Publisher Renames 'Katie.com'

twigstamc420 writes "In an update to stories posted the previous two days on Slashdot, Penguin Putnam publishing has issued a press release stating that they have re-named the title of Katie.com to 'A Girl's Life Online'. Press release (pdf) found on their press page."

Comments

Boys night out!

[garcia]

In other news, GL Online has stated that Penguin Books had used psychical and emotional intimidation to coerce them into allowing the usage of the title "A Girls Life: Online".

A representative from Boy's Life was quoted as saying, "girls have cooooodies, ewww. Good riddance!"

Re:Boys night out!

[tgrigsby]

"psychical"? They used brainwaves to attack them?

Yow.

The Power of Slashdot????

[Hobbex]

Isn't this is a four year old issue in which very little has happened recently? (Most articles I found about it were dated from 2000).

Did Slashdot force this sudden 180?

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[chimpo13]

Jesus, who would've thunk a bunch of annoyed geeks to could affect rapid change?

Okay, everyone concentrate until I get superpowers. And I don't want to be the next "Arm Fall Off Boy" or "Matter Eating Lad" (dang Legion of Super Heroes), I want something neat. Some sort of Tad Ghostal powers.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[Sircus]

There was also an article on The Register. I presume there were other articles on other sites - it probably all got too much for Penguin.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[garcia]

Nah, it's just that the media has recently jumped on this. Al Roker probably has more people that are psychotic than we do.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[travdaddy]

Whoa, I think Katie Jones (the good one) owes Slashdot an interview! I'm sure she would be more than willing to do one!

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[stromthurman]

If the slashdot community can get a publisher to rename a book in a matter of days (assuming of course that this community was largely responsible), maybe we can be harnassed for more than bringing webservers to their knees.
I also wonder how much of this was a result of the amazon.com reviews/rankings, and so on? If it was significant, slashdotting places that provide open reviews may be a viable way to instigate change in businesses whose practices we find questionable.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[MojoRilla]

Slashdot was USED by the publisher. They know as well as anyone else "There is no such thing as bad publicity".

If this is true, I think the publisher was sadly mistaken. I don't think this will help book sales at all. People who read Slashdot won't be interested in this book.

On the other hand, slashdotters will long remember that Penguin acted in an unethical manner. Perhaps they might even avoid buying books from them.

I believe this is simply a case of a marketing department thinking that it can do what it wants, and getting caught by public opinion.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[jsebrech]

On the other hand, slashdotters will long remember that Penguin acted in an unethical manner. Perhaps they might even avoid buying books from them.

But then they might also think "hey, penguin got the message, they're not so bad after all"

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[brandonY]

Whow, boy, slow down. Let's not imply the other Katie is the bad one. She was also, and to a much greater extent, a victim. Repeat after me. I am not my publisher.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[Scrameustache]

On the other hand, slashdotters will long remember that Penguin acted in an unethical manner. Perhaps they might even avoid buying books from them.

Yeah, slashdotters will boycott a penguin. That'll be the day!

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[OrangeTide]

"You are who you choose to associate with." -- Brian Sussman/KFSO (i think)

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[The Angry Mick]

On the other hand, slashdotters will long remember that Penguin acted in an unethical manner. Perhaps they might even avoid buying books from them.

This is what makes the whole mess a damn shame for Penguin. I really respected the company for its practice of publishing some really obscure titles from the past in conveniently cheap editions (you know, all those orange spined paperbacks in the history section). But, I can't buy the argument that they're entirely clean in this affair, and their reputation has suffered a serious stain in my eyes. While I probably won't boycott them outright, I will confess that I'll most definitely pause whenever I see one of their titles on the shelf.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[argent]

A twist on "the good one/the bad one" at Bob, the Angry Flower...

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[Sycraft-fu]

Being a victim of a sexual assult isn't a free pass to be a jerk later in life. It's a horrible experience, no question. However just because something bad happens to you doesn't make you automatically a good person or mean your actions are always justified.

The critical point that people are missing here is the lawyer that was doing the dirty work represents Katie Tarbox, not Penguin. Well guess what? When a lawyer represents you, they MUST do as you say. If they don't like it, they can leave, but they are not allowed to not listen to you. If you tell your lawyer to drop a lawsuit on your behalf, they must do so.

So Katie T. was laying when she claimed there was nothing she could do. On the contrary, she could tell her lawyer to back down. The book name is up to the publisher (though they always clear it with the author) but it was Katie's lawyer, not Penguin's, that was making the legal threats.

Basically from reading some stories about this, the post on katie.com, and Tarbox's responses, I get the feeling that Tarbox has become greedy and wants to milk her fame for all it's worth. Now there's nothing wrong with profiting from something like this. If oyu have a story people are willing to pay to hear, then good for you if you make money selling it. However I believe that for Tarbox, money is now the motivating factor, not protecting people, hence her agressive actions and deceptive information.

People really need to be careful about worshiping victims. When someone is a victim of something bad, a crime, natural disaster, disease, etc they need love and support. It does not, however, make them into a super hero. They still can be and can be come a bad person. As an example, take a drug dealer that gets a debilitating cancer. Well, that's a bad thing, and you certianly can feel sorry for them because of that, but it doesn't mean it's suddenly ok for them to be a drug dealer, one does not wash out or justify the other.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[Anonymous Coward]

And if the entity with which you are asosciated changes their behaviour AFTER the contract is signed?

Unless KatieT knew that the publisher was planning to pull this (or she had a part in it ofc), I don't think she should be judged on their actions after the contract was signed.

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[biotic]

oh, but wait! Lets quote Editor-in-chief from the press release:

- "This is an important book about predatory pedophiles on the Internet (...) We changed the title to keep focus on this issue (...) We have always taken this situation very seriously. And we hope that by making this title change, it will demonstrate just how dedicated Plume is to clarifying this matter."

so it only took them 4 years to clarify it... dedicated indeed.

And a little more corporate bullshit for you:

- "After the book was released into the market, it was brought to Dutton's attention that a website of the same name existed on the Internet."

Riiiiight... They decided to use a domain name as a title and nobody bothered to check if it was taken.

Good ass kicking /.

P.S. And everybody seems to disassociatie themselves from the Parry FATab. Where's her press release? Anyway, remember her name, the bitch will be back!

Re:The Power of Slashdot????

[siskbc]

Typical Slashdot ignorance. Please submit a list of the books your written where the publisher cleared the title with you.

It's not so much who chose the title as who's currently the asshole. Penguin just changed the name of the book; Tarbox has a creep of a lawyer who's harassing Katie Jones.

So currently it looks like Tarbox's lawyer is the ass here. If that doesn't reflect Tarbox, she needs a new lawyer.

I can't believe it.

[2names]

A large corporation has finally done something right.

Wait, what's the catch?

Re:I can't believe it.

[Anonymous Coward]

They're going to light us all on fire tonight at 8:53. :(

Re:I can't believe it.

[flibuste]

They did what was the ONLY thing that could go right for THEM. Don't worry, they did nothing else than work toward their own interest.
Obviously, they've tried to force an issue. The lawyer was badly wrong trying to intimidate somebody while knowing there was no way a court would rule in their favor. She had no idea of how an Internet community can be powerful in those matter because it's not their primary business.
Seeing all the harm that was done by people like slashdotters (including comments in Amazon.com), they backed up right away in order to appear as good as they could given the damage already done to their reputation.
So do not think this title change was done to help Katie.com. It's all in the sake of keeping their business healthy.

Re:I can't believe it.

[rowdent]

Throwing money at causes doesn't make a corporation "good". When their business practices reflect ethical decision-making, then they are "good". Look at some of the companies that are listed in the link:

Lockheed Martin: *kaboom* Great humanitarians there.

Monsanto Fund: "Grow GMOs or wave major grocery chains goodbye." Most abusive multinational food company out there.

Shell Oil: Supported South African Apartheid. See Mother Jones for more information.

Typical Face Saving -'Not Our Fault' Retreat

[gadlaw]

We didn't do anything wrong, we don't know of anyone who did anything wrong, we didn't even think about doing anything wrong. And now we'll correct this wrong right away like we could have done years ago. Thank you very much. Love us, we are the good guys. _-Right.

Re:Typical Face Saving -'Not Our Fault' Retreat

[josh3736]

Something that a lot of people seem to be missing out on is that this is not entirely the publisher's evildoing.

Yes, they might be the ones that said "huh.... katie.com is already in use.... Fuck it, we'll use it anyway!"

But they aren't the ones sending the lawyers after Katie Jones. Katie Tarbox, the author, is sending the lawayers after the other Katie.

I can almost forgive using katie.com. It is inexcusable for the author to send the lawyers after someone who has the legal rights to the domain.

Re:Typical Face Saving -'Not Our Fault' Retreat

[squiggleslash]

Actually we don't have any evidence that Tarbox sent lawyers after anyone. All we know is that a lawyer, working on a project with Tarbox, suggested to Jones that she sell the domain to Tarbox, and when Jones refused, said that continuing to hold on to the domain would only make things worse.

Which is presumably true. If you own a domain that's being targetted by netkooks and other Internet lowlife, you're not going to make anything better by holding on to it.

From what I have read, nothing Jones has said implied in any way that any legal threats were being made. But it's now being treated as fact on Slashdot that she has, I think the usual "If you hear something repeated enough times you begin to believe it's true" has been combined with a misunderstanding of what Jones wrote.

Re:Typical Face Saving -'Not Our Fault' Retreat

[pyrrhonist]

All we know is that a lawyer, working on a project with Tarbox, suggested to Jones that she sell the domain to Tarbox, and when Jones refused, said that continuing to hold on to the domain would only make things worse.

I don't think threats count as suggestions. In Katie Jones' own words:

She then got quite aggressive and said things would 'only get worse' for me if I didn't give it up.

The other thing she tried to do was emotionally blackmail me, which I felt was extremely inappropriate.

From what I have read, nothing Jones has said implied in any way that any legal threats were being made.

Again, in Katie Jones' own words:

She also told me that I could not sell it to anyone nor use it for any other purpose because she could prosecute as it's now linked forever to the book and it's subject matter. And she said that they were going to Trademark the term 'katie.com'.

I'm still not satisfied . . .

[sbergstrom]

This is just Plume's red herring attempt to get the pressure off. They've got to still be doing something we can be angry about!

Woot!

[Anonymous Coward]

FinaFuckingLy! Geeks: 1; The Man: 0

I wonder

[sneezinglion]

...if that lawyer will still be demanding the domain from the other Katie though.

Re:I wonder

[randyest]

That excerpt from the press release denies attempt to buy the domain. It makes no mention or denial of having tried to intimidate and threaten Katie Jones into donating the domain to them to avod "things only getting worse."

Important distinction, that.

Your post proves the effectiveness of denying a related, but different charge in an effort to whitewash an entire event.

Be careful.

Covered their bases on this one...

[Coffee Warlord]

Certainly snapped this one up.

Domain Name: AGIRLSLIFEONLINE.COM
Registrar: REGISTER.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.register.com
Referral URL: http://www.register.com
Name Server: DNS19.REGISTER.COM
Name Server: DNS20.REGISTER.COM
Status: ACTIVE
Updated Date: 05-aug-2004
Creation Date: 05-aug-2004
Expiration Date: 05-aug-2006

Organization:
Katie Tarbox, Inc.
Katie Tarbox

Re:Covered their bases on this one...

[Dr. Evil]

Quick, somebody publish a book called "agirlslifeonline.com" and sue them!

Re:Covered their bases on this one...

[deft]

yes, but is agirlslifeonlinesucks.com taken?

Great move.

[randyest]

Fury of a 10,000 angry geeks diverted.

I'm very glad to hear this.

So, the only remaining question is: will Chubby Aftab apologize for the threats now, or wait until she's on O'Reilly next week?

Re:Great move.

[vegaspctech]

So, the only remaining question is: will Chubby Aftab apologize for the threats now, or wait until she's on O'Reilly next week?

Given her visible track record, I find it unlikely that she'll apologize to anyone for anything, because there's no money in that. This self-proclaimed angel of the internet ought to look a little closer to home and pause a moment to consider where potential visitors will wind up if they simply enter teenangels in their browser's address bar. If ever she does, I'll bet you that instead of admitting her mistake she'll go after the owner of teenangels.com.

Only one word, repeated twice, is necessary...

[Tom7]

ha-ha

Other Katie.com References

[stromthurman]

Now, if Katie Tarbox can be dissuaded from using the name 'Katie.com' for her upcoming school lecture series as well, Katie Jones may finally get her weblife back.

/. effect can make people back down on BS claims?

[swordofstars]

If so, let's all pay a visit Here and Here.

Her own announement

[miracle]

She posted her own personal announcement on the site she really owns.

Today I am very excited to announce that Katie.com will be re-released and re-named A Girl's Life Online. From the beginning, I hoped that Penguin and Katie Jones would be able to resolve this issue. I never believed that I had any right to the name Katie.com as a website but simply viewed it to be the name of my book. That being said, I never wanted anyone to experience unwanted emails or traffic on the Internet. As someone who has been abused, I would certainly not wish to cause anybody pain. Therefore, I sincerely apologize to Katie Jones for any suffering she may have endured.

That's a little different than the slashing perpetrator Slashdot has cast her. Refreshing to know the good guys do win....sometimes.

Re:Her own announement

[pete-classic]

So was it mis-reported that Katie Tarbox's personal lawyer was trying to get Katie Jones to give up the domain?

-Peter

Re:Her own announement

[icedivr]

Well.... what else was she supposed to say? "I'm sorry my bullying attempts got exposed to the light of day and yall called me on it"?

I guess I'm just cynical but I doubt Katie T's lawyer would have pursued the domain name without the ok of Ms Tarbox. That makes her complicit in the attorney's actions. At this point it's just damage control.

Re:Her own announement

[Omeganon]

Umm. That's 4 years _after_ they first started using it. Please. Even in 2000 the Internet was widely used and you can't tell me that someone didn't think to check if the domain was already in use. That's back in the hey-day of buying/suing for domain names. They knew what they were doing.

Re:Her own announement

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

Well, had you read up on the information available from sources other than Slashdot, you might have been clued in about this from the start. Things are not always as they seem here at Slashdot. It's pretty typical around here to read the first sentence and embellish it into something it's not quite. For example, Tarbox has said that this lawyer who the other Katie implies threatened her, does not represent her. But you know how the sheep here feel about lawyers, one mention and keyboards all over the world get covered with spit.

Re:Her own announement

[NaugaHunter]

Using Occam's Razor, the following scenario seems likely.

1) Penguin's legal team researches proposed names and replies that they wouldn't want to be associated with girl.com, but katie.com's content is inoffensive enough.

2) The author is told that 867-5309 set enough precedent that she could use the name as a separate entity.

3) As publicity builds up before a proposed tour using the name katie.com, the author attempts to engage legal counsel to acquire the domain.

4) A cyber-ambulance chaser gets in touch with her and is engaged. (Come on. Just look at this site.)

5) The geek world, while sympathetic to the author's original experience and book, cries 'Shenanigans!' to her lawyer's actions towards the current domain owner.

6) Penguin's legal staff decides that that negative fallout was becoming larger than their original risk estimates, and recommends a name change to settle things without admitting anything.

A publisher has great control over a book's title especially for unpublished authors (even Asimov had his titles changed early in his career), so I don't hold the author overly to blame for the original use. I also don't hold her to blame for wanting to acquire the name. She obviously could have chosen a better lawyer, but who knows how she made that choice.

The only thing I think the publisher is guilty of is underestimating the degree of problems usurping an existing domain name would cause. While it's obvious to us now, the book did come out in 2000 and the title may have been decided in 1999. At that time domain name legality was still all over the place, and it's more likely a combination of inexperience and ignorance then malevolence.

Re:Her own announement

[dillon_rinker]

Katie T's lawyer CAN'T do ANYTHING without the ok of Ms Tarbox. Attorneys DO NOT act independently; they act ONLY in the interests of their clients. Failure to do so can get them disbarred.

Re:Her own announement

[dillon_rinker]

As far as the legal system is concerned, an attorney IS you. EVERY ACTION taken by an attorney on your behalf is legally YOUR action. Since this is the reality that lawyers have created and understand, I don't think it's too farfetched to suggest that when Katie T retained a shyster as her attorney, she became legally, ethically, and morally liable for the actions of her attorney.

Regarding the publisher's guilt - I don't think inexperience and ignorance could be an excuse even in 2000. The internet was not a new thing in 2000. The antitrust case for Internet Explorer + Windows was three years old. The ".com thing" was big news and big business - it was the height of the internet bubble. Furthermore, ignorance ceased to be an excuse the instant they found out about Katie J, and they COULD have found out about Katie J by typing the address in any browser.

A pox on all of them, I say.

Re:Her own announement

[dillon_rinker]

There are three possible cases:

1. The lawyer is representing Katie T
2. The lawyer is representing Penguin
3. The lawyer is representing herself, doing all this out of the goodness of her heart in her free time on her own dime.

I think #3 is right out. #2 may be the case, but I suspect that Penguin has their own attorneys and doesn't need to hire shysters (you have seen her web site, right?). That leaves #1.

If you can point me to a source (other than Katie T) that indicates the attorney doesn't belong to Katie T, I'll agree with you.

#3 is right out.

Re:Her own announement

[AC5398]

Or the cyber-ambulance chaser contacts gets in touch with her and says 'I have lots of online safety experience and I'm a lawyer; lets do a safety website together to help warn children and parents about the dangers of the internet.'

KatieT thinks this is a fab idea, but cac promptly goes overboard and tries to intimidate katieJ into giving up katie.com - heck, cac may have thought she had the legal stuff to fluff her way through a courtroom to legally gain possession of katie.com.

And then Slashdot happens.

And a CEO of Penguin, after the 80th email with 'katie.com' as the subject asks Peon X, Y, or Z, 'what the heck is katie.com?' And after email 800, he tells the legal department to rename the &^%$ing book.

KatieT finally gets asked 'What was the title you originally wanted?'

And two Katies win!

Re:Her own announement

[shirai]

You've never had a lawyer before.

When you have a lawyer (especially for the first time) and you don't understand the law, you feel obligated to listen to your lawyer. Before I understood that what I want is ultimately what should drive my decision, I let a lawyer convince me into behavior that I later regretted. It wasn't quite so public or bad but I understand how should could have been suggested into a course of action ("You're just protecting your name and this is how we do it corporately.")

Lawyers encourage you to be aggressive.

That Katie later withdrew her statements and apologized doesn't mean she was a meanie to begin with. Just like the social psychology studies, a person in a perceived position of power (a lawyer is certainly one) can affect your behavior.

I'm not saying Katie's behavior was right. Only that it is forgivable and she ultimately did the right thing. We should forgive her.

Hold on a second....

[wolfemi1]

There is a quote here in the press release that set off my BS detector:

...it was erroneously reported that Plume had asked its attorney to attempt to buy the website Katie.com...

There were no rumors of offers to buy the website. What kind of shameless PR technique is this to cover up the fact that they asked for its donation? I think asking for (demanding) its donation is worse than offering to buy, and this strikes me as a particularly unscrupulous statement by their PR department.

Re:Hold on a second....

[VidEdit]

If the discussion was as reported it is quite possible that KatieT's lawyer was trying to goad Katie Jones into asking for money. If she did, KatieT's lawer could have used that as trumped up evidence that Katie Jones was trying to illegally profit from the trademark "Katie.Com" and try and get the WIPO to award the domain to KatieT. I think the lawyer's call was even more insidious than it appeared. Remember, tricking the website owner into an offer to "sell" a domain was used to get Mike Rowe who had MikeRoweSoft.com

Probably Amazon, not Slashdot

[Bozdune]

Hey, whether they fess up to their original sins or not, we won. But I bet the reason we won is all the negative reviews that suddenly landed on Amazon, not a bunch of geeks mouthing off on /. The reviews hit them where it hurts, in the pocketbook. A lesson to be learned, perhaps...

Re:Probably Amazon, not Slashdot

[Jagasian]

I took part in the negative Amazon ratings bomb yesterday, and there were hundreds of slashdotters giving the book a negative rating. However, when I checked today, all of those ratings were removed, i.e. censored!

Re:Probably Amazon, not Slashdot

[sik0fewl]

Yep, that's been noted several times already (see my post history). They haven't been "censored" however, since the reviews weren't about the book, they were about the publisher and author which is why they were removed.

However, I still think the ratings bomb had a big effect on the publishers. They were down to 2 stars or less for a while and all the positive reviews still say "5 out of 287" people found this review helpful.

In Other News

[Wind_Walker]

Penguin Putnam, publishers of "A Girl's Life Online" (previously titled Katie.com) are thrilled at the enormous amount of free publicity they have received. They clearly did not intend to pursue the lawsuit in question, merely to make enough of a gesture to arouse interest in certain tech communities.

Such astroturfing is top-notch, the likes of which has not been seen since the Phantom Video Game Console. Penguin Putnam thanks all the gullible editors and saps who provided their free advertising.

Re:Hmm

[nahorniak]

Yeah.. I guess this would be a good time to slap myself for not RTFPR

This trend

[www.sorehands.com]

This trend only happens when the little people stand up to the corporations.

I think we should show our appreciation...

[cliveholloway]

Not often these things happen. Please take the time to thank Penguin. I suggest you email the writer of the Press Release, Brant Janeway at Brant.Janeway(at)US.PenguinGroup.com

I'm sure they'd appreciate hearing how grateful we all are.

cLive ;-)

Every effort?

[Rev. Rudolf]

"We have made every effort to clarify the fact that Plume's book, Katie.com, and the website, Katie.com, are not in any way associated with one another."

Personally I would have thought that "every effort" would have included going to the effort of not calling the book that in the first place.

Still, a small victory. Behold, Geek Power! :-)

My new book

[nacturation]

I'm writing a new book called Penguin.com, all about how you can find penguins online. The fact that the book, Penguin.com, and the website belonging to the publishing company shares the same name is purely coincidental. Regarding this, I have been quoted as saying, "I will make every effort to clarify the fact that my book, Penguin.com, and the website, Penguin.com, are not in any way associated with one another.

Re:My new book

[PhuCknuT]

The problem is, it won't work as well the other way around. For penguin, it would be free advertising. For katie j, it was more like a free slashdotting for 4 years.

Sting.com

[Fubar411]

Has anyone else noticed that Sting.com, once a website for a computer game fanatic is now the official web-page of Sting, the artist? A quick look, shows typical rock-ego, with quotes from the artist himself, a ton of flash, etc. Any idea how this was finally handed over? Did the guy at least get paid?

Re:Sting.com

[DragonMagic]

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/200 0/d2000-0596.html

Sting got the WIPO to stand in and give him the domain.

Re:Sting.com

[Zordak]

The decision you link to clearly finds for the other guy, and denies the singer's attempt to hijack the domain name. Every once in a while, the guy with the money does lose.

Re:New address

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's what KatieT had to say about it

http://www.katiet.com/message1.htm

I don't understand...

[Hank Reardon]

The author of the book has her own "vanity" domain name, katieT.com. Why the hell wouldn't you just use this for the title instead of dragging somebody else through all of this crap.

Domain conflicts never resolved logically

[Surak_Prime]

I always wonder why it is, when I see things like this, that the two parties can't work it out in a more straight-forward and mutually beneficial fashion. In this case, all it would probably have taken was for the publisher to have offered to pay for katie.com's hosting and registry for as long as they wished to put a small presence along the top or to one side of her page, referring people to info on the book. In the case of the two WWF's a few years back, I emailed them both outlining a mutually beneficial way to SHARE the domain name and promote both the Wildlife Fund AND the Superstars of Wrestling. Probably would have netted the World Wildlife Fund a nice new source of revenue from wrestling fans who like Jake the Snake and ACTUAL snakes, Gorilla Monsoon and REAL gorillas, and Sable and um, things with fur, but NO, we can't have that, can we?

Too many damned lawyers in the world, not enough "gentlemen's agreements".

Katie Jones Responds

[geekychic]

Katie Jones, owner of the katie.com domain, has posted a response on her website.

Penguin FINALLY do the right thing!

According to a press release on their site today, Penguin Puttnam have finally decided to do the right thing and rename the book. I cannot tell you how pleased I am!. Of course they should have done this 4 years ago and saved us all a load of grief, but I am thrilled that they've finally realised the consequences of their actions and admitted fault by retitling the book.

All that remains is to hope that Katie Tarbox does not continue to promote herself or her services as 'katie.com' as previously threatened and maybe then my life can return to normal :-)

I am sure that this sudden change of heart by the publisher is largely to do with the support this issue has received from the online community and once again I'd like to thank everyone very much indeed.

Yours very happily

Katie Jones

I'm so glad -- I was so ticked off by this that I sent an email to Penguin yesterday threatening to never buy their books again. I wonder how many irate slashdotters flooded their inboxes... =)

Missing Cowboy Neal option?

[Mateito]

From GL online:
What's your biggest summer beauty blunder?

• My hair gets so oily!
• Makeup melts off my face!

Where's the Cowboy Neil option?

Re:New address

[bostonkarl]

"Additionally, please also understand that while I have worked with Parry Aftab, she is not my lawyer, and I never asked anyone to speak with Ms. Jones about her website. I hope that the book's title change and my apologies to Ms. Jones will resolve this issue. For more information, please read the press release below." Well, then, who is Parry Aftab working for?

pdf contents

[randyest]

No special formatting, fonts, graphics, images . . . sigh. Why pdf? Press release text and my comments below:

In an effort to avoid an association between the book originally titled Katie.com and the website Katie.com, Plume and the author decide to make this title change. New York, New York, August 6, 2004 ... In 2000, Dutton published a hardcover book called Katie.com by Katie Tarbox, an eye-opening account of one teenager's descent into the seductive world of the Internet.

Can't resist the plug ("eye opening" indeed.)

After the book was released into the market, it was brought to Dutton's attention that a website of the same name existed on the Internet.

Given that the original title "girl.com" was changed after they realized it was, at the time, a porn site I find it very hard to believe no one checked "katie.com" before release. I guess that sounds better than "We expected to bully katie.com away from Katie Jones, but all our efforts failed, including bringing out Jabba the Lawyer. Worse, the backlash was costing us ratings on Amazon.com. So we're backing down."

The fact that the book, Katie.com, and the website shared the same name was purely coincidental.

And very easy to check before release. Like they did with girl.com. Liars.

In an effort to avoid any association between the book and the site, when Plume issued the book in trade paperback in 2001, it printed on the copyright page that the author of Katie.com and events described in the book have no connection whatsoever with the website domain owner Katie Jones or her e-mail address.

Which means they knew this before release. Which means their previous statement that they didn't realize until after release is a lie.

Trena Keating, Editor-in-chief of Plume, said, "We have made every effort to clarify the fact that Plume's book, Katie.com, and the website, Katie.com, are not in any way associated with one another.

Yes, now they have finally made "every effort," which includes changing their book name.

In addition, it was erroneously reported recently that Plume had asked its attorney to attempt to buy the web site Katie.com from domain owner Katie Jones. This is absolutely not true. Ms. Jones confirms this point in a message currently posted on her web site.

I didn't hear that they wanted to buy it. I heard they tried to intimidate her into giving it to them. Big difference.

"We are not working in association with author Katie Tarbox or any other individual in an attempt to assume ownership of the domain name address www.katie.com. Of course, the personal views of the author are hers and do not represent Plume in any way. "Going forward, Plume and the author have decided to re-title this book A Girl's Life Online.

Great. Good job. Late, and chock full of spin and damage control, but good call.

This is an important book about predatory pedophiles on the Internet and how we can protect our children. We changed the title to keep focus on this issue. The newly titled book will be released next month.

More revenue opportunity! Everyone wins!

We have always taken this situation very seriously.

As evidenced by your ignoring it for 4 years?

And we hope that by making this title change, it will demonstrate just how dedicated Plume is to clarifying this matter."

Oh yearh. It's clear. You're afraid of slashbots! har har har

#### Penguin Group (USA) Inc. is the U.S. member of the internationally renowned Penguin Group. Penguin Group (USA) is one of the leading U.S. adult and children's trade book publishers, owning a wide range of imprints and trademarks, including Berkley Books, Dutton, Frederick Warne, G.P. Putnam's Sons, Grosset & Dunlap, New American Library, Penguin Boo

Re:pdf contents

[dcigary]

We expected to bully katie.com away from Katie Jones, but all our efforts failed, including bringing out Jabba the Lawyer [aftab.com].

Thanks. You'll be receiving a call from my lawyer for the ensuing damage that was caused to my monitor by my spit-take of Diet Coke after reading the above sentence...

Perhaps they backed off . . .

[acceleriter]

. . . when the rightful owner threatened to sell katie.com to a "barely legal" pr0n site :).

Meddling Kids...

[CharAznable]

Penguin:
"We would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those meddling kids..."

Geeks Strike Back

[pilsen]

Penguin against Penguin, to to toe.
Geeks: 1
Lawyers: 0

Re:This site is incredibly intolerant and sexist

[be951]

You must be new here.

This doesn't change a damn thing people!!!

[otlg]

Ok, yes they changed the name, but how many copies are in circulation?

Plus they only changed the name because of negative press, not because they wanted to 'Do The Right Thing'. They are still on my personal 'banned' list. And I refuse to believe that Ms. Tarbox is as innocent as she claims.

THIS WENT ON FOR 4 YEARS!

I guess it's true; people have short memories, which is why stupid politicians get second terms.

Re:RICK JAMES IS DEAD!

[rarose]

Didn't you forget the part about "whether or not you liked his work, we can all appreciate the impression Dave Chappelle does of him" yadda yadda yadda?

If you're going to troll, at least put some heart into it!

You really have to wonder......

[Y-Crate]

How long will Katie Tarbox continue to milk her experience for cash? There is no doubt in my mind that what happened to her was horrible, but there are moments when I find myself questioning if it is even about protecting others anymore.

She could just be an unfortunate woman who had a terrible childhood experience only to grow up and have publishers manipulate her recovery in the persuit of money, or she could just be someone who is desperately clinging to her celebrity as - by her own accounts - it is the only recognition and purpose she has ever known.

If the former is true, then she needs to be a bit more upfront about it, but if the latter is true, then she needs to make use of her family's wealth and do something with her life that will provide her with a sense of accomplishment.

So Amazon took down all of the /. neg reviews

[Spyfox]

Surprised to see Amazon influencing the content of their reviews pages.

The real Katie.com thanks slashdot

[Cheeko]

Took a quick look over at katie.com and she makes mention of slashdot, and offers much thanks to the support of the community making a difference. Good to see that she holds no hard feelings over the publicity :) Go good guys.

If only SCO....

[ArtisteTerroriste]

If only SCO had the business sense that Penguin, Tarbox Inc., sleazy lawyers, etc. have, this whole "truckload of code" nonsense would have been over with a long time ago.

Obviously Penguin, Tarbox Inc. (see domain registration) ARE interested in making money, having a sucessful business even if people don't seem to like the book.

Looks like Parry Aftab has already decided on...

[tyroneking]

... the name of the new Katie site - Katiesplace.com (see here), which is great name and probably better than Katie.com for the purpose it is intended. Good luck to them!

Meanwhile Parry appears to be a self-styled Angel of the Internet which is little odd (from a UK perspective).

She may well be as described (she seems very busy and her aims are to be admired and she did make a good comment about the response of large firms to Y2K) but when someone starts describing themselves as an "Angel" (or acknowledges that other people calls one that) then there is something a little less than great about that (again, from a super-reticent UK perspective).

Though she might indeed be some sort of super-natural human much like the super-supports of one of her sites such as the Hulk and your friendly-neighbourhood-Spiderman.

Re:Buy the Katie.com book now before it's gone

[otlg]

Please tell me that was just a poor attempt at humo(u)r. Someone in this situation was evil for a longtime. How about printing out the slashdot pages instead as a momento. Buying a momento is just giving money to a bunch of people who only backed done for their own purposes and not for the right reasons. Please DO NOT reward that sort of behaviour.

Re:New address

[randyest]

Krispy Kreme?

Interesting difference in international title

[mrklin]

On Katie Tarbox's site, you can see in the lower banner that her book has been translated into multiple languages such as Chinese, Japanese, German, and others.

All of them feature the original title of katie.com except for the Chinese version whose title translates to Dream of the Internet Lover. Maybe the Chinese editors did their homework?

An IM conversation with Katie Tarbox

[jbltk]

jbltk: I'm sorry to bother you so randomly, but I'd like to know when you found out that someone else owned Katie.com, and why you didn't insist the title of your book be changed at that time and wait to say it was a good thing until the publisher finally ceded?

ktarbox261: As I said before this issue was between Katie Jones and Penguin, I could do nothing to change it. They bought the right to publish it and I sold it under a different name.

jbltk: Than why did the press release state that the publisher as well as the author made the decision to change the name, seeing as you have no input?

ktarbox261: This time was a very unique situation.

jbltk: But why didn't you, even without any control, publicly state you felt Penguin's stance was unfair to Katie Jones, and why did you continue to plan to call your workshop by the same name?

ktarbox261: I never had any plans to do that and that is reported incorrectly.

jbltk: so Parry Aftab happens to be a lawyer who doesn't represent you and is only a victim's rights advocate?

jbltk: it just seems to me like you've played both sides, awaiting the outcome so you would be able to do what was most profitable for you, in regards to your future projects

ktarbox261: Parry Aftab is not my lawyer and never has been. My lawyer works out of Connecticut.

ktarbox261: I never asked anyone to call Katie Jones.

ktarbox261: I have always wanted Penguin to do the right thing . What you read is not the whole story.

jbltk: Then why did she call Katie Jones? What was the purpose of that call? Lawyers charge large amounts of money to do things like that. I find it hard to believe she'd make an international call like that without instruction from a client

jbltk: ok i'm listening

jbltk: please inform me of all the misinformation

ktarbox261: Parry is not my lawyer we have no written agreement, I have never paid her a single dime.

jbltk: FYI, I've yet to see an article that quotes you as being in favor of changing the title

ktarbox261: Look at my website

jbltk: I looked. I don't see anything said by you that indicates you favor a title change or sympathize with Ms. Jones. The only thing I've seen so far is your statement regarding the press release. Up until then, I'd never seen any news article that had you saying you felt sympathy or wanted a title change

jbltk: I know you may have signed your creative control over when you sold your book, but that didn't prevent you from speaking out publicly

jbltk: You see, it's easy to say all those things you say @ (Link: http://katiet.com/message1.htm)http://katiet.com/m essage1.htm after the fact, but you never said them until today

ktarbox261: I do sympathesize with Ms. Jones and the fact that I said I am excited to change the name of the book, that would show I am in favor of it.

ktarbox261: Unfortunately I couldn't speak about this issue until today.

jbltk: why is that?

ktarbox261: Because this issue was between Penguin and Ms. Jones.

jbltk: that hasn't prevented me or my peers from giving Penguin a hard time publicly or directly. Did you have some sort of confidentiality agreement or something?

ktarbox261: That is all I can say.

jbltk: OK, is it fair to say that you would have faced financial hardships had you made any statements on the issue?

ktarbox261: No it is not fair to say.

jbltk: It just seems to me that if you really thought what Penguin was doing was wrong, you should have piped up way back when this all started, unless you were under a contractual obligation to not speak about it.

jbltk: I'm not trying to be a jerk, there are just a bunch of inconsistencies that I see in this whole thing, and I really like to know the whole story

ktarbox261: I could not speak about it.

jbltk: Because of an agreement between yourself and the publisher?

ktarbox261: I could not speak ab

Re:An IM conversation with Katie Tarbox

[Anonymous Coward]

You're being too nice: Aftab and Tarbox shook hands on a partnership with dreams of mega $ in the near future. Aftab got Tarbox's wholehearted consent to start harassing Jones and get Katie.com. When the shit hit the fan, Tarbox called Aftab crying her eyes out. Aftab told her to deny all associations between the two of them and that she (Aftab) will take care of everything. Either that, or Tarbox got her old lawyer to have a chat with Aftab and together they destoryed all incriminationg documents and intrstucted Tarbox to deny all wrong-doing, post do-gooder messages on her website, etc.

Re:An IM conversation with Katie Tarbox

[jbltk]

I know! I was so tempted to tell her I was a 27 year old guy looking for a good time.

Re:That's not how I see it.

[DrNibbler]

Meanwhile, can we get Marvel to stop letting Aftab use Ben "The Thing" Grimm as a banner ad on her site?

I thought that was her picture. Oh, you mean that other picture...

Same book, different title

[pdkrocul]

I wonder how many books will be sold to people (or libraries, schools, etc) who don't realize it's the same book.