PublishAmerica author sues Stephen King for plagiarism

Unimportant

No COVID yet. Still masking.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
19,519
Reaction score
22,755
Location
Aotearoa
As for the other, all writers yearn to see their work in print. Yearn. Desperate.
I think that's a point we'd definitely have to disagree on. I'm a writer, and I don't yearn to see my work in print, let alone feel desperate about it. Neither my household budget, nor my career, nor my self-image are dependent on my story sales. I like to sell my stories, so I submit them to editors, but if the stories don't sell it's barely a blip on my radar, and if they do sell I cash the check and spend the money.

While it's perfectly fine to speak for yourself and for writers you know personally, it's perhaps a bit less accurate to generalise, or to make assumptions, or to project your own feelings onto other people.
 

Marian Perera

starting over
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
14,333
Reaction score
4,576
Location
Heaven is a place on earth called Toronto.
Website
www.marianperera.com
There's some work of mine that should never see the light of day, and some which I would really love to see published. I'm not sure that I feel desperate about it, though. If every reputable publisher rejected the latter manuscript(s), I still wouldn't resort to a bottom-of-the-barrel outfit.
 

Little1

Hakuna Matata
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
1,298
Reaction score
639
Location
york, PA
I would rather not have my book not published then to have it published poorly.
 

Little1

Hakuna Matata
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
1,298
Reaction score
639
Location
york, PA
BAH! I mean I would rather my book not be published at all then to have it published poorly.
 

Deleted member 42

I'm feeling sad, thinking about the cash the author is shelling out for this. Honestly, the whole thing has become really distasteful, with the author dancing after his delusion like the girl in the red shoes, and the lawyers pocketing money for this lost and pointless cause in order to be able to say they sued Stephen King.

Just gross.

That's exactly what I think; and yes, the law firm should be deeply ashamed for this.

I hope they end up being censured from the bench.
 

darkprincealain

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
3,379
Reaction score
1,925
Location
Nowhere. Now here.
I'm feeling sad, thinking about the cash the author is shelling out for this. Honestly, the whole thing has become really distasteful, with the author dancing after his delusion like the girl in the red shoes, and the lawyers pocketing money for this lost and pointless cause in order to be able to say they sued Stephen King.

Just gross.

- Victoria

I feel horrible. Not that I am in any position to do anything about it of course, but there's a time and a place for delusions of this nature to end, and it isn't the courtroom. In this instance, it was more likely in an attorney's office very early on. Someone seems to have missed a key step, here.
 

DreamWeaver

Shakespearean Fool
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
2,916
Reaction score
403
A joint motion for extension of time for S&S to file its Reply brief has been filed. They are asking for a delay until May 12th.
I am *so* ready to see the next move in this soap opera legal proceeding...

:popcorn:
 

DreamWeaver

Shakespearean Fool
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
2,916
Reaction score
403
I'm glad I'm not the only one on pins & needles ;)
 

Little1

Hakuna Matata
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
1,298
Reaction score
639
Location
york, PA
*is waiting for the next installment of PA V.S SK* I am with you Kate. I doubt that they would blow a deadline.
 

DreamWeaver

Shakespearean Fool
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
2,916
Reaction score
403
I finally found a legal site that shows a reply brief was filed 12 May 2011. If I want to pay $4.99 for the download, I can see what it says. I keep hoping someone with a PACER account will chime in--don't know that I really want to pay to find out. It might be just another extension request. Most likely, whatever is in it wasn't earth-shattering, since the news doesn't seem to have picked it up at all.

The link is here if anyone feels like looking.
 

BenPanced

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
17,864
Reaction score
4,639
Location
dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
I tried with my PACER account, but they must have revamped the site since the last time I saw anything. I keep getting this odd PERL script opening and I can't view any documents from the site.

More's the pity because it's 22 pages. Which is why it's probably taking so long to go through it.
 

Kateness

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
2,716
Reaction score
884
Location
Wilmington, DE
Website
kateness.wordpress.com
Well, I know the local rules here have a 20-page limit on answering briefs (excluding table of contents/table of authorities), so that sounds about the right length to be something substantive.
 

BenPanced

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
17,864
Reaction score
4,639
Location
dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
Okay. Something about Firefox bungs it up. I was able to look it up on Safari with no problems.

Three sections:
I. THE COURT CAN AND SHOULD CONSIDER THE TWO BOOKS AT ISSUE ON A MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBSTANTIVE SIMILARITY
S&S's attorneys are asking for the case to be dismissed because to anybody reading the two books, it's blatantly obvious there's no way King plagiarized.

II. DISCOVERY WOULD NOT INFORM THE SUBSTANTIAL SIMILARITY ANALYSIS
IANAL, but it looks like they're pointing out expert testimony isn't necessary for the case to proceed, as anybody who reads the two books can tell they're not the same and how similar cases were decided by simple, side-by-side comparisons.

III. PLAINTIFF CANNOT ESCAPE THE FACT THAT DUMA KEY AND KELLER'S DEN ARE COMPLETELY DISSIMILAR BY MANUFACTURING MISLEADING SIMILARITIES
S&S's attorneys argue Marquardt is stretching in his evidence and "resorts to several randomly-selected examples of non-protectable matter that are irrelevant and legally insufficient to support a claim" and there is "fabrication of similarities that do not exist between the two protagonists in the works at issue".

CONCLUSION
They ask for dismissal and award the Defendants costs, legal fees, "and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper".
 

MysticWolf12001

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
3
Location
This side of Sanity, but just barely.
Well, this is a start. Thankx BenPanced. It sounds like S&S and King's attorney's are going after this will all-guns firing!

What the Plaintiff was thinking, I don't know. If this is dismissed, this could very costly for the Plaintiff.
 

Kateness

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
2,716
Reaction score
884
Location
Wilmington, DE
Website
kateness.wordpress.com
From the legal docs I've seen, asking for attorney's fees and "all other relief" are pretty standard provisions of the wherefore clause [the summation clause where you ask for what you want] (a lawyer can jump in here and totally contradict me if they like)
 

MysticWolf12001

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
3
Location
This side of Sanity, but just barely.
I wonder if the jury will have to read the two books, if this isn't dismissed. I mean, at least they'd get to see an example of a book published by a real publisher, and a PA book... that would prove that SK could not have plagiarized.