The Old Neverending PublishAmerica Thread (Publish America)

Status
Not open for further replies.

sfsassenach

Re: PublishAmerica business model

Dee said:
Just as a little background I have a Master's in Business Administration and have worked in the finance department of a major corporation, as well as a consultant in business planning for my own consulting company. I am very familiar with budgets, forecasting, cash flow and income statements.


....and you got sucked into the PA hype. So it it any wonder that less savvy "authors" believe them?
 

HapiSofi

Re: It's only half the battle

Priceless Lynne said:
When the author, armed with his printing rights, queries another publisher they find that they’ve fallen into a No Man’s Land.
Printing rights? What you need is a reversion letter from the previous publisher. And if they've reverted the book, there should be no question of their continuing to advertise it: they shouldn't.

The author may be in No Man's Land, but you aren't. That's what indemnity clauses are for.
 

Gwen4

Re: PublishAmerica Contract

On the topic of contracts--I can understand why a publisher would shy away from a book that has been give an ISBN, and perhaps already been in production, but I am having trouble with queries I am making on a book that I never even finished the AQ stage with. PA does not have any version of my book--just the signed contract and nothing else. I feel like if the contract is rescinded at this early stage, it may be given more of a chance. I wish I never ever mentioned PA, but I am an honest person...I think I blew a chance at a decent publisher!
 

lindylou45

Re: and yet another reality check...

These people will eventually learn the truth, but like the rest of us, it will take time to realize that they were duped as well.

I love the part about all of the "misinformation" about PA floating around. Most of it is on their website!

But then those rose colored glasses sure do make the world a pretty place, don't they?
 

priceless1

Re: It's only half the battle

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Printing rights? What you need is a reversion letter from the previous publisher. And if they've reverted the book, there should be no question of their continuing to advertise it: they shouldn't.<hr></blockquote>
Yes, sorry, HapiSofi, I was half asleep when I wrote this. Yes you are correct. The author is armed with their reversion letter. I've seen no less than twelve such letters within the past three months and in each case the books were still being advertised.

That it isn't right was exactly my point. But, nonetheless, it continues because no one is there to tell them to knock it off. I took that battle on and won't do it again. Some publishers continue to advertise because they claim they have unsold copies. In those cases they are more than within their rights to recoup their investment. How a publisher can make that claim when they're a POD is a whole other enchilada. Conjecture away. <img border=0 src="http://www.ezboard.com/image/posticons/pi_freak.gif" />

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The author may be in No Man's Land, but you aren't. That's what indemnity clauses are for.<hr></blockquote>
Yes, again, I agree with you one hundred percent. That and a dime will get you a stick of gum. The law is definitely on my side, the author's reversion letter is on my side, but unless I take it to a court of law and spend money to get some action, nothing changes.

That project suddenly becomes a lot more expensive for us (a small press) to publish due to legal fees. Fees which we would rather sink into our marketing dept. So, I maintain and continue to warn that, yes, the author may fall into a No Man's Land because the realities are such that publishers will not take on the project.

I bring this up so that any author negotiating to rescind their contract may want to include a demand that their books be removed from all the online stores as well.
 

priceless1

Re: PublishAmerica Contract

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>but I am having trouble with queries I am making on a book that I never even finished the AQ stage with.<hr></blockquote>
Gwen, you will continue to have probelms with queries because you do have that signed contract. No one will touch you until you are completely free from your prior publisher and you have something verifying that fact.

Hang in there!
 

Sher2

and yet another reality check...

<I tell ya, the PA censors must have their hands full keeping the boards clear of the truth.>


Well, it's not like they have much else to do, what with the writers producing the product, editing it, advertising it, and selling it.

Seriously, I find the delusion and brainwashing on those boards so disturbing. I don't know how they'll handle it should the truth ever hit them upside the head.
 

Sher2

PublishAmerica Contract

<On the topic of contracts--I can understand why a publisher would shy away from a book that has been give an ISBN, and perhaps already been in production, but I am having trouble with queries I am making on a book that I never even finished the AQ stage with. PA does not have any version of my book--just the signed contract and nothing else. I feel like if the contract is rescinded at this early stage, it may be given more of a chance. I wish I never ever mentioned PA, but I am an honest person...I think I blew a chance at a decent publisher!>

My best advice at this point would be to concentrate on your second novel, finish it, and get it into the hands of a legitimate publisher. Later on, after that damnable contract is a thing of the past, there are ways to revamp the first one and let it, too, have a chance at life.
 

Sher2

and yet another reality check...

<I love the part about all of the "misinformation" about PA floating around. Most of it is on their website!>

For my money -- ONE WHOLE DOLLAR, I'll have you know! -- that's where it ALL is.
 

FM St George

Now this is interesting...

www.publishamerica.com/cg...s/1764.htm


7/20/2004
17:23:13
Subject: Beware of Contract!!


Message:
Dear Marlene Thornton

Can you believe this after months of promotion?
How dare them. If you can't believe it, look out.
This will be my last, and final message on this board. My work is else where, now.

As per Paragraph 25 of the contract, it has become impossible for us to commence production of your book.
There fore we will not publish your work. All rights are herewith returned to you.

Sincerely

Janice Riley
publishamerica

Here is paragraph 25

The publisher agrees to commence production of the said literary work within 365 days from the date of the signing of this aggrement by both parties thereto. Provided Publisher is not hindered by causes beyond its own control, or by the author.

I have lost 6 months from promoting this book. And, have made a complete ass of my self to the public, friends, and family. Sue or not sue is the question of the day?

LHP

7/20/2004
18:14:09
RE: Beware of Contract!!


Message:
Sorry,
and its not the end of the univers.

Keep on writin'

Marlene

7/20/2004
18:21:15
RE: Beware of Contract!!


Message:
Want to bet, how much?

Carl Baxter

7/20/2004
18:24:09
RE: Beware of Contract!!


Message:
Marlene:

What do you suppose it was that made it impossible to commence production of your book?

**********

???
 

CaoPaux

The logo replies to Depressing Story

Infocenter
Administrator
7/20/2004
17:51:32

Message:
Well, let's see...

What does The Providence Journal have in common with, let's say, the
Tallassee Tribune,
Windsor-Hights Herald,
The Glendale Star,
The Hartford Courant,
Wellsville Daily Reporter,
Nevada Appeal,
The Guardian,
The Miami Herald,
Houston Chronicle,
The Gainesville Sun,
Florida Times-Union,
South Bend Tribune,
Butler Eagle,
Austin Daily Herald,
Appalachian News-Express,
Oakland Press,
The Washington Post,
The Detroit News,
The Sierra Times,
Vancouver Sun,
Knoxville News,
The Columbus Dispatch,
The Oregonian,
The Dallas Morning News,
Fort Worth Star Telegram,
The Philadelphia Inquirer,
Pittsburgh Tribune Review,
or the St. Louis Post-Dispatch,
(are you still there...?)
just to name a random few out of hundreds and hundreds of well established newspapers?

Exactly, they recognize PA authors as what and who they are: serious writers whose work deserves serious attention. That's why they all have written about PA authors such as yourselves, and they continue to do so every day.

Yes, also The Providence Journal. Seems you talked to the wrong guy, Jeremy. Only a few months ago, his much less elitist colleague Richard Dujardin wrote a very supportive interview with a local PA author, in the very same newspaper, the very same The Providence Journal. He included this portion:
"Emigh's contract with Publish America, the Maryland-based publishing firm that's paying her for the book, says publication will take place within the year. She says the firm has a reputation among writers as being open to the works of previously unpublished authors."

Same newspaper, different standards. You talked to the arrogant book editor, Ms. Emigh talked to the hard-working local reporter.

Details? See
www.publishamerica.com/Press/index.htm
www.publishamerica.com/Press/emigh.htm

Moral: avoid the arrogant book editor, ask for the hard-working local reporter. They almost always say yes to PublishAmerica authors, as you can see at a glance when you hit the Press Clippings tab at the top of this page. And that's just a sample!
------

I forget, do we respect media or not?
 

emeraldcite

well...

if you read this post:

www.publishamerica.com/cg...s/1669.htm

you may get an idea of why they didn't publish her. It would be too much work for their editors....or whatever they are.

if that link is taken down, i have a copy of the message saved. i'll be happy to send it.

maybe this is a turnaround point for PA. maybe they are monitoring quality...
 

emeraldcite

ring

ring.

"Hello?"
"Hello."
"Hello?"
"Hello. I'm an author. I have a book. I want it reviewed. Am I speaking with an arrogant book editor?"
"I'm sorry. What?"
"Am I speaking with an arrogant book editor?"
"I don't understand."
"I'm supposed to ask for a hard-working reporter. Are you hard-working?"
"I just handle the phone calls."
"Could you put me through to a hard-working reporter? I don't want to speak to an arrogant book editor."
"We don't have book editors."
"Well, can I still speak with the hard-working reporter?"

click.
 

FM St George

Re: PublishAmerica business model

ah,yes - I went to her website.

'nuff said.

sad thing is that they offered her the contract in the first place - it's just not nice to raise hopes like that and then dash them.
 

Sher2

well...

<if you read this post:
www.publishamerica.com/cg...s/1669.htm
you may get an idea of why they didn't publish her. It would be too much work for their editors....or whatever they are.

if that link is taken down, i have a copy of the message saved. i'll be happy to send it.

maybe this is a turnaround point for PA. maybe they are monitoring quality...>


I think it'll be a cold day when PA gives a hoot about quality. I wonder, however, whether this could possibly have anything to do with it?


"Who Owns Print-on-Demand?
Amazon.com, Others Sued for Patent on Common Net Practice

By Cade Metz
PC Magazine

March 11— This time, Amazon.com has landed on the other side of the patent debate.

In 1999, the pioneering Internet bookseller famously sued chief competitor Barnes & Noble.com, claiming that the rival's Express Checkout service infringed on patents for the 1-Click system that lets customers quickly order from the Amazon Web site. The suit caused an uproar among Internet users, many of whom held that such an obvious business process idea wasn't innovative enough to warrant a patent.

Last week, the tables turned when Amazon proved the victim of a business process patent. On March 4, a jury in a St. Louis federal district court found that the print-on-demand services run by Amazon and two other companies, Lightning Source Inc. and Ingram Industries Inc., infringed on a patent held by the On Demand Machine Corporation (ODMC), a company based in St. Louis. ODMC (www.bookmachine.com) was awarded damages of $15 million for past infringement up to December 2003.

Lightning Source, a subsidiary of Ingram Industries headquartered in LaVergne, Tenn., started its print-on-demand service in 1997, providing a library of digital texts that are printed only when customers purchase them. In 2000, Amazon entered a partnership with Lightning Source, selling the company's print-on-demand titles through the Amazon.com Web site.

A Problematic Patent?

According to the district court jury, these print-on-demand businesses infringe on a patent issued to the late Harvey Ross, founder of ODMC. Ross first filed for a patent involving "a system and method of manufacturing a single book copy," but the initial request was abandoned. He filed again in July of 1993, and two years later, the patent was granted. In 2001, after a reexamination, the Patent Office discarded six of the patent's eight claims but upheld the last two, and these were the basis for the jury's decision.

The patent describes a computer-based hardware system that "may be utilized in many environments, but it is especially well suited for direct retail consumer sales." Many object to the grant, saying that the patent covers a broad idea rather than a specific invention. "The Patent Office essentially read a 3,000-word essay on print-on-demand and issued a patent for it," explains Bob Young, the former CEO of Linux packager Red Hat, who now runs the print-on-demand company Lulu.com. "This was not an invention that was awarded this patent. It was simply a description of an idea."

Douglas Goldhush, a patent lawyer with the international law firm Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, disagrees. "This claim is fairly specific," he says. "It talks about storing the text of a book, it talks about storing sales information related to a book in the computer, which is a critical part of print-on-demand, and it talks about how the customer can view the book and command the computer to print the text."

The question may be whether the patent is too specific to be applied to the services run by Amazon and Lightning. Unlike these services, which include a vast collection of servers, printing technology, Web sites, resellers, distributors, and stores, the system detailed in the patent seems to be a single piece of hardware.

Harold Ross and ODMC did eventually build systems much like those described in the patent, but they were never commercialized. "We got a couple of prototypes out but never got to the point of actually selling the product," says Bruce Baebler, current president of ODMC. "We were primarily a development-stage company." These prototypes were intended for use as kiosk-like devices within brick-and-mortar retail stores. "The model that ODMC developed was a self-contained system for retail point-of-sale," continues Baebler, "but our patent has a broader scope than that. Lightning and Ingram are doing a warehouse, centralized type of operation, but it does infringe on our patent claim."

Murky Future

Amazon, Ingram, and Lightning are likely to appeal the jury's decision. "This is only a district court decision out of St. Louis," says Goldhush. "With $15 million at stake, I would be very surprised if they didn't appeal."

If the courts continue to uphold the patent, other print-on-demand companies, including Lulu.com, my have to pay damages, licensing fees, or both to ODMC.

"If the patent stands as valid and is infringed," continues Goldhush. "On Demand could have the opportunity to assert it over anyone else who is using a print-on-demand system or method covered by their claims."



Perhaps I'm thinking of the wrong company, but isn't Lightning PA's sole printer?
 

Gwen4

Re: It's only half the battle

QUOTE: Gwen, you will continue to have probelms with queries because you do have that signed contract. No one will touch you until you are completely free from your prior publisher and you have something verifying that fact.

-----------------------------------------------------

Oh, I know Lynn--I'm waiting! I have a feeling that the "scarlett letter" P will be on IVY for a long time. I still don't know for sure what they're doing but as I said, I haven't sent them anything--it's that darned signed contract. Some days I feel like just giving up and letting them publish it and move on to the next. I do appreciate all your support, Lynn. You have been great!!
 

FM St George

Re: PublishAmerica Contract

"I think it'll be a cold day when PA gives a hoot about quality. I wonder, however, whether this could possibly have anything to do with it?"

actually, I think not - the hard fact is that this writer has no grasp of spelling and/or grammar, and they couldn't just slap it into a PDF file and send it out to be published - it would be a HUGE illustration of everything that PublishAmerica is criticized for.

not to mention the author's family and friends wondering what sort of company she signed with that would allow this to go out in the state it was in - I would bet that the "editors" took a close look at it, decided that they couldn't spend the time with the book (it's much faster to deal with PA authors who pay book doctors and deliver their own corrected copy, doncha know) and decided to write it off on those lines.

as for the entire POD article - that came up months ago here and elsewhere and is probably not affecting any decision PA makes in the least. They're still signing authors left and right, so it's not hurting them.

I do feel for this author who got cut, however - they should have never signed the contract with her if they had really looked over her manuscript and deemed it to be illegible in the first place.

maybe she can sue THEM for breach of contract...

:p
 

James D Macdonald

Re: PublishAmerica Contract

First, I'd like to congratulate Hapi on that masterful dissection of Paragraph 24 of the PA contract.

(According to John Savage, this is one of eight variations of the PA contract that he's seen. Anyone thinking of suing PublishAmerica ought to have their attorney contact Mr. Savage -- he's got lots of background information.)

<hR>

Next, let's not confuse PA continuing to advertise a book that they no longer publish with Amazon continuing to list it. As long as used copies of a book exist (and sometimes beyond), Amazon will maintain a listing for that book, under that ISBN. This includes books that have been out of print for a decade or more.

That includes books from publishers who'd gone out of business before Amazon was founded.

If I were a publisher, I'd be careful not to let Amazon's business practices jerk me around.


<HR>

For those PA book reviews in various newspapers: First, most of them aren't on the book review page with the rest of the reviews -- they're human interest stories of the "Local Man Writes Book" variety that appear elsewhere in the newspaper. Also, I bet that you find fewer and fewer of them as time goes on and editors wise up to PA, rather than more and more as PA publishes more books (as you'd expect with a traditional publisher).
 

DaveKuzminski

Re: Re: It's only half the battle

Also, according to John Savage, all eight of the PA contracts are bad and some are worse than the one I posted for others to see.

What really gripes me is that PA could have told the truth and hundreds, if not thousands, of writers would have still flocked to them. They could have also cut down on the rights grabs and the criticism would have similarly died away. However, they had to try to take as much as possible because their lack of experience in publishing led them to believe that there was serious money to be made in those. There is, but you have to know how to mine it before you can get the gold out of any hill.

So, if any of PA's trolls or staff are reading this, why not consider changing some things in your contract and policies? It's the only way that any of us are going to ever let up on you with our criticism. Otherwise, we're going all the way and sooner or later, you'll find yourself in court. When that happens, this will all be part of what crushes you. That is the only, inevitable conclusion and we all know it.
 

priceless1

Re: PublishAmerica Contract

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Next, let's not confuse PA continuing to advertise a book that they no longer publish with Amazon continuing to list it. As long as used copies of a book exist (and sometimes beyond), Amazon will maintain a listing for that book, under that ISBN. This includes books that have been out of print for a decade or more.<hr></blockquote>
This is true, James, and a point I attempted to make. However, with the experiences we had (not PA, by the way), all of the books had been bought up by our author. I complained to the original publisher that they still had their name up. I fully realize Amazon's penchant for doing things on their own timetable, but I had to cover all my bases and see where the breakdown was occurring. My first email initiated action on the part of the publisher to get their advertising removed.

When I went back a month later and still saw their advertising up, I complained more stridently the second time. They indicated that they had already contacted Amazon about getting everything removed. That’s all well and fine, but the advertising was on B&N, BAM, and Alibris. This made me think nothing had been really initiated by the publisher at all and I was being paid lip service. My second contact with the publisher stated that there was no valid reason for any advertising to remain since no copies existed anywhere. All signs disappeared within a week. In this case, Amazon was innocent.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>If I were a publisher, I'd be careful not to let Amazon's business practices jerk me around.<hr></blockquote>
Couldn't agree with you more. After all, it's our reputation and necks that are on the chopping block, not theirs. <img border=0 src="http://www.absolutewrite.com/images/EmoteHeadbang.gif" />
 

James D Macdonald

Paragraph 24

A further thought on the infamous Paragraph 24: Is perhaps another reason for using all that obsolete production-speak, aside from the smokescreen for the rights-grab, to give the impression that they're a traditional publisher using offset printing without coming out and saying that they're a tradtional publisher using offset printing?
 

HapiSofi

Re: It's only half the battle

Lynne, Lindy, Gwen --

Why not change the title of the book when you publish (or republish) it, and never again mention the first publisher in connection with it? Seriously -- just get the rights back, and regard it as a different book.

FM St George, I first saw Marlene Thornton's writing a week or two ago. She's so hopeful and vulnerable, and such a terrible writer, that I could only wonder how the people at PA could bear to look at themselves in the mirror every morning. Now, on top of defrauding the poor woman, they're publicly humiliating her.

I suppose it makes sense. It's an indictment of PublishAmerica that they did a contract with Ms. Thornton in the first place, but if they go through with it and publish her, they'll either have to discredit their editing, or they'll have to pay for a lot of editorial work hours. That book can't be fixed short of rewriting every sentence.

James, thanks for the egoboo on dissecting #24. That paragraph still disturbs me. You couldn't ask for clearer proof that the PublishAmerica people are deliberate scammers, not clueless wanna-be publishers.
 

priceless1

Re: It's only half the battle

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Lynne, Lindy, Gwen --

Why not change the title of the book when you publish (or republish) it, and never again mention the first publisher in connection with it? Seriously -- just get the rights back, and regard it as a different book.<hr></blockquote>
That is exactly what we were faced with and I had discussed that option with our author. Problem was, he was really stuck on the name, and he should have been. It was perfect. Besides, it galled us to no end to have to play that game.
 

FM St George

Re: Now this is interesting...

I do hope she sues the heck out of them - if they can't give a real reason for cancelling their contract, I'd drag them over shattered glass.

after all, they give authors such a hard time getting out of their contract...

*evil chuckle*
 
Status
Not open for further replies.