Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, I don’t play one on TV, but at one time in my life I aspired to be one, until I learned that the concepts of law and the reality of law in practice are two entirely separate things.

So, I’ve read all of the Dooce documents*. Absent any others, it seems to me that the lawyers for Kensington Publishers were a little quick on the trigger finger.

There weren’t many mistakes on Dooce’s part (or her representative’s). If I had one criticism, or maybe two, it would be these:

1. Research the publisher
   Some reports seem to indicate that Kensington Publishers and imprints don’t always play nice with their authors. Ashida Kim claims that his book was hijacked by Pinnacle and Kensington. (Note: I said CLAIMS — I haven’t researched enough to know that for sure). Entertainment Law Digest has abstracts which report a couple of lawsuits involving Kensington and authors or competing publishers.

   Honestly, by looking through Internet search results it would seem that Kensington is no more evil or good than anyone else. It’s doubtful that anyone could tell from internet research whether they’re a good or bad publisher to fall in with. They are for sure, one of the few that take risks on unknown authors.

   Is word of mouth in publishing circles reliable? I don’t know. There seems to be a huge black hole when it comes to this question, probably because print publishers could potentially be a large source of bread and butter to bloggers looking to publish and market books. Biting the hand that feeds writers is usually not a smart move.

2. Don’t negotiate as an individual. This is probably the most important thing that Dooce could have done. If she had incorporated as an LLC she would have had a better chance of protecting herself from the possibility of losing her house. Given that she’s actually making income from her blog efforts and other writing, it’s worth spending the money to incorporate. The contract that ultimately results will be between the publisher and the company rather than the publisher and an individual.
3. At the first sign of interest, involve a lawyer. I know, it sucks. But when you’re dealing with a big company, they come out of the gate with lawyers protecting their interests. Agents REPRESENT writers’ interests. Their job is to get as much as they possibly can for writers’ creative efforts. That doesn’t make them experts in PROTECTING writers’ interests. It was (and is) worth having a good lawyer in on the negotiations at the start.

Overall, though, it seems as though this company was pissed off that she received a better offer from another publisher and tried to throw their corporate weight around to bully her into a contract that didn’t really pay enough in the long run for what they would get in return. Before I get slapped for saying that about a $150,000 two-book contract, let’s be real — her agent gets the off-the-top cut, the publicist (if there is one) will get their cut, the Internal Revenue Service and state of Utah will get their share, and what’s left will be hers. Not very much, trust me.

There isn’t a magic bullet against Kensington’s bully behavior beyond having the court slap THEM by awarding fees and damages to HER, which I doubt was part of the settlement. (I would like to know what the ultimate settlement was — I hope that it at least covered what she shelled out for that 27-page response and depositions…).

This is new and sometimes terrible territory for bloggers. As I was researching this, I came across some frightening articles about bloggers being sued, copyrights being violated, and other publishing issues that aren’t new, but aren’t always thought about when we set up our little virtual house and start to talk about things that concern us.

It’s definitely worth more discussion…I’d love to hear thoughts from other bloggers, especially those who aspire to be published in print.

Technorati Tags: dooce lawsuit, dooce, blogging risks, publishing

*Documents:

• From the Blog Herald: Initial Complaint (PDF)
• Memo in support of her motion to dismiss
• An affidavit filed in support of that motion
• An exhibit attached to that affidavit