I don't see any mention of this yet on AW, though the Making Light blog comments mention it.
This doesn't mean a whole lot. Regardless of the way things went down after, this is dated a while back.
Anyone can do this. Doing a POD you can do this. You just write up your little piece, add a photo, give a local connection and an angle and ba-da-bing! Press Release.
If they have newsies are having a slow day, they might use it - busy day, probably not. And depending on how well you do it, how busy the "reporters" are, that kinda stuff, they might just use your entire piece, not even call you up.
For heaven's sake. This is all getting so hugely out of proportion. Have a look at the context, people. One plagiarized chapter in a vanity-published book that fewer than 100 people will ever see. Everyone is behaving as if this is Nora Roberts and Janet Dailey all over again. This really is more equivalent to the kind of plagiarism that happens in fanfic. When was the last time the Internet was abuzz with indignation over that?
But what do I know. I only have actual documentation to extrapolate from.
- Victoria
As I said on my blog, I think one reason that people are heaping so much abuse on Lanaia (who, I believe, has been disgracefully taken advantage of and doesn't deserve the beatdown she's receiving) is that the situation gives them the opportunity to say about her all the things they really think about scam victims and fake-published authors, but can't normally admit to for fear of seeming mean and elitist.
So Cheryl Pillsbury read through the book six times? And didn't catch the Alexander-Archimedes typo?
Um, I wasn't trying to argue what it seems you think I'm trying to argue. The paper got fooled too, and if Mary/Lanaia doesn't come to them with a retraction before they hear it elsewhere, it may go badly for her.
Here's what I've been wondering:
If Lanai's got other novels written, as well as poetry, why did she accept Hill's offer to ghostwrite her next book?
Lanaia claims that she has copy right of this work as her own. Can anyone confirm if that's true?
We had no contract binding anything, the work I did is now yours I give you full copyright consent here.
She might have felt is was "her" book the same way adoptive parents feel it's "their" child.
She might well have believed herself correct in saying she owned the "copy right" (sic). I have several work-for-hire novels copyrighted to another party. In the law's eyes that other party is the owner even though I wrote them. I doubt Hill will come forward to admit "t'was I who done the deed." He's got every reason to keep his head down.
If the slimeball's name is not on her "original" MS then she's only one available for prosecution if it comes to that.
What are the odds there is nothing on paper of their arrangement and it devolves into a she said-he-said situation? Prosecutors hate that sort of case.
She's been left holding the bag and Hill gets away to swindle more people.
Too bad they aren't doing some sort of sting operation on HIM, but the amount of money involved is too small to put him on any DA's event horizon. Only if a LOT of people he's ripped off start complaining is there a chance of hurting him.
Trouble is, most scam victims don't want to admit they were fooled or (the Cult of the PAer's comes to mind) cling to their belief that they're special and everyone else is wrongwrongwrong-stop-saying-those-mean-things-you-Blue-Meanies.
I feel sorry for her, but on the other hand she let him fool her TWICE.
If her dream was to become a famous writer, then she got it, just not the way she wanted.
Just as many amateur publishers don't know the difference between rights and copyright, I suspect that many amateur writers don't know the difference between ghostwriters and editors.
- Victoria
Between the woman working with Hill and Cheryl Pilsbury? No. Remember, the Hill scam was located in Edinburgh, and the woman working with Hill, who called herself Claire Ashton, had either a British or Scottish accent (I forget which, but people did speak with someone claiming to be her). There's ample evidence that Cheryl is American.In reading over your posts on Hill, the ones from 2006, I noticed you had mentioned a woman working with Hill back in the day. Now does this fit the pattern? This woman Cheryl, her agent, has a few strange ways of typing from her posts over at Making Light. Could there be some sort of connection between them?
I wonder if she means the same thing by "ghostwriter," though. Surely there can't be that many people selling ghostwriting services to unpublished writers. Victoria would have heard about it by now, and AW would have lots of threads about it. I wonder if she means instead that she hired an editing service, or for that matter, maybe she had a critique partner.Apparently Cheryl is now admitting that she used a ghostwriter for her own vanity published books (http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/009448.html#009448, post #312).
Also, she has a fan club for her Angus Grady books (Publish America, natch):
HERE YOU CAN JOIN IN AND LEARN OF HIS WORLD AND THE PEOPLE IN HIS LIFE.
YOU WILL RECEIVE:
A MEMBERSHIP CARD $20.00 PER YEAR
This horse issue is dead and I'm tired of repeating myself, the subject is closed, move on.
So Cheryl Pillsbury read through the book six times? And didn't catch the Alexander-Archimedes typo?