Active Users:400 Time:01/05/2025 05:33:09 PM
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
Reply to message
Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board? - 20/09/2009 08:40:03 AM 1681 Views
Yes. - 20/09/2009 11:56:22 AM 1022 Views
Sorry wrong place. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:31:27 PM 453 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 01:12:18 PM 955 Views
No. *NM* - 20/09/2009 01:26:48 PM 459 Views
No, I prefer to see them after the 27th. - 20/09/2009 01:42:38 PM 806 Views
They don't have to read them if they don't want to *NM* - 21/09/2009 01:54:30 AM 457 Views
NO! *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:05:47 PM 507 Views
No *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:22:15 PM 554 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:08:41 PM 505 Views
Yes please! *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:40:41 PM 517 Views
NO *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:16:55 PM 458 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:17:32 PM 507 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board? - 20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM 820 Views
I just hate getting interupted. even if I'm at work *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:13 PM 451 Views
Sorry wrong place *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:54 PM 464 Views
We need them to maintain the spike in activity. - 20/09/2009 05:34:14 PM 933 Views
YES. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:44:48 PM 472 Views
Can anyone who voted no explain why? - 20/09/2009 05:51:51 PM 836 Views
Yes, why not? - 20/09/2009 06:18:42 PM 1124 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:30:54 PM 438 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:39:34 PM 445 Views
Yes. I see no reason not to. *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:08:47 PM 451 Views
No, I'll just read them and then go regretting it *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:18:27 PM 495 Views
Yes! - 20/09/2009 07:30:59 PM 833 Views
yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:46:37 PM 501 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 08:34:03 PM 772 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:08:42 PM 457 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:17:51 PM 457 Views
Yes- Give ppl the option to see the reviews *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:03:27 AM 453 Views
Yes *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:33:13 AM 426 Views
I vote yes. - 21/09/2009 04:21:28 AM 866 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 06:12:37 AM 826 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 09:32:56 AM 814 Views
Yes. Don't click the link if you don't want to read it. *NM* - 21/09/2009 02:39:16 PM 481 Views
No - 21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM 895 Views
I think you missread the rules... - 21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM 1357 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work? - 22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM 862 Views
I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM 1009 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 948 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM 856 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM 834 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM 996 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:42:55 PM 1232 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 01:20:58 PM 831 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM 1013 Views
As I mentioned elsewhere - 22/09/2009 02:51:00 PM 755 Views
I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM 831 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM 726 Views
Good to know. - 22/09/2009 10:19:57 PM 947 Views
I'm shitfitng to no too. Hope more people change their votes. - 22/09/2009 10:34:22 PM 1065 Views
Re: Good to know. - 22/09/2009 11:01:35 PM 859 Views
Interesting - 23/09/2009 12:16:38 AM 953 Views
How much is that infamous COT review to blame? - 24/09/2009 05:01:29 AM 750 Views
Well, Rand IS a transvestite - not exactly a spoiler anymore. - 22/09/2009 08:29:12 AM 833 Views
No, no, no, no, no! *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:31:22 PM 428 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak. - 22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM 798 Views
Ever hear of Napster? - 22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM 758 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM 928 Views
Sounds right to me. - 23/09/2009 12:27:57 PM 1017 Views
Thank you for the clarification. - 23/09/2009 07:04:13 PM 817 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM 1072 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 27/09/2009 02:41:11 AM 879 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 28/09/2009 07:53:46 PM 826 Views
Baloney. The two are not related at all. *NM* - 23/09/2009 07:00:47 PM 474 Views
Yes, as long as no-spoiler policy is employed. *NM* - 23/09/2009 12:04:41 AM 434 Views
No *NM* - 25/09/2009 07:05:03 AM 439 Views

Reply to Message