Active Users:525 Time:15/12/2025 12:52:08 AM
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 1917 Views
Yes. - 20/09/2009 11:56:22 AM 1240 Views
Sorry wrong place. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:31:27 PM 602 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 01:12:18 PM 1167 Views
No. *NM* - 20/09/2009 01:26:48 PM 591 Views
No, I prefer to see them after the 27th. - 20/09/2009 01:42:38 PM 999 Views
They don't have to read them if they don't want to *NM* - 21/09/2009 01:54:30 AM 636 Views
NO! *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:05:47 PM 651 Views
No *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:22:15 PM 728 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:08:41 PM 655 Views
Yes please! *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:40:41 PM 660 Views
NO *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:16:55 PM 623 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:17:32 PM 665 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board? - 20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM 1016 Views
I just hate getting interupted. even if I'm at work *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:13 PM 592 Views
Sorry wrong place *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:54 PM 597 Views
We need them to maintain the spike in activity. - 20/09/2009 05:34:14 PM 1134 Views
YES. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:44:48 PM 611 Views
Can anyone who voted no explain why? - 20/09/2009 05:51:51 PM 1035 Views
Yes, why not? - 20/09/2009 06:18:42 PM 1344 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:30:54 PM 598 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:39:34 PM 583 Views
Yes. I see no reason not to. *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:08:47 PM 584 Views
No, I'll just read them and then go regretting it *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:18:27 PM 631 Views
Yes! - 20/09/2009 07:30:59 PM 1054 Views
yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:46:37 PM 656 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 08:34:03 PM 975 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:08:42 PM 589 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:17:51 PM 606 Views
Yes- Give ppl the option to see the reviews *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:03:27 AM 592 Views
Yes *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:33:13 AM 567 Views
I vote yes. - 21/09/2009 04:21:28 AM 1089 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 06:12:37 AM 1029 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 09:32:56 AM 1015 Views
Yes. Don't click the link if you don't want to read it. *NM* - 21/09/2009 02:39:16 PM 637 Views
No - 21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM 1105 Views
I think you missread the rules... - 21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM 1546 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work? - 22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM 1073 Views
I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM 1269 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 1182 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM 1082 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM 1018 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM 1206 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:42:55 PM 1443 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 01:20:58 PM 1072 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM 1231 Views
As I mentioned elsewhere - 22/09/2009 02:51:00 PM 958 Views
I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM 1053 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM 955 Views
Good to know. - 22/09/2009 10:19:57 PM 1180 Views
I'm shitfitng to no too. Hope more people change their votes. - 22/09/2009 10:34:22 PM 1279 Views
Re: Good to know. - 22/09/2009 11:01:35 PM 1065 Views
Interesting - 23/09/2009 12:16:38 AM 1146 Views
How much is that infamous COT review to blame? - 24/09/2009 05:01:29 AM 954 Views
Well, Rand IS a transvestite - not exactly a spoiler anymore. - 22/09/2009 08:29:12 AM 1028 Views
No, no, no, no, no! *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:31:22 PM 575 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak. - 22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM 1018 Views
Ever hear of Napster? - 22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM 938 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM 1146 Views
Sounds right to me. - 23/09/2009 12:27:57 PM 1236 Views
Thank you for the clarification. - 23/09/2009 07:04:13 PM 996 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM 1301 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 27/09/2009 02:41:11 AM 1119 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 28/09/2009 07:53:46 PM 1034 Views
Baloney. The two are not related at all. *NM* - 23/09/2009 07:00:47 PM 607 Views
Yes, as long as no-spoiler policy is employed. *NM* - 23/09/2009 12:04:41 AM 573 Views
No *NM* - 25/09/2009 07:05:03 AM 575 Views

Reply to Message