Publisher Renames 'Katie.com' 510
twigstamc420 writes "In an update to stories posted the previous two days on Slashdot, Penguin Putnam publishing has issued a press release stating that they have re-named the title of Katie.com to 'A Girl's Life Online'. Press release (pdf) found on their press page."
The Power of Slashdot???? (Score:5, Interesting)
Isn't this is a four year old issue in which very little has happened recently? (Most articles I found about it were dated from 2000).
Did Slashdot force this sudden 180?
Typical Face Saving -'Not Our Fault' Retreat (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder (Score:5, Interesting)
Other Katie.com References (Score:5, Interesting)
Hold on a second.... (Score:5, Interesting)
There were no rumors of offers to buy the website. What kind of shameless PR technique is this to cover up the fact that they asked for its donation? I think asking for (demanding) its donation is worse than offering to buy, and this strikes me as a particularly unscrupulous statement by their PR department.
In Other News (Score:5, Interesting)
Such astroturfing is top-notch, the likes of which has not been seen since the Phantom Video Game Console [infiniumlabs.com]. Penguin Putnam thanks all the gullible editors and saps who provided their free advertising.
Re:The Power of Slashdot???? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sting.com (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I can't believe it. (Score:3, Interesting)
Obviously, they've tried to force an issue. The lawyer was badly wrong trying to intimidate somebody while knowing there was no way a court would rule in their favor. She had no idea of how an Internet community can be powerful in those matter because it's not their primary business.
Seeing all the harm that was done by people like slashdotters (including comments in Amazon.com), they backed up right away in order to appear as good as they could given the damage already done to their reputation.
So do not think this title change was done to help Katie.com. It's all in the sake of keeping their business healthy.
Re:Her own announement (Score:5, Interesting)
-Peter
Domain conflicts never resolved logically (Score:2, Interesting)
Too many damned lawyers in the world, not enough "gentlemen's agreements".
Re:Probably Amazon, not Slashdot (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I can't believe it. (Score:1, Interesting)
This doesn't change a damn thing people!!! (Score:3, Interesting)
Plus they only changed the name because of negative press, not because they wanted to 'Do The Right Thing'. They are still on my personal 'banned' list. And I refuse to believe that Ms. Tarbox is as innocent as she claims.
THIS WENT ON FOR 4 YEARS!
I guess it's true; people have short memories, which is why stupid politicians get second terms.
You really have to wonder...... (Score:5, Interesting)
She could just be an unfortunate woman who had a terrible childhood experience only to grow up and have publishers manipulate her recovery in the persuit of money, or she could just be someone who is desperately clinging to her celebrity as - by her own accounts - it is the only recognition and purpose she has ever known.
If the former is true, then she needs to be a bit more upfront about it, but if the latter is true, then she needs to make use of her family's wealth and do something with her life that will provide her with a sense of accomplishment.
So Amazon took down all of the /. neg reviews (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The Power of Slashdot???? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Her own announement (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Penguin's legal team researches proposed names and replies that they wouldn't want to be associated with girl.com, but katie.com's content is inoffensive enough.
2) The author is told that 867-5309 set enough precedent that she could use the name as a separate entity.
3) As publicity builds up before a proposed tour using the name katie.com, the author attempts to engage legal counsel to acquire the domain.
4) A cyber-ambulance chaser [aftab.com] gets in touch with her and is engaged. (Come on. Just look at this site.)
5) The geek world, while sympathetic to the author's original experience and book, cries 'Shenanigans!' to her lawyer's actions towards the current domain owner.
6) Penguin's legal staff decides that that negative fallout was becoming larger than their original risk estimates, and recommends a name change to settle things without admitting anything.
A publisher has great control over a book's title especially for unpublished authors (even Asimov had his titles changed early in his career), so I don't hold the author overly to blame for the original use. I also don't hold her to blame for wanting to acquire the name. She obviously could have chosen a better lawyer, but who knows how she made that choice.
The only thing I think the publisher is guilty of is underestimating the degree of problems usurping an existing domain name would cause. While it's obvious to us now, the book did come out in 2000 and the title may have been decided in 1999. At that time domain name legality was still all over the place, and it's more likely a combination of inexperience and ignorance then malevolence.
Re:The Power of Slashdot???? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is what makes the whole mess a damn shame for Penguin. I really respected the company for its practice of publishing some really obscure titles from the past in conveniently cheap editions (you know, all those orange spined paperbacks in the history section). But, I can't buy the argument that they're entirely clean in this affair, and their reputation has suffered a serious stain in my eyes. While I probably won't boycott them outright, I will confess that I'll most definitely pause whenever I see one of their titles on the shelf.
Re:Her own announement (Score:3, Interesting)
1. The lawyer is representing Katie T
2. The lawyer is representing Penguin
3. The lawyer is representing herself, doing all this out of the goodness of her heart in her free time on her own dime.
I think #3 is right out. #2 may be the case, but I suspect that Penguin has their own attorneys and doesn't need to hire shysters (you have seen her web site, right?). That leaves #1.
If you can point me to a source (other than Katie T) that indicates the attorney doesn't belong to Katie T, I'll agree with you.
#3 is right out.
Re:Her own announement (Score:2, Interesting)
KatieT thinks this is a fab idea, but cac promptly goes overboard and tries to intimidate katieJ into giving up katie.com - heck, cac may have thought she had the legal stuff to fluff her way through a courtroom to legally gain possession of katie.com.
And then Slashdot happens.
And a CEO of Penguin, after the 80th email with 'katie.com' as the subject asks Peon X, Y, or Z, 'what the heck is katie.com?' And after email 800, he tells the legal department to rename the &^%$ing book.
KatieT finally gets asked 'What was the title you originally wanted?'
And two Katies win!
An IM conversation with Katie Tarbox (Score:5, Interesting)
ktarbox261: As I said before this issue was between Katie Jones and Penguin, I could do nothing to change it. They bought the right to publish it and I sold it under a different name.
jbltk: Than why did the press release state that the publisher as well as the author made the decision to change the name, seeing as you have no input?
ktarbox261: This time was a very unique situation.
jbltk: But why didn't you, even without any control, publicly state you felt Penguin's stance was unfair to Katie Jones, and why did you continue to plan to call your workshop by the same name?
ktarbox261: I never had any plans to do that and that is reported incorrectly.
jbltk: so Parry Aftab happens to be a lawyer who doesn't represent you and is only a victim's rights advocate?
jbltk: it just seems to me like you've played both sides, awaiting the outcome so you would be able to do what was most profitable for you, in regards to your future projects
ktarbox261: Parry Aftab is not my lawyer and never has been. My lawyer works out of Connecticut.
ktarbox261: I never asked anyone to call Katie Jones.
ktarbox261: I have always wanted Penguin to do the right thing . What you read is not the whole story.
jbltk: Then why did she call Katie Jones? What was the purpose of that call? Lawyers charge large amounts of money to do things like that. I find it hard to believe she'd make an international call like that without instruction from a client
jbltk: ok i'm listening
jbltk: please inform me of all the misinformation
ktarbox261: Parry is not my lawyer we have no written agreement, I have never paid her a single dime.
jbltk: FYI, I've yet to see an article that quotes you as being in favor of changing the title
ktarbox261: Look at my website
jbltk: I looked. I don't see anything said by you that indicates you favor a title change or sympathize with Ms. Jones. The only thing I've seen so far is your statement regarding the press release. Up until then, I'd never seen any news article that had you saying you felt sympathy or wanted a title change
jbltk: I know you may have signed your creative control over when you sold your book, but that didn't prevent you from speaking out publicly
jbltk: You see, it's easy to say all those things you say @ (Link: http://katiet.com/message1.htm)http://katiet.com/m essage1.htm after the fact, but you never said them until today
ktarbox261: I do sympathesize with Ms. Jones and the fact that I said I am excited to change the name of the book, that would show I am in favor of it.
ktarbox261: Unfortunately I couldn't speak about this issue until today.
jbltk: why is that?
ktarbox261: Because this issue was between Penguin and Ms. Jones.
jbltk: that hasn't prevented me or my peers from giving Penguin a hard time publicly or directly. Did you have some sort of confidentiality agreement or something?
ktarbox261: That is all I can say.
jbltk: OK, is it fair to say that you would have faced financial hardships had you made any statements on the issue?
ktarbox261: No it is not fair to say.
jbltk: It just seems to me that if you really thought what Penguin was doing was wrong, you should have piped up way back when this all started, unless you were under a contractual obligation to not speak about it.
jbltk: I'm not trying to be a jerk, there are just a bunch of inconsistencies that I see in this whole thing, and I really like to know the whole story
ktarbox261: I could not speak about it.
jbltk: Because of an agreement between yourself and the publisher?
ktarbox261: I could not speak ab
Same book, different title (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:An IM conversation with Katie Tarbox (Score:1, Interesting)