Part of a series: Cassie Edwards 1: The First Post | Cassie Edwards 2: Savage Longings | Cassie Edwards Part 3: Running Fox | Cassie Edwards Part 4: Savage Moon | Cassie Edwards Part 5: Savage Beloved | Follow-up: Penguin (Part 1?) | Official Statement from Signet | AP Article Contains Response from Edwards | RWA Responds to Allegations | A centralized document for the Cassie Edwards situation
…and, well, read it yourself.
Signet takes plagiarism seriously, and would act swiftly were there justification for such allegations against one of its authors. But in this case Ms. Edwards has done nothing wrong.
The copyright fair-use doctrine permits reasonable borrowing and paraphrasing of another author's words, especially for the purpose of creating something new and original. Also, anyone may use facts, ideas and theories developed by another author, as well as any material in the public domain. Ms. Edwards' researched historical novels are precisely the kinds of original, creative works that this copyright policy promotes.
Although it may be common in academic circles to meticulously footnote every source and provide citations or bibliographies, even though not required by copyright law, such a practice is virtually unheard of for a popular novel aimed at the consumer market.
All credit due to Jane of Dear Author for ferreting out (black-footed or otherwise) the appropriate Signet representative to write to and forwarding the statement to us when she got a response.
Candy says: Here’s a refresher on what constitutes plagiarism and what constitutes copyright infringement. Here it is again in brief:
Plagiarism and copyright infringement sometimes intersect, but not always. The most famous cases we’ve seen—Janet Dailey’s plagiarism of Nora Roberts’ work, for example—do. But it’s entirely possible to plagiarize without infringing on a copyright; all that’s required is copying huge chunks of a work without attribution and passing it off as your own original efforts. If the work has passed into the public domain, or if it isn’t copyrighted, there’s no copyright infringement. It’s also possible to infringe on somebody’s copyright without plagiarizing—if somebody making a movie decides to use a piece of copyrighted music without clearing the rights with the publisher first but acknowledge the musician in the credits, they’ve infringed on a copyright but they haven’t plagiarized.
In short: plagiarism is an ethical issue. It’s concerned with what’s right and what’s not. Copyright infringement is a legal action, and is a way for somebody whose works have been infringed to say “Bitch where my money?” It’s concerned with what’s legal and what’s not.
And that’s all I’m going to say for now.
Sarah says: I’m not qualified or even interested in the legality of the situation, or whether something is within fair-use doctrines. Not a lawyer. Not even in law school.
But I do want to make it explicitly clear that on terms of ethical use, I disagree with Signet and the idea that she’s done nothing wrong.
I’m certainly not a copyright lawyer, and questions of law are not my point. My issue is the ethics of it. Further, I think the ethics of the question are much more important than the legalities. There are a lot of things that can get you failed in English class or fired from a newspaper that are not against the law.
And the idea that she’s done nothing wrong from an ethical stance? Horsepucky. She’s done plenty wrong in my book.
I don’t buy Janet Dailey’s books past or present for that reason. I don’t check them out of the library or read them used. It’s an ethical distinction on my part: as a consumer, I can vote with my wallet. As a reader I can vote with my choices. As a blogger, I can write my opinion. In my opinion, Cassie Edwards’ use of at least 6 documented sources verbatim without attribution or acknowledgment is ethically wrong. It would have been so simple and appropriate to place an acknowledgment at the back of her book. “For more information about the Lakota Indians, I heartily recommend….”
So, let me ask you your opinion, if you haven’t already stated it. From an ethical standpoint, where do you draw the line? Are the usage of passages in Edwards’ books acceptable from an ethical standpoint or not? If you’re a reader or a writer, what do you think?
To the lady who suggested we all get lives: I will if you promise to get a dictionary and look up “paraphrase”. It doesn’t mean what you think it does!
Yes, I would gladly stop buying CE books in protest; unfortunately, that would require me to begin by actually buying CE books, so I could, you know, stop. Besides defeating the purpose, that would make little baby Jesus (who Himself never plagarized) cry.
“Why doesn’t somebody write a “Savage” romance about ME? It was my
mother’s maiden name….”
Shame on you, Tal. Jenny Crusie already has. I know you’ve read “Getting Rid of Bradley” with Lucy Savage (Porter) as the heroine. /;+)
Boycott the publisher? No, but I’m certainly going to have an unpleasant feeling when browsing books in the future and run into Signet/Penguin.
Appreciate the address. I think that a letter carries more gravitas than an email.
How nice that Signet is covering their asses without stopping to consider the larger issues.
Like the kind of message this sends to students in college right now where the professors are fighting a tidal wave of plagiarism from a generation that’s been brought up to believe they are entitled to take anything they want, especially if it lets them avoid doing actual work or critical thinking.
Jesus Wept indeed.
” I’m heading to the libary for AGNES AND THE HIT MAN and all future Nora Roberts books and signet books.”
Lexie – what’s your problem with buying Nora Roberts? She’s come out consistently against copying other’s work. Why are you lumping her in with signet, et al? That seems unfair.
In hindsight, sure, but when Signet responded, they didn’t know exactly what articles might come out or who they might quote.
Which is why true spin artists (and I’m certainly not including myself in that group) are so sought-after. There is an incredible talent in being able to anticipate and pre-empt what others will write, and I often admire great spin, even in the midst of being horrified by a particular issue. In this case, I just think it is bad spin (I’ll restrain my obsessive impulse to go through the statement line by line and explain why I think that), and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it comes back to haunt them at some point. JMO.
I am really interested in anyone’s addressing talpiana’s points.
I agree with everyone else, but I was wondering whether anyone would boycott Shakespeare for plagiarism, or if the morality is considered different because of the context of time and tradition between then and now.
I a reader who will read almost anything and a technical writer who writes stuff NO ONE ever reads. But I know what I have written and what I have not written. In fiction, it is insanely easy to list credits, sources, references, influences, and just anyone who had anything to do with ideas. A simple one line shout out – and none of this would have happened.
I am reminded of the Jessica Seinfeld mess with the veggies snuck into kids food. This is NOT a new idea – my parents and grandparents have been doing that for generations. Seinfeld acknowledges this ‘tradition’ and gets on with the recipes!
I’ve been able to only scan through the posts, but I feel like an important point is being missed. When you write fiction—I stress fiction—you’re not supposed to need to cite sources. That’s not to say offering suggested/further readings isn’t nice, but good historical authors incorporate research without slapping in copied passages from the researched text.
Some of the sentences I’ve seen don’t bother me, because there are only so many ways to say some things. But the bigger passages that clearly show they were lifted is, above all else, plain lazy.
Fwiw, I’m also a librarian, and Fair Use is taught in library school. Fair Use does NOT cover the verbatim or paraphrased use of pre-exisiting text in a for-profit, non-satirical work (like a novel). Fair Use, as it relates to this situation, lets a person use portions of a work only for educational use, in scholarly or critical works, or in satire. If the publisher’s argument is that some of her research sources may be in public domain, I refer back to the paragraphs above.
As a writer and as a secretary for a university history department, I have to say this is not just ethically, but socially wrong.
A lot of students are caught plagiarizing, sometimes in ways similar to Ms. Edwards, and they always go for the “But we didn’t understand exactly what plagiarism is.” argument.
But I don’t think it’s a fair one, especially when you are at her level. Of course writers use references, but you should be able to tuck the information into the material more, the wording should be different…in other words, we should have a sense that the writer read the information, digested it, then wrote the passages with your own understanding of what it means. They should all be your own words. To have an author doing this is a poor example to other people, writers, students, etc, on how these things should be done. And if you used a lot of information, why wouldn’t you put on your acknowledgements page “I could never have written about Seminole wedding practices without Joanna Doe’s wonderful “Living the way it was”.
Clearly, she needs to read Charles Lipson’s Doing Honest Work in College
call her on plagiarism. call her on quoting and not listing the source.
your arguments lose steam when you start to call the woman names: hack, twit, loser, idiot. if you can’t state your case without having to resort to name-calling, then perhaps your case isn’t as strong as you’d like to think.
let her rise and fall on the facts of the issue. not because she’s ‘ugly’.
I believe instances of people calling CE anything harsher than “plagiarist” on this board are few and far between.
What is interesting is the fact that you are not taking the genre into account, nor the state of book publishing in this country. The romance genre is, for the most part, plagiarism. Lady Charmain Vibart is exactly described, almost in Farnol’s words, in half the regency romances published last year. The genre lacks decent editing or writing beyond a high school level, so naturally, when stuck it reverts to plagiarism.
Romance is instructive of what happens when you hire recent graduates and bargain basement writers to be editors and restrict submissions to agents. It’s all headed that way. A shame in that romance can be a wonderful genre. Now, if you read Farnol, you’ve probably read all the best passages in romance published this year in one place. The real problem lies with the publishing companies. The writers can’t write in the first place, so what can you expect? Publishers need to go back to first readers, open submissions, so they can, at least, train a few editors properly.
I have to say Rick, WTF? Have you read half the historical romances published last year? I read plenty and I don’t recall even one of them including Lady Charmain Vibart.
The statement “The romance genre is, for the most part, plagiarism” seems a hyperbolic and largely baseless accusation.
Why not provide some examples to support such a conclusion.
Jane,
Have you read Farnol’s books? As a book dealer and a judge for two romance contests I do read a good deal of the historical romances published. If you don’t see Lady Charmaine in the descriptions of about half the regency romance heroines then you really aren’t paying attention.
Last year in judging one contest I ran into nearly exact quotes from Farnol, Louis Lamour. Raphael Sabatini, and H. R. Haggard, in the books given to me to judge. These quotes, presented as original work existed in four of the five historical romances I was given. So within the normal statistical parameters, half is understated. Nor is my statement hyperbolic and baseless.
Poor writing, poorer editing and very bad publishing practices have devalued one of the most enjoyable and, at one point, most lucrative literary genres. This is what you want to defend?
Are the usage of passages in Edwards’ books acceptable from an ethical standpoint or not? If you’re a reader or a writer, what do you think?
I’m a writer, a reader and an editor.
I cheer the fact that Ms. Edwards has done her research. Not all writers do. As a reader, the lack of research and correctness bothers me.
As an editor, I see that she has re-written the research into a fiction-based format and style rather than using wholesale copy-and-paste. Legally and ethically this makes the passages (and the books) “derivative work.” Derivative work is different from plagarism and copyright violation. Her editor and publisher have said as much in their press release. What Ms. Edwards’ publisher didn’t say is that derivative work is the ultimate gray area. How ethical and acceptable a derivative work is depends wholly upon where the viewer is stading in the gradient that goes from blackly unacceptable to whitely acceptable.
I will also note that Ms. Edwards is following a fine, well established tradition. Have you read “Moby Dick” by Melville and the unabridged “Les Miserables” by Hugo? Those gentlemen borrowed heavily from encyclopedias and history books with minimal re-writing.
What bothers me most about this whole situation is the air of sheer glee on the part of the Smart Bitches. I recognize an agenda when I see one. Put down the tar and feathers, ladies, and send your lynch mob home. You’re starting to look vindictive.
~As an editor, I see that she has re-written the research into a fiction-based format and style rather than using wholesale copy-and-paste.~
Please provide examples of the re-written text, because I’m seeing copying with some very minor paraphrasing.
And the statement that the Romance genre is, for the most part, plagiarism is so staggeringly insulting it doesn’t deserve response.
But I’ll say again, please post examples.
Poor writing, poorer editing and very bad publishing practices have devalued one of the most enjoyable and, at one point, most lucrative literary genres. This is what you want to defend?
Of course not, but that wasn’t what I was defending, was it? In fact, the only thing I was defending was the genre against the the broad statement that you have made to wit “The romance genre is, for the most part, plagiarism.”
If Edwards had done such a bang up job of supposedly rewriting this research, she never would have been caught with her hand in the cookie jar.
This woman has made a career of stealing (yes, stealing!) from other authors, fiction and not. That people continue to still defend her after the evidence continues to mount taller than Everest is made of fail.
Maybe the level of snark here is getting thick because the defense is starting to be beyond laughable.
Victoria sayeth earlier
I’m gonna blame my reading comprehension again, ‘cause I don’t see the glee on the part of SBSarah nor Candy, or Jane or MOST of the commenters. Are some people sarcastic in their comments? Yes. Are the blog owners responsible for how their readers express their opinions? Perhaps they would if they moderated the comments. They don’t. As far as I’m concerned, that’s that.
Nora,
Please you know what you do. It’s the reason your brand new first editions go on a table outside the store for a dollar. Yes, you have a following by dumbing down good literature. There is nothing wrong with that, but to defend it as somehow something other than that isn’t insulting, just factual. Despite what it may sound like, I don’t have a problem with it, the only thing I regret about it is that the bad money runs out all the good. So basically the only romance left is second rate.
I’ve actually tried four of your books. Three chapters in I knew the plot and the ending, skipped to the back, verified that and saved myself a lot of time. Formulas lead to plagiarism, because, well, why not it’s the same basic book after all? I’d give a good deal to actually be presented with an original, post adolescent, romance. But it seems they just get worse, more formula, more derivative until plagiarism is only a half step away and in most a half step taken.
And no, I am not going to specifically embarrass anyone, so get off that hobby horse. Not only would it be impolite, I suspect most of it is under pseudonyms anyway.
Rick, since you are unable to provide any examples (it’s high horse not hobby horse btw), I can’t engage in any fruitful debate with you.
~Please you know what you do~
Yes, I do, so I can find some amusement in that remark.
You’re absolutely entitled not to like my work. But you’re not allowed to call it, or any other work, plagiarism without proof. Please give me an example of literature I’ve dumbed down in my books. Which books have I taken and turned into my own?
~And no, I am not going to specifically embarrass anyone, so get off that hobby horse. Not only would it be impolite, I suspect most of it is under pseudonyms anyway.~
This isn’t my hobby, but my profession. Not a hobby, but a vital issue of my profession. And your excuse for not providing examples of this lame, and doesn’t ring at all true for me.
If all you have are insults and supposition without verification, then there’s no point in communicating.
Jane,
What made you think I was debating you? If you have read classic romance, and are fairly well read in other fields, you can verify it for yourself. if not specific instances aren’t really going to do you any good are they? The point I made is that, if you are well-read, it’s a part of the genre itself. And the argument is that well-read people would probably appreciate something original, but publishers either won’t publish it, or editors homogenize it.
Last year in judging one contest I ran into nearly exact quotes from Farnol, Louis Lamour. Raphael Sabatini, and H. R. Haggard, in the books given to me to judge. These quotes, presented as original work existed in four of the five historical romances I was given. So within the normal statistical parameters, half is understated. Nor is my statement hyperbolic and baseless.
Name them. Please. If they plagiarized, they need to be identified. It’s the only way to improve the situation, if it is as dire as you describe it.
Rick, isn’t it much more impolite to insidiously insinuate widespread wrongdoing than to call a spade a spade in as political and respectful a manner as one can?
Me, I think you are being quite rude myself, but what do I know? I read romance./sarcasm
>>Romance is instructive of what happens when you hire recent graduates and bargain basement writers to be editors and restrict submissions to agents.<<
I’m detecting some frustration here. Care to explain the source?
Nora,
My only problem with you is that I have never read anything you have written that contained a single original thought. I wouldn’t call that plagiarism, but rather part of the evolution toward it by other authors. The total lack of originality in modern romance creates an atmosphere where plagiarism is common to the point of being almost the norm.
My point has been, it’s stuck in a rut of formula writing and that will almost always resolve itself in a species of plagiarism because, in the end most of your output only changes names, locales and minor details anyway. Invent a new form of love triangle. Something, anything I haven’t read before.
And I write too. Only it’s non-fiction and I don’t repeat myself.
Plagiarism is NOT using the same genre idea over and over. For example, man meets woman, sparks fly, obstacles interfere, then they live happily ever after. Not plagiarism.
It’s also not use of a common phrases like ivory skin or heart-shaped face.
Your exaggeration is ridiculous and infantile. You should disclose your opinions to contest coordinators to be sure they are comfortable with your offer to judge.
azteclady,
Wrongdoing? People who do it take it that way. I said that formula writing leads to plagiarism to the point where it has become a part of the genre. At this point I don’t think it’s wrongdoing anymore than pastiche is. What I lament is the incredible lack of imagination and original thought.
Victoria,
I am a book dealer, collector and a reader, sometimes a writer on subjects I have researched. And frustration is far, far too mild a word for what I see has happened to a genre I love.
I tend to read JD Robb more than Nora Roberts. In fact I read the first 20 In Death books in a row. Strange I didn’t find any repetition.
Rick, I must as you, if you dislike romance genre fiction as much as it seems, why did you judge two contests?
Out of curiosity, Rick, what romance authors do you read and enjoy?
Don’t know about the rest of you, but I feel oh so honored to be in Rick’s presence, since he’s clearly so far above Nora and just about every other Romance writer. I’m close to weeping with joy that Rick lowered himself enough to shower us with his pearls of wisdom. How can I ever pick up another of Nora’s books again, knowing that Rick does not approve?
Perhaps I’m too much of a cynical bitch (okay, there’s no perhaps about it, I am *shrug*), but Rick? This sentence of yours,
sorta gives me the impression that you feel that YOUR writing—and maybe even your moral stance—is oh so superior to Ms Roberts’s. Which, you know, kinda makes your assertions rather suspect in my (just a reader’s) eyes.
And just so you know, saying that
is an implication of widespread wrongdoing.
Why?
Because plagiarism is ethically and morally wrong.
I would hope that someone who, you know, doesn’t repeat himself, would know that.
~I said that formula writing leads to plagiarism to the point where it has become a part of the genre.~
Again, please give examples of plagiarism which indicate it’s part of the genre over and above CE—and I’ll add Dailey as she’s been discussed considerably.
You are, again, perfectly entitled not to like or even respect my work. But it’s a different matter to state that plagiarism is ‘almost the norm’ in the Romance genre. That’s not opinion, but a statement. Where are the examples to support your statement?
Oh, and predictability (in your less-than-humble opinion) is not plagiarism. They are two different words. See that? They’ve even got different definitions. Though they do both start with P.
Well, you know what they say. Those who can, do. Those who can’t claim they can but they just choose not to, then gleefully make snide comments about those who actually do.
I’d be very interested in reading an original Romance manuscript by Rick. Really. I’m sure it would be great for a laugh.
Come on, Rick. For someone like you writing a completely original Romance novel will be oh so easy. We’re all waiting to read the literary gem you will bestow upon us lesser mortals.
Victoria,
You beat me to it but I was about to say Poo which starts with P and ends with O’rly.
T-Pig, (May I call you T-Pig?) I really wish I had an e-book to send you. I have high hopes for my HQN release. In 2009. *sigh*
You make me laugh every time.
“I dreamed that the black Kaffirs were going to kill me. Where is my Papa?”
I winced at the question. “Your Papa has gone on a journey, dear,” I said, “and left me to look after you. We shall find him one day.” H. Rider Haggard, Allan’s Wife
“I dreamed the red Indians were going to kill me. Where’s my Daddy?”
I winced at the question. “Your Daddy’s gone on a journey, my dear and left me to watch over you. We’ll find him one day.” I won’t name the book or author, but it is a modern romance published within the last two years.
Perhaps this not Victoria’s concept of plagiarism, but it is mine and I could fill a book or two with similar examples. Nora, this is as far as I will go. Unless the author pops up to defend herself.