Who won? (EC v DA)

11 Dec

(See update at the end)

Ellora's Cave sues Dear AuthorAs I mentioned the other day, I’m still following #notchilled, because there are still many authors and other contractors, who have not been fully paid for their work.¹

Tina Engler/Jaid Black has her own narrative–but then, she always has looked at things from a very…special point of view, hasn’t she?

Anyhoodle…Someone at Romantic Times–Kathryn Falk, I believe it was?–posted some asinine note on facebook, crowing that EC had ‘won’ the lawsuit (hint: reaching a settlement out of court ain’t winning, cupcake), and other bullshit.²

That note was quickly taken down, with this taking its place:

Of course, there are still idiots people out there who will swallow Jaid Black’s spews whole; to whit:

wait till it happens to you

It does not mean what you think it means

Deirdre Saoirse Moen shut the last one down on the spot:

Deirdre Saoirse Moen pithy response

Having witnessed a number of publisher implosions, I would almost be willing to put money on what’s her face above changing her tune when it’s her turn to wait eight months or more for a five dollar check–but really, I can’t be bothered.

However, I wanted to share this with my readers (remember to read from bottom up):

EC v DA sum up by CMTo what Ms Milan says, I can only add this:

While Jane has lost the most money upfront, plus the lost of trust; and while EC is in the midst of its death throes (however long those may last); it’s the authors, editors, cover artists, etc, who are still waiting to be paid in full, and whose reputations are constantly impugned by Jaid Black and her sycophants, who have lost the most–in money, and time, and effort, and in peace of mind.

As author Roslyn Holcomb says:

More than the mortgage

Via #notchilled/Courtney Milan, this link to Nina S Gooden, who was EC Managing Editor for a couple of years–before being fired, with no warning, in January 2015. I’m sure that several little lapdogs of TE/JB will come out in force, yapping that Ms Gooden is “yet another lying (four letter expletive).” I’ll say that it’s up to each reader/aspiring author to make up their own minds as to who is lying about what–and why.

~ * ~

¹ Ann Jacobs on rumors

 

² Will you look at this:

copy of screenshot posted to #notchilled

Advertisements

9 Responses to “Who won? (EC v DA)”

  1. twooldfartstalkingromance 11/12/2015 at 2:21 PM #

    Since Jane obviously had to print a retraction of sorts it does look like EC can call themselves the winners. And their authors, artists and editors are the big losers.

    • azteclady 11/12/2015 at 2:27 PM #

      Actually, since the original post–and the actual points made in that post–are intact, EC can claim whatever they want, they still lost.

      (Deirdre Saoirse Moen breaks this all down over here)

      And yeah, the authors who signed contracts with EC continue to be the biggest losers here.

  2. Jules Jones 12/12/2015 at 5:13 AM #

    As you probably recall, since you posted in comments at the time, RT’s hate-on for DA and love-in for EC goes back at least this far:

    http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/why-romantic-times-reviews-are-not-credible/

    http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/romantic-times-update-kathryn-falks-vested-interest-in-elloras-cave/

    The whole http://dearauthor.com/tag/kathryn-falk/ post trail makes interesting reading (and entertaining, particularly getting to see Nora Roberts using the word “fuckwit” in comments:-).

    • azteclady 12/12/2015 at 10:39 AM #

      I had actually forgotten the dynamics of the DA/RT/EC triangle–I honestly forget the existence of RT at times.

      Wow, those comment threads! :sigh: I really miss the days when people would get passionate in comments–and when Nora Roberts would actually show up in comments all over the place.

  3. Bona 12/12/2015 at 5:40 AM #

    It looks to me that both of them have lost -at least, money and reputation. What can we learn from this? Bloggers have the same freedom of speech as any other citizen, but it looks that it might not be as protected as we thought. At the same time, you can act as a journalist and give information relevant to the public, as far as you give facts after you have checked their accuracy at least with two sources, or one if it’s relevant and direct, as any journalist does. But even then, they are not above being sued. So, there’s no way to act to be a hundred percent right.
    Anyway, what amazes me most is how expensive it was. The sheer amount of money required for litigation in the US is just awesome. I guess that’s why there are more settlements over there, even in criminal cases, which is something not very common here in my country where judicial sentences are much more usual than settlements.

    • azteclady 12/12/2015 at 10:50 AM #

      The main problem here is that people can sue people, regardless of whether they have a prayer of winning the suit. That’s why it’s so important to lobby for a federal anti-SLAPP statute.

      Regarding criminal cases, and keeping in mind I am not a lawyer, my understanding is that there cannot be a settlement over crimes–though there can be deals cut. A person can plead guilty to a lesser crime (and accept a lesser sentence), instead of risking a harsher punishment. In theory, this save the government (and taxpayers) some money.

      However, there are plenty of settlements over civil filed over criminal acts–such as the families of the victims suing O J Simpson after he was acquitted in the murder trial.

      • mouise 12/12/2015 at 11:41 AM #

        I don’t know if you followed the Mother Jones case but they won the defamation case and it cost them and their insurance company $2.5 million dollars.

        http://www.motherjones.com/media/2015/10/mother-jones-vandersloot-melaleuca-lawsuit

        Truth may be the best defense but it doesn’t help pay the bills. I get that many people feel betrayed by Jane because of the Jen reveal but that doesn’t change the fact that Jane stuck her neck out for a lot of people. She put her money, core principles on the line and she did it at great personal risk to her financial well-being and her career.

        $135,000 (and we aren’t done yet because the settlement isn’t finalized) is a lot of money even with the assistance of a fund-raiser which I’m guessing only covers about 1/3 of the expense after paypal and go-fund-me fees are taken out. Not to mention the personal toll at home and the blow to her reputation and the changes to the DA site.

        $90K is an expensive lesson for anyone. Even someone with multiple revenue streams at their disposal. Because one fact is paramount to me: Jane never had to say a word. She didn’t have to stick her neck out at all but she did. The haters can hate her all they want and even rail on her hypocrisy for the Jen scandal, but that doesn’t change the fact that she is one ballsy woman with a supportive family who tried to do what she believed was right. Or that she paid a steep price for her efforts.

        If you hear of another fundraising effort, please keep us informed.

      • azteclady 12/12/2015 at 11:45 AM #

        I agree with pretty much everything you said, mouise (and welcome to the blog).

        I don’t know that Jane would consider, or accept, any organized/public fundraising to help her cover the rest of the legal bills, but you may always contact her privately about it (I know there’s a paypal account for Dear Author), or even Sarah Wendell at SmartBitches, who I know coordinated off internet contributions at one point.

  4. Kaetrin 13/12/2015 at 1:29 AM #

    I’d just like to correct something, if I may. The downsizing of DA next year is more about Jane being busy writing and not doing much reading (and therefore, reviewing) than about the lawsuit. I spoke with Courtney Milan about this on Twitter. I think it’s fair to say we agreed that while Jane may well have lost some of her joy in DA and that may have in turn influenced her decision, it is not accurate to say that the downsizing of DA is as a result of the lawsuit or that it is one way she “lost”.

    Jane certainly lost respect and reputation in some quarters following the reveal that she is also author Jen Frederick. But this is not universally true. There are quite a few people who still hold her in high regard. Obviously, I am one of them but I’m not alone (I acknowledge I’m not an uninvolved bystander here – I review for DA). I have always said that I understood why those who were upset felt as they did and that hasn’t changed.The people who feel that way have an absolute right to their feelings and opinions. But even at the time of the reveal, there were a lot of people who were either neutral or congratulatory to Jane about her authorial success. I’m not entirely sure that this counts as a loss for Jane as a result of the lawsuit. Reasonable people differ, but I think the information would have inevitably come out at some point – the lawsuit may have brought that forward but that’s just timing.

    Regardless of the Jane/Jen thing, there is also a not-insignificant group of people who appreciate that Jane fought the good fight as long as she did and, in that respect, I think her reputation has come out *at least* even.

    The lawsuit cost Jane a lot – in time, stress, a shitload of money and probably other things I don’t know about. I can only hope (and I do) that EC’s legal bill was even bigger. As is usually the case in litigation, the winners were the lawyers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: