona is who they want to be...and they spend all their resources on becoming that person. Which of course, will only work for so long, because eventually they will get caught.
> 
> This person's want was to be a writer. To be respected as a writer and have readers. They built a fantasy world to support it, even though they didn't think they had the skills to be a writer. For all we know it's a thirteen-year-old boy with access to his parents' credit cards. Watch the movie Catfish or the MTV show "Catfish" and you'll see what great lengths people go to when they want to hide themselves and live their fantasy life.
> 
> I have lots of Youtube videos of me out so people can *see* me, I'm willing to Skype, or Google+, so everyone can know who I am. I can see how this would be very hard for erotica writers who don't want their picture out there.


There are a number of well respected authors on these here boards that have multiple pen names (sometimes of differing genders) with multiple Facebook account, multiple twitter accounts, multiple Kboards accounts, multiple "bios", multiple "author photos" all with the intent to hide something or deceive (make people believe something that isn't true e.g: "this book was written by a woman") etc Do they fall under the catfishing umbrella?


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> There are a number of well respected authors on these here boards that have multiple pen names (sometimes of differing genders) with multiple Facebook account, multiple twitter accounts, multiple Kboards accounts, multiple "bios", multiple "author photos" all with the intent to hide something or deceive (make people believe something that isn't true e.g: "this book was written by a woman") etc Do they fall under the catfishing umbrella?


You don't find that a little odd? Using a penname and putting your own bio under the penname's bio is one thing. Pretending that the penname actually is a real person is another. And there's a sliding scale from protecting one's own anonymity to being a weirdo to being a fraud (e.g., "*Dr*. Bob Smith").

Suppose, for example, the male author uses a female penname-no big deal. Now suppose he posts a stock photo too. A bridge too far maybe; and maybe it borders on weird. But okay.

Now suppose the pseudo-female starts posting fake pictures of "her" vacation to Rome, where she's doing research, and fake photos of "her" fake children. "Here's my new baby!" he/she writes. "It was a ten-hour labour!" Fans commiserate and say congratulations. That's just weird, and it's really just fraudulent.

I don't get why some people pretend to be two people here on KB. That bespeaks pathos.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "You don't find that a little odd?"


Not as a general case. It can easily be a rational marketing strategy if an author found different author personas enhanced sales of different genre books or series. It becomes commercial advertising.

The story behind _Naked Came The Stranger_ by Penelope Ashe is great. Penelope never existed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_Came_the_Stranger


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Not as a general case. It can easily be a rational marketing strategy if an author found different author personas enhanced sales of different genre books or series. It becomes commercial advertising.


Agree.

There are a lot of things in this world that I find odd an author portraying a fictitious public persona is pretty far down on the list. And I certainly don't think that it alone is grounds for prosecution, persecution or shaming.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> Agree.
> 
> There are a lot of things in this world that I find odd an author portraying a fictitious public persona is pretty far down on the list. And I certainly don't think that it alone is grounds for prosecution, persecution or shaming.


I put fraud lower on the list than murder too. But then I didn't know we were playing the which-crime-is-worse game; I thought we were talking about fake personas.

Anyway, I have no problem with pennames or multiple pennames. But making up fake personas as a marketing strategy is sleazy and, in some cases, it's going to be fraud. I wouldn't buy a book from someone who did that; and I wouldn't buy another if I found out after. I bet the vast majority of consumers agree with me on this.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

WHDean said:


> I thought we were talking about fake personas.


I thought we were talking about copyright infringement. I thought the fake personas only came into the discussion because they explained how the copyright infringement almost paid off.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

I have no problem with fake personas so long as they are not engaged in sock puppetry.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

WHDean said:


> I put fraud lower on the list than murder too. But then I didn't know we were playing the which-crime-is-worse game; I thought we were talking about fake personas.
> 
> Anyway, I have no problem with pennames or multiple pennames. But making up fake personas as a marketing strategy is sleazy and, in some cases, it's going to be fraud. I wouldn't buy a book from someone who did that; and I wouldn't buy another if I found out after. I bet the vast majority of consumers agree with me on this.


I have no problem with fake personas because they don't bother me or anyone else. What I have a problem with would be using a fake persona to harm others.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "Anyway, I have no problem with pennames or multiple pennames. But making up fake personas as a marketing strategy is sleazy and, in some cases, it's going to be fraud. I wouldn't buy a book from someone who did that; and I wouldn't buy another if I found out after. I bet the vast majority of consumers agree with me on this."


I bet the vast majority of consumers have no problem with fake personas because they don't give a hoot about any of this stuff.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> I have no problem with fake personas because they don't bother me or anyone else. What I have a problem with would be using a fake persona to harm others.


Well, you agreed with Terrence who said it was a good marketing strategy. I think it's dishonest. For example, a fake persona can be "dying of cancer," which is a good marketing strategy and it could be debated whether an appeal to pity hurts anyone. Do you think that's okay? I don't.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Different personas for different projects = fine. Those personas interacting in any way, including discussing other peronas projects without disclosure = uncool.


----------



## kCopeseeley (Mar 15, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> There are a number of well respected authors on these here boards that have multiple pen names (sometimes of differing genders) with multiple Facebook account, multiple twitter accounts, multiple Kboards accounts, multiple "bios", multiple "author photos" all with the intent to hide something or deceive (make people believe something that isn't true e.g: "this book was written by a woman") etc Do they fall under the catfishing umbrella?


Yeah, this particular person didn't just have a pen name or a fake bio or a fake blog. I'm cool with all of those. (I have a pen name and a fake bio.)

What I'm not cool with: using several pen names to post reviews for other pen names, creating a goodreads group to push your books on innocent readers (I joined that sexy reads group and got several emails from that particular author pushing their wares. I was not aware it was the same person at the time, but I know now!), stealing photos without permission of the copyright holder to create a persona with the intent to mislead readers.

This is not catfishing, but there's no way it's just a case of multiple pen names.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

justsomewriterwhowrites said:


> I think readers expect pen names and are well-versed in their existence. But as a reader, I still expect anything said or written about that pen name to be truthful. When a persona isn't a truthful representation of the author, then it's not okay with me. It reeks of sleaze and I wouldn't want to buy anything from that author again. People don't like being manipulated or lied to, and most of the time excuses for why it's done fall far short of making it acceptable. My pen name has a truthful bio that leaves a lot of information off the table. I won't lie about where I live, or my gender (even though I do have 1 pseudonym that is gender neutral, I don't hide that I'm female in the author bio). Marketing is no excuse for lying and deception. This case is a good example of how far is too far. Anyone posting and pretending to be female by using fake photos has gone way too far in my opinion, and marketing is a sorry excuse for that kind of deception.


To me it seems a bit of gray zone, justsomewriterwhowrites (if that is even your real name).

What I object most to is that this person and his different personae, aliases and pen names of different genders has _plagiarized_ someone else's work. _That_ bears investigating and though luck if that means his/her personae are revealed in the process. "I didn't steal anything, it was my alter ego of a different gender," isn't a defense.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> There are a number of well respected authors on these here boards that have multiple pen names (sometimes of differing genders) with multiple Facebook account, multiple twitter accounts, multiple Kboards accounts, multiple "bios", multiple "author photos" all with the intent to hide something or deceive (make people believe something that isn't true e.g: "this book was written by a woman") etc Do they fall under the catfishing umbrella?


Good question. Most authors are honest about having pen names to protect their privacy. Publishers in the "old days" (and still do today) picked pen names to hide the authors' sex, or the fact that a series was being written by paid for hire ghost writers.

I guess it would boil down to "intent." Where does one draw the line? How much deception and for what reasons, is it okay?


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> Good question. Most authors are honest about having pen names to protect their privacy. Publishers in the "old days" (and still do today) picked pen names to hide the authors' sex, or the fact that a series was being written by paid for hire ghost writers.
> 
> I guess it would boil down to "intent." Where does one draw the line? How much deception and for what reasons, is it okay?


I agree. I say it stops being OK if their various pen names are reviewing each other or otherwise recommending each other (sockpuppetry). This is out and out fraud, in my opinion. I think this is what was going on in the case in the OP, and that outrage over sockpuppetry is why the plagiarizing author's other pen names came up at all.

Concerning the other issue of one pen name being allowed to continue to publish after another pen name has been caught plagiarizing:

Heck no! This is all one person, and it is a person who has shown him or herself to be disrespecting of intellectual property rights. No way do I think he or she ought to be allowed to profit from his or her own intellectual property rights after disregarding those of another person. Preventing this copyright infringer from profiting off intellectual property rights is the motivation behind the witch hunt for all this person's pen names, I think.

Concerning the issue of it being the person's ghostwriter who plagiarized, perhaps unknown to the person:

Copyscape exists. There is no excuse not to use it or to at least buy ghost-written material through a site which uses Copyscape. It would have caught this particular case because portions of the book were published online.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

justsomewriterwhowrites said:


> My online privacy is important to me, but I don't lie about who I am or am not. Of course that's not my real name.
> 
> There are good reasons for pen names and justsomewriterwhowrites is a pen name just like any other pen name. If I pretended to be male, that would be a lie. If I had a "real" sounding name versus justsomewriterwhowrites, who cares? Pen names aren't fake personas just because the name is a moniker and I was clear about that in my comment. Readers expect pen names. People use pen names on forums all the time. But using fake personas to manipulate and deceive are inexcusable, and anyone who thinks otherwise isn't someone I want to read. If I ever found out that the bio that says someone lives in Boca Raton really lived in Tuscon and the dog didn't exist, then yeah, I wouldn't be a fan and I wouldn't be reading those books. It's creepy. It just is. If you don't want people to know where you live, don't mention it. Lying isn't marketing. It's lying.


I sort of had guessed that was a moniker&#8230; 

I agree with you to a certain degree. I read and value books for what is actually in the book, not for who wrote it or who s/he pretends to be. Were Shakespeare's play written by Shakespeare or by someone else? Interesting question, but it doesn't change my opinion about the plays themselves. That which we call a rose (who said this? I forget) and all that, you know.

I don't mind if you invent a dog and a whole litter of kittens. I do mind when you try to make me buy your book because your non-existent dog needs open heart surgery.


----------



## KaryE (May 12, 2012)

FYI, in my case the pen name was necessary due to death threats. My publisher approved the pen name, but also required a natural looking, professional headshot for my online profile. When I pointed out that a pic of the real me would entirely invalidate the whole pen name thing, the publisher's explicit instructions were to find a stock photo.  

Fake photo doesn't always equal smoking gun or nefarious intent.

For fiction, however, this is a different name, and I've so far managed to avoid the author photo issue by simply not having one.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Those of you with author photos that aren't you (your cat, a stock photo, etc), do you simply never make public appearances? No signings or conventions, etc?


----------



## KaryE (May 12, 2012)

I'll have to cross that bridge eventually.  At workshops, I simply introduce myself as Kary English. Yes, I'll get tagged somewhere at some point, and if I ever flipping win Writers of the Future, there will be photos galore, plus web video streamed to the entire world.

I'll deal with those when and if they happen and hope to God that one particular stalker has gotten over his obsession.


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

Monique said:


> Those of you with author photos that aren't you (your cat, a stock photo, etc), do you simply never make public appearances? No signings or conventions, etc?


My photo is real, although it's only of the back of my legs. My avatar for blog postings is a Middle Eastern design.

I've done public readings--one in Powell's bookstore in Portland, OR, one in the sex museum in Las Vegas, one at the Erotic Literary Salon in Philadelphia. Using only my pen name. I do ask that people not take photos.

I think the only awkward Pen Name Moment was at a hotel in Las Vegas, where I'd gone for the Erotic Authors Association conference. I was sharing a room with a woman who'd put it in her name, and she said she'd leave me a key with the concierge. So I went down there, and could see that she indeed had an envelope for Sharazade.

"I just need to see some photo ID."
"I don't have any photo ID."
"Why not?"
"Because that's not my legal name."
(awkward pause)
"But I have business cards! Here! Look!"

That worked, but I don't know if it would have worked at a hotel anywhere other than Las Vegas.


----------



## 25803 (Oct 24, 2010)

The Jordin Bishop persona may or may not have purchased fan fiction -- but from what I've seen, =she= never claimed to have done so. Her conflicting answers raise questions. Which of her statements should one believe? What she's said herself (and then which of those statements) or what people might surmise? All we know for sure is that the book published by this persona contained copyrighted material from at least two other authors' books. The revelation of multiple personas, used to promote each of these false personas, simply thickens the plot.

I have friends who write under multiple pen names and I don't have any issue with it. They have their reasons for why they do so, and it's no business of mine. But if they start plagiarizing under one of those aliases (and I so hope this never happens!), then I'd expect the distributors would likely take issue with all of their pen names. And if they should start buying or scraping content from a fanfic or other site and publishing it as their own work (under any of those names), and its found to contain plagiarized material, then I would expect the distributors to react in the same way. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, and when you agree to a contract (which is what the TOS is), you're stating that you're uploading original or licensed material.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "Ignorance of the law is no excuse, and when you agree to a contract (which is what the TOS is), you're stating that you're uploading original or licensed material."


That contract is between Amazon and the author, and none of my business. Thank God I don't have to manage all that for everyone.

And, yes. That picture is really me. It's not easy being a trend setter, but I accept the burden.


----------



## Caddy (Sep 13, 2011)

> I don't mind if you invent a dog and a whole litter of kittens. I do mind when you try to make me buy your book because your non-existent dog needs open heart surgery.


Hmmm. I use my real name and photo, so I'm not hiding. My question is, would you buy my book to contribute to my African Grey parrot's college fund?  Anyone interested will receive an authenic photo of Melanie as a thank-you...


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

WHDean said:


> Anyway, I have no problem with pennames or multiple pennames. But making up fake personas as a marketing strategy is sleazy and, in some cases, it's going to be fraud. I wouldn't buy a book from someone who did that; and I wouldn't buy another if I found out after. I bet the vast majority of consumers agree with me on this.


Seems to have worked out well for Stephen King/Richard Bachman.

No, the truth is most people don't care.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

What I'm curious about is the authors on here without any links to their books.  I understand that there are some who haven't published yet, but when I hear advice given by an author, I like to take a look at their work, in order to judge for myself whether their advice is meaningful to me.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

swolf said:


> What I'm curious about is the authors on here without any links to their books. I understand that there are some who haven't published yet, but when I hear advice given by an author, I like to take a look at their work, in order to judge for myself whether their advice is meaningful to me.


You do realize, of course, that not EVERYONE who posts here is an author. 

I guess if they say they are an author but don't have books in their signature it's simply because they want the place to be mostly social for them.

I have had any number of folks tell me they like to post in areas away from the Cafe and not feel like they're marketing, even though they're allowed to have their books in their signatures. Since you can't turn 'em on or off depending on the board you're in, they just leave 'em off.

If they're posting here in the Cafe and mention they're an author, I don't think there's anything wrong with asking about what they've written. OR, look at their profile and see if they've got a promotional thread in the Bazaar.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> You do realize, of course, that not EVERYONE who posts here is an author.
> 
> I guess if they say they are an author but don't have books in their signature it's simply because they want the place to be mostly social for them.
> 
> ...


But when they hand out authoring advice, I think we can assume they're writers, unless they preface it by saying they're posting from a reader's perspective, which some do. And it doesn't have to be books in their signature, just a link to somewhere.

For example, if someone claims that they do their best writing after eating green pancakes, I'm curious to know if they're onto something. If their writing is extraordinary, I may give the green pancakes a try. If it's jibber-jabber, then I'll be sure to leave them off my diet.

Or, more to the point, if I started handing out tips on how to write proper literary fiction, a glance at my writing should let people know not to take my literary fiction advice seriously.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

swolf said:


> But when they hand out authoring advice, I think we can assume they're writers, unless they preface it by saying they're posting from a reader's perspective, which some do. And it doesn't have to be books in their signature, just a link to somewhere.
> 
> For example, if someone claims that they do their best writing after eating green pancakes, I'm curious to know if they're onto something. If their writing is extraordinary, I may give the green pancakes a try. If it's jibber-jabber, then I'll be sure to leave them off my diet.
> 
> Or, more to the point, if I started handing out tips on how to write proper literary fiction, a glance at my writing should let people know not to take my literary fiction advice seriously.


Fair point. (I'm not addressing your comment about your writing.  )

Some authors have said that they are leaving their covers out of their sig becuse they don't want to be accused of posting only to promote their books. But, in cases where you might want to see if eating green pancakes is worth it, I think it's fair enough to ask civilly for a link to the person's writing.



Betsy


----------



## Lady Vine (Nov 11, 2012)

swolf said:


> But when they hand out authoring advice, I think we can assume they're writers, unless they preface it by saying they're posting from a reader's perspective, which some do. And it doesn't have to be books in their signature, just a link to somewhere.
> 
> For example, if someone claims that they do their best writing after eating green pancakes, I'm curious to know if they're onto something. If their writing is extraordinary, I may give the green pancakes a try. If it's jibber-jabber, then I'll be sure to leave them off my diet.
> 
> Or, more to the point, if I started handing out tips on how to write proper literary fiction, a glance at my writing should let people know not to take my literary fiction advice seriously.


I can only speak for myself, but I don't include my books in my sig for two reasons: firstly, because I want to be able to comment on here uninhibited, without having my "normal person" words connected with my fiction. Secondly, because I write under multiple pen names and, for the time being, don't want them connected.

I appreciate that people giving advice should put their money where their mouth is, so to speak, so I try to be specific with my examples, whilst avoiding mentioning the names of my titles. This is the best I can do at this point.


----------



## Kwalker (Aug 23, 2012)

http://tammarawebber.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-one-about-plagiarism.html

Tammara Webber posted openly about her plagiarism ordeal today, and I know when this situation first came to light, many were sure that it would never see a courtroom.

Tammara stood up to the plagiarist, and is donating the proceeds to charity.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

What a satisfying outcome.


----------



## Guest (Nov 16, 2013)

Kwalker said:


> http://tammarawebber.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-one-about-plagiarism.html
> 
> Tammara Webber posted openly about her plagiarism ordeal today, and I know when this situation first came to light, many were sure that it would never see a courtroom.
> 
> Tammara stood up to the plagiarist, and is donating the proceeds to charity.


Bravo!


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

Wow. Reading that made my evening! Good for her & Jamie.

It's quite a testament to the emotional impact of plagiarism, isn't it? Writers _care_ about their words.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Awesome! I'm so glad to see that some justice was done, and that the profits are going to those charities. Tammara Webber is very talented - and a class act.


----------



## 54706 (Dec 19, 2011)

Good for her!  That was fast.


----------



## No longer seen (Aug 17, 2013)

I confess to feeling a great curiosity about how it got resolved so fast.
Perhaps the thief was well-intentioned and simply ignorant, and his own 
IP lawyer advised him to settle now before it cost him a fortune in legal
fees, and he lost in the end anyway.

Besides, as all bill collectors and John Grisham fans know, there's a huge 
gap between a legal settlement and actually collecting it, so I'm wondering whether she 
has actually received any cash yet.


----------



## Austin_Briggs (Aug 21, 2011)

I'm excited for her and wowed with the vigilance of the reader.

And as for our antagonist? My suspicion is that he'll pick a new pen name, find a few more popular books to rip for "content" (in IM speak) and will engage once again his brilliant marketing machine. Selling several thousand copies in a week _is_ brilliant.

He'll just "spin the text" (IM speak) better next time. Big learning for him. You know, there's brilliant spinning software these days which requires minimum human input. You can also pay websites that would do it by hand dirt cheap.

It's a valid "blackhat" IM strategy - take a best-seller and rewrite in your own words. Whole "products" are sold online on how to do it and not get caught. This guy was too lax.


----------



## ElHawk (Aug 13, 2012)

Good for her!  That's awesome.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

Thing was, he yanked the entire text of the book from a fanfiction site and then changed the names of the characters.

He'd done the same thing with literotica stories, stealing the text from the internet and uploading it to Amazon as his own.

The scary thing about this is that if the fanfic he stole hadn't been plagiarized, we might never have known about this.

And while stealing people's free stories from the internet and making money off of them is ethically wrong, does the writer of those original stories have any recourse against this guy? Especially the writer of the original fanfic? Who stops him, you know?


----------



## N. Gemini Sasson (Jul 5, 2010)

Glad to see they followed up on this, that she shared about it and that some good will come of it.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I don't usually drag up older topics, but in this case, its the conclusion of this saga. Tammara Webber has posted a recap and an update on how this all played out and ended. I found it interesting. Here is her blog post from yesterday.

http://tammarawebber.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-one-about-plagiarism.html


----------



## 48209 (Jul 4, 2011)

THANKS! I'd just been wondering what was going to happen with this, but that felt FAST. I figured we'd maybe hear something in another year.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Thanks, Atunah--

I've merged another thread started today with the older thread.  Sorry for any confusion.

Betsy


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I didn't even see the other thread, sorry. I just went straight searching for this thread.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Sooooo glad this was resolved. And while I understand her thinking, I wish she'd outted the bugger.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Read her blog post and glad it was resolved.

It's uncomfortable even having writers write something that is eerily similar even without plagiarism involved. I had an author leave me a two star review on Smashwords a year ago, then publish her book in the last few months. The funny thing is about a month ago she pm'd me on my FB page, mentioned how much she loved my series, and asked me to recommend her book since it's along the same theme. I went and read her blurb, and it's almost like she copied mine!

I never responded back, because what's the point? I did send her PM to my agents, and the movie producer though in case they had any thoughts. People are going to at the very least imitate.


----------

