Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
DomA Send a noteboard - 28/09/2009 07:53:46 PM
Discussing the content of leaked copies/illegally obtained copies is at the very least a very good way to get on the publisher's bad side and the publishers would be perfectly in their legal rights to take measures to have these reviews/spoilers removed from sites hosting them. I know it's the case for movie spoilers - I've signed enough NDA in two decades for the stuff I work on to know this - and I don't see why it wouldn't be the same for books that are protected by the same laws.
That's true. Although I think Tor do need to get a bit of a grip. This isn't the new JK Rowling or Dan Brown or Stephen King. Strictly enforcing street dates and refusing to let anyone review the book before it comes out, especially in the current situation with a new author taking over, is a brilliant way of reducing first-week sales until people wait to hear if it's any good or not (Jason's review not being regarded very well, it has to be said).
From what I heard it's a decision from Harriet enforced by Doherty to keep a blanket of secrecy over the content of TGS for fans who have waited so long for the book. I'm guessing for the rest, but I think the marketing folks and publicists have been asked to be imaginative to promote the book and work around the fact they can't do an ARC campaign etc. It might be a reason why they've released two chapters already, so everyone can make their own idea.
Tor didn't turn us down when we discussed with someone there the possibility to get the book a week or so before release, but the answer was something in the vein of "I'd love to if I can, but I'm not able to give you a definitive answer on this yet.". And we didn't ask, they're the ones who reached to us about our TGS coverage.
It's not a matter of not knowing if they'll even get the book in time, they were supposed to have the first copies very soon, if not already.
I thought that's what we were talking about: did we want reviews (spoilery or otherwise) a couple of days before the book was coming out?
From what I understand, it's more than many people claim they have or are about to have the book and want to post reviews soon.
From all I've heard so far, it's not very likely - or not legit review copies anyway.
that the book will be on shelves anything up to a week before its official date, so reviews and spoilers will start appearing then anyway.
It's more likely to happen in the UK perhaps? I don't recall what happened before. From the little I know of the US/Canadian distribution system, it's not so likely unless there's a mistake, because except for exceptional releases they need to work a lot on (say, like Potter and Brown), the chains tend to keep the books at central storage until they're about ready to put them on the shelves in the stores, a day, two before street dates. It's more frequent here to have the opposite and some bookstores missing the street date because the get the books so late that if there's a mistake in shipment they need a day to correct it. I got 75% off and 30% off on another book for quite a few (5 or 6) titles like this in the last years - it's what the book chain I shop at do when they miss a street date. Not being a fool, I started shopping more often on release days.
This message last edited by DomA on 28/09/2009 at 07:58:09 PM
Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board?
20/09/2009 08:40:03 AM
- 1583 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
- 423 Views
Yes. Visitors who don't want them should simply avoid reading them. *NM*
20/09/2009 02:42:15 PM
- 488 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
- 846 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
- 448 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board?
20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM
- 734 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
- 416 Views
Why is No even an option? there supposedly wont be spoilers duh *NM*
20/09/2009 11:40:37 PM
- 410 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
- 828 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
- 788 Views
No
21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM
- 805 Views
I think you missread the rules...
21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM
- 1267 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work?
22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM
- 772 Views
I'm strongly against it
22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM
- 910 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
- 846 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it
22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM
- 777 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this?
22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM
- 742 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this?
22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM
- 907 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it
22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM
- 930 Views
I had no idea about these legalities.
22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM
- 729 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities.
22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM
- 634 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak.
22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM
- 704 Views
Ever hear of Napster?
22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM
- 697 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM
- 823 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM
- 979 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
27/09/2009 02:41:11 AM
- 787 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
28/09/2009 07:53:46 PM
- 714 Views