1. Tor insisted this week once again that there are no pre-release copies, and that Jason is the only one who has access to the book.
Tor are not Orbit. Orbit are releasing the book across all Commonwealth territories and, although Tor will sell vastly more copies, Orbit theoretically have access to a bigger market. Orbit are sending a very few selected review copies to a few selected bloggers, although as far as I know apart from myself just about none of them are regular WoT fans and will be reviewing the book before release. I'm not sure if Ken or Pat fall into that category either (I imagine they'll be dealing with Tor). My review copy isn't expected until maybe a week before the street-date anyway, around the time the book will be hitting the shelves anyway.
2. That pre-release distribution of the book is a copyright infringement which Tor are serious about nailing down on. RAFO will become a focal point for every person who has messed with Tor, even if they have done so unwittingly.
I'm pretty sure it isn't a copyright violation at all. Issuing a book early happens all the time and is not a major problem unless it's a huge amount of time early (such as the month-early release of CoT in the UK in December 2002, which I know RJ was unhappy with). KoD was also on the shelves more than a week before the official release date (in the UK anyway), as was NEW SPRING. Unless you're JK Rowling or Dan Brown, enforcing street dates can be a really bad idea, if not handled correctly as Bantam UK recently discovered when they tried to enforce the DUST OF DREAMS release date with the net result bookshops refused to stock it until a week AFTER release as they couldn't have multiple 1,000-page hardcovers taking up their stock rooms and they missed out on the series possibly hitting (the lower reaches of) the bestseller lists for the first time.
3. Even if there are decent reviews, there are bound to be hoaxes and lies which will damage our reputation as posters or as a place with worthy content.
I think you are blowing this out of proportion. I was here (well, on Wotmania) when KoD came out and was a lurker at the time CoT did and don't recall the issues you outline here. I remember a few lame jokes which were obviously people having a laugh, but I do not recall anyone attempting to carry out a deliberate campaign of misinformation. I do recall the point-by-point, 100% accurate spoiler review someone posted about two weeks before KoD came out.
4. Risking our reputation and exposing the board to all manner of trash is not worth it when the book is coming out in 5 weeks anyway. We've had the Prologue and the first chapter, and to go beserk for the rest of the book is utterly pointless.
As others have said, no-one has to read the thread. I remember people regretting reading the KoD thread at the time (including me, as I didn't realise it would be a blow-by-blow summary of the book), but that's up to them. And as has been said, it's a specifically spoiler free situation.
Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board?
20/09/2009 08:40:03 AM
- 1576 Views
No, if people want to review the book, they can do it on their own blogs. *NM*
20/09/2009 09:27:18 AM
- 415 Views
Yes. Visitors who don't want them should simply avoid reading them. *NM*
20/09/2009 02:42:15 PM
- 482 Views
If it's going to be in a separate section, and it's spoiler free, why is "NO" even an option?
20/09/2009 05:04:11 PM
- 829 Views
Absolutley! ^ If they don't want to read that section then it shouldn't be a problem. *NM*
21/09/2009 04:24:37 AM
- 441 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board?
20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM
- 724 Views
Yes-- reviews are an essential part of any fanpage-- People have the option not to read them though *NM*
20/09/2009 06:53:42 PM
- 410 Views
Why is No even an option? there supposedly wont be spoilers duh *NM*
20/09/2009 11:40:37 PM
- 403 Views
Yes. If a review is clearly marked as such, please who don't want to read it don't have to. *NM*
21/09/2009 12:59:54 PM
- 822 Views
If they are quarantined in an announced post, I don't see and problem for me, so yes I guess
21/09/2009 01:09:41 PM
- 774 Views
No
21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM
- 796 Views
I think you missread the rules...
21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM
- 1256 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work?
22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM
- 763 Views
I'm strongly against it
22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM
- 897 Views
I hadn't thought about all that, you should have made some kind of pros and cons list
22/09/2009 08:53:39 AM
- 837 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it
22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM
- 763 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this?
22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM
- 731 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this?
22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM
- 893 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it
22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM
- 912 Views
I had no idea about these legalities.
22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM
- 717 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities.
22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM
- 622 Views
Interesting
23/09/2009 12:16:38 AM
- 845 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak.
22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM
- 691 Views
Ever hear of Napster?
22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM
- 684 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM
- 810 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM
- 963 Views