Smart Bitches Trashy Books | All of the romance, none of the bullshit.

Here at Smart Bitches, we’ve examined a slew of material since last Monday, from novels to anthropology texts to poems, and we’ve discussed authors, editors, publishers, writers, scientists, ethnographers, Native Americans, and of course, Bitches.

But as Paul Tolmé pointed out in his article in Newsweek, there’s one party that hasn’t gotten enough attention.

The ferrets.

Tolmé’s article about the black footed ferret focuses on the loss of their habitat, the prairie, and the programs working to bring them back from near extinction.

The black footed ferret is officially classified by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature as extinct in the wild, though breeding and repopulation programs have been successful. Defenders of Wildlife classifies the ferrets as an imperiled species. 

And then came this morning’s email: Nora Roberts has volunteered to match up to $5,000.00 USD any donations made by Smart Bitches readers to Defenders of Wildlife, a 501(c)3 nonprofit that works to preserve not just ferrets but endangered wildlife across the US, most particularly that species much loved by paranormal romance writers: the wolf.

Are you outside the US, but want to increase Nora’s gift? Please feel free to make a donation to the local wildlife charity of your choice.

To qualify your donation for Nora’s matching gift, please email me at with a screen cap or PDF of your donation receipt. You can block out your personal deets if like. I’ll total up the collective donations and keep y’all appraised of the totals.

Smart Bitches, Trashy Books LLC, will kick off the donations with a $100 pledge. Nora’s offer to match expires 31 January 2008, so please get your donations in by then.

Updated to add: We have cleared $1000 $1500 $2200 $4900 in total Smart Bitch Reader donations. Way to go!

Updated 18 January 2008, 6:00 pm EST: WE have REACHED $5,000.00 - and then some. Way to go Bitches!

The story is in the AP and therefore in USA Today, the New York Times, and various local newspapers from Oklahoma City, OK, to Morris County, NJ.

Hi there, newspaper readers. Hayadoin?

My point is, this isn’t a blog story anymore, and it’s not just a concern for the romance community, either. It’s a national story about what is and what isn’t plagiarism. Candy, myself, Jane at Dear Author, Nora Roberts and other readers say it is. Signet Publishing and Cassie Edwards say it is not.

Some of the comments I’ve seen on our site and in my inbox sent to me personally ask in irate tones how dare we, why didn’t we pursue it privately, and how can we BE so MEAN!?

Accusations as to Candy’s and my morality notwithstanding, this isn’t really about Cassie Edwards so much as it is a debate of ethics. The entries we’ve posted as to the passages that match her novels speak for themselves. This became about plagiarism and the ethical debate surrounding fair use the minute Signet said she’d “done nothing wrong.” I personally, as a reader, consumer, and writer, think there is something very wrong when sections of dialogue in a fictional novel match a previously published source identically and without attribution, particularly when the novel in question is published by a bestselling, nationally recognized author and thus she and her publisher presumably profit from the contents therein.

In my opinion, the debate here isn’t about reputation and HOW we should handle information on this site. The question for me at this point is HOW the romance writing community, including writers, readers and publishers, responds to plagiarism, and so far, I’m deeply amazed and cheering on the readers who say, “That is NOT right and I’m writing to Signet, and Penguin/Putnam to say so.”

As a wise friend of mine, RB, just said: “In the modern age, everyone’s a writer.” All our blogs and journals and published and digitally published works all constitute writing. A good writer cites their sources, acknowledges them, and in my opinion does not drop identical passages without attribution to the original writer.

Moreover, for every hate email I have in my inbox, I have readers who grabbed an Edwards novel and did their own research by not only searching online but taking a trek to the library to consult additional sources.

(Want to move on to other Smart Bitch topics? I’ve got a Friday video today that will make you snort liquid up your nose. I recommend you put down the beverage before you watch it. It’s like whoa, merde, and mon dieu.)

---

I realized recently that all the information we’ve uncovered regarding the Cassie Edwards situation is scattered all over the place. Granted, Sarah and I have been pretty good about keeping that little header bar updated, but it’s still a pain in the ass to click all over when all you want is to specifically see which books have been looked into, how many passages we’ve found, how the passages compare, etc.

So I created a little Word document and converted it to PDF to track this little controversy. It’s by no means complete yet--I’m still waiting to hear from two people about a few books they’re researching, and I might’ve forgotten to include one or two titles. Also, none of the links are clickable, as I’m working from my laptop and my Acrobat Distiller isn’t working properly for some reason; once I have access to my desktop (where my Acrobat behaves just fine), that will hopefully be remedied. As it stands, however, what we have are:

Seven Cassie Edwards novels: three from Signet, one from Topaz, two from Dorchester and one from Zebra, ranging in publication date from 1983 to 2007
Fourteen outside sources: thirteen of them non-fiction, one of them a collection of short stories
More passages than I care to count at the moment
And a paaaaartridge in a pear tree

if you spot any mistakes, have any questions or want to make suggestions on how to make it more usable or readable.

Nora Roberts has been quoted in a revised AP article regarding the Cassie Edwards story:

Roberts, whose fiction has sold hundreds of millions of copies, told The Associated Press on Thursday that “it seems clear” Edwards acted improperly.

“Given the side-by-side comparisons I’ve read, it seems clear Ms. Edwards copied considerable portions of previously published work and used them in her books without attribution to the original source,” Roberts wrote in an e-mail to the AP. “By my definition, copying another’s work and passing it as your own equals plagiarism. As a writer, a reader and a victim of plagiarism, I feel very strongly on this issue. I’m not a lawyer, but I can’t see it as fair use, or fair anything when one writer takes another’s work.”

Both Roberts and Edwards are published by Penguin Group (USA), which on Wednesday defended Edwards, saying: “She has done nothing wrong.”

---

The RWA has released a statement regarding the plagiarism accusations against Cassie Edwards:

There are heated discussions on various loops and blogs regarding the accusations of plagiarism against a published romance author. Some questions have also been raised regarding RWA’s stand on the matter. To be clear, RWA does not condone plagiarism or any type of copyright infringement. (Please see RWA’s Code of Ethics ).

RWA takes all accusations of plagiarism very seriously. RWA also stands behind the idea that guilt or innocence should be determined after a thorough review of all documents and sources, not based on discussions or articles found on the internet or in other news media.

Within RWA, there is a process in place to examine claims of plagiarism made against RWA members. That process includes a set of procedures that affords the individual due process. Any member found to be in violation of RWA’s Code of Ethics is subject to disciplinary action including loss of membership.

According to information RWA has, Cassie Edwards was once a member of RWA and is listed on RWA’s Honor Roll; however, it appears she allowed her membership to lapse four or more years ago. If guilt is admitted or established, RWA will take appropriate steps with regard to the Honor Roll listing.

Members have raised questions about a news article that includes a quote by RWA’s president. The president was asked to give an expert opinion on the issue based solely upon information available in internet blogs. The president does not have enough first-hand information to adequately assess the allegations.

Romance Writers of America