I finished a novel that I wrote in 2006, and as soon as I did of course, I had a copyright. I registered that copyright with the U.S Copyright Office, and had been validated in June of that year.
The book has been given to many people, many of which provided feedback on the story, and insights into things that were wrong. In this process, I suppose one of these people gave the story to someone else, and that's where the whole thing begins.
Just about a week ago, I had found out that he was trying to sell the same EXACT copy online under an internet pseudonym. This person used a fake name and most likely a fake address to set up his attempt at self-publishing. As soon as I found out word, I told the company through their "live-chat" feature what was going on. IMO, right there they should have halted display of this book. Especially after I talked to the SECOND agent. Needless to say, I was disappointed when it took 36 hours for the material to be taken down. It does not matter though, I ended up getting a copy to show physical proof in a court of law. He is hard to find, but the company SHOULD have some kind of record of his address. The "author" had to get paid right? If they can't, I can show negligence on their part, can I not?
I do not like the fact that these companies issue copyrights and ISBN's like candy and without any investigation in the matter. This is so frustrating for an author, and it should be frustrating to anyone else who does self-publishing. If this were allowed to stand, I could literally take Hemmingway's work, put a few original pages at the beginning (just enough for a 12-page preview) and put the rest of Hemmingway's words in text. Even though my novels may not be as widely read or even as good as those best-selling authors, I deserve the same protection that they got when their works came out. To take away that right is fundamentally wrong and dangerous.
Another point is with this company, if they can not provide addresses and/or names in infringement cases, it shows me they are not taking affirmative steps to prevent such infringements. This guy could have all credit card receipts going to Zimbabwe for all we know, or it might be some address that's not even legitimate!
Therefore, I am thinking very hard about suing the website as well as the person who did the actual infringement. I believe I can find them liable for letting this stand, and not doing anything about it until much much later.
Of course, their claim will be that it was an "honest mistake" and that "this happened on a weekend", but that means little to me. An honest mistake is forgetting something that your wife needs for dinner at the store when you just got back home. An honest mistake is your friend spilling a soda in your car because you turned just a bit too hard. An honest mistake is NOT letting a book stand for 36 hours when you've got live-help going 24 hours a day. Honest mistakes would mean that you would be able to trace the person who did the original bad deed and get justice out of the whole thing.
Finally, the Supreme Court has issued an opinion on this kind of thing already:
I realize this is slightly different, but it's the same kind of precedence.
Is there anything wrong with this line of thinking?
unbiasedpassion
PostScript: Sorry, the Supreme Court case did not come up as it should have. But it was quoted from my Microsoft Word.
The book has been given to many people, many of which provided feedback on the story, and insights into things that were wrong. In this process, I suppose one of these people gave the story to someone else, and that's where the whole thing begins.
Just about a week ago, I had found out that he was trying to sell the same EXACT copy online under an internet pseudonym. This person used a fake name and most likely a fake address to set up his attempt at self-publishing. As soon as I found out word, I told the company through their "live-chat" feature what was going on. IMO, right there they should have halted display of this book. Especially after I talked to the SECOND agent. Needless to say, I was disappointed when it took 36 hours for the material to be taken down. It does not matter though, I ended up getting a copy to show physical proof in a court of law. He is hard to find, but the company SHOULD have some kind of record of his address. The "author" had to get paid right? If they can't, I can show negligence on their part, can I not?
I do not like the fact that these companies issue copyrights and ISBN's like candy and without any investigation in the matter. This is so frustrating for an author, and it should be frustrating to anyone else who does self-publishing. If this were allowed to stand, I could literally take Hemmingway's work, put a few original pages at the beginning (just enough for a 12-page preview) and put the rest of Hemmingway's words in text. Even though my novels may not be as widely read or even as good as those best-selling authors, I deserve the same protection that they got when their works came out. To take away that right is fundamentally wrong and dangerous.
Another point is with this company, if they can not provide addresses and/or names in infringement cases, it shows me they are not taking affirmative steps to prevent such infringements. This guy could have all credit card receipts going to Zimbabwe for all we know, or it might be some address that's not even legitimate!
Therefore, I am thinking very hard about suing the website as well as the person who did the actual infringement. I believe I can find them liable for letting this stand, and not doing anything about it until much much later.
Of course, their claim will be that it was an "honest mistake" and that "this happened on a weekend", but that means little to me. An honest mistake is forgetting something that your wife needs for dinner at the store when you just got back home. An honest mistake is your friend spilling a soda in your car because you turned just a bit too hard. An honest mistake is NOT letting a book stand for 36 hours when you've got live-help going 24 hours a day. Honest mistakes would mean that you would be able to trace the person who did the original bad deed and get justice out of the whole thing.
Finally, the Supreme Court has issued an opinion on this kind of thing already:
I realize this is slightly different, but it's the same kind of precedence.
Is there anything wrong with this line of thinking?
unbiasedpassion
PostScript: Sorry, the Supreme Court case did not come up as it should have. But it was quoted from my Microsoft Word.
