I’m glad there are consquences here, but I’m not wholly convinced we’re tarring the right victim. Not saying she’s shiny innocent, but the more the layers are revealed, the odder it all is.

I thought I’d read that the copyright was jointly held by the “author” and the book packager? Which would make them both on the hook. Actually, the “author” (sorry, I have to put that in quotes – I can’t call her that without choking) ought to be on the hook no matter what since she’s the one who delivered the “goods.”

The advance money ought to have to be coughed back up, and they can give it to the original writers.

I’m glad to see that there HAVE been repercusions in this case, glad Little Brown pulled the book completely (no revised version), glad she lost her movie deal, etc. I mean tarring and feathering might have been a good option, but this works, too. I hope Harvard expells her.

Let us hold her up as a not-so-shiny example of what word theft gets you: a once promising career extinguished like a dirty cigarette butt.