Reply to Author's book publication cancelled after a tweet reporting on a WMATA employee eating on the metro

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Author's book publication cancelled after a tweet reporting on a WMATA employee eating on the metro"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Even if she wins, she will need to self publish her work. She is too much of a risk for a publisher. This whole lawsuit kills her career as a published writer. Its Instagram for her forever. Pictures and Twitter blurbs. [/quote]

HA, well it sounds like she would have been better off self-publishing. Her book tanked.

Eisen's full statement reads:

The complaint filed against Rare Bird by Natasha Tynes is baseless for a host of reasons, chief among them:  Rare Bird has never had any agreement of any kind with Ms. Tynes, nor has anyone from Rare Bird ever had any contact with her whatsoever, and Rare Bird’s statement about Ms. Tynes’ conduct was not defamatory.

Ms. Tynes’ publisher, California Coldblood, arranged for Rare Bird to distribute the book. As Rare Bird has stated previously, the company could not in good conscience be affiliated in any way with Ms. Tynes’ book, given her actions on social media.

[u][b]    As for the amount of damages Mr. Tynes claims to be seeking, it is worth noting that her book had pre-orders of less than 50 copies, and only a few hundred were scheduled to be printed. And it was not initially well-received:  https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-1-947856-75-2[/b][/u]

It is ironic that, having taken advantage of her First Amendment rights with an ill-advised tweet, Ms. Tynes now seeks to stifle and punish use of those very same rights of a respected book publisher who legitimately expressed its opinions of her conduct, rather than take responsibility for her own actions. Ms. Tynes would have been better served to have simply let this episode disappear into the annals of history.

Rare Bird will, of course, expend all of the resources necessary to defeat this meritless litigation.[/quote]

Interesting that you post the "irony" this way and not the other way. The publisher apparently had a problem with the author tweeting something about someone but then turned around and tweeted something way worse about her.

And actually, it was really the publisher who first put an "official" racial spin on it. Before that, it was just rumblings and accusations from the public. The author herself said nothing remotely racist. It was the publisher's statement and embellishment that ultimately made the whole thing a news story.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics