Authors Sue Self-Publishing Service Author Solutions

Three authors have filed a lawsuit against self-publishing service provider Author Solutions and its parent company Penguin, airing a long list of complaints and alleging the company engages in deceptive and questionable business practices. “Defendants presented themselves as an independent publisher known for its exceptional quality and impressive book sales,” the complaint states. “Instead, defendants are not an independent publisher, but a print-on-demand vanity press.”

The suit, which is seeking class-action status, alleges Author Solutions misrepresents itself, luring authors by claiming its books can compete with “traditional publishers,” offering “greater speed, higher royalties and more control for its authors”. The company then takes advantage of “fraudulent” practices, according to the complaint, including “delaying publication, publishing manuscripts containing errors to generate fees, and selling services that are worthless, or services that fail to accomplish what they promise”. The lawsuit also alleges that Author Solutions fails to pay its authors the royalties owed to them.

Filed in the Southern District of New York, the lawsuit seeks damages of more than $5 million and, in a twist, is before a judge who has some publishing experience – Judge Denise Cote, who presides currently the ongoing e-book price-fixing scandal. The authors and potential class are represented by Oren Giskan of New York firm Giskan Solataroff, Anderson and Stewart.

This case might strike a nerve, as it comes at a time of a self-publishing boom and recalls a dark past of self-publishing – the days of the Vanity Press – when unsuspecting authors were courted by corporations. , only to be saddled with expensive fees and left with piles of substandard printed books. In July last year, Penguin bought Author Solutions, for $116 million, and the lawsuit puts the company’s annual revenue at more than $100 million. Author Solutions also partners with other publishers, including a recent deal with Simon and Schuster’s Archway Books.

In a prepared statement, Author Solutions highlighted the fact that it has “successfully empowered over 170,000 authors to self-publish over 200,000 titles,” and noted that it received an “A” rating. from the Better Business Bureau. The company said it “will correct false and misleading claims made about Author Solutions in the appropriate legal forum.”

Whether the case has any legal merit remains to be seen, but it is fascinating to read, and one can certainly imagine a large contingent of equally disgruntled self-published authors who would love to peek behind the curtain of self-publishing. In the complaint, the three named plaintiffs (Kelvin James, Jodi Foster and Terry Hardy) detail their experiences: paying thousands of dollars, being resold in “development” packages for publishing and marketing services that failed to failed to materialize or provided below average service and, in the process, generated charges for Author Solutions. Author Solutions, according to the complaint, even created a collection of “fingerprints” to trick potential authors into thinking there are specialized editing programs, which there isn’t. The real business of the company is not publishing, the complaint points out, but the sale of services to authors.

The complaint also alleges that Author Solutions’ royalty practices are either misleading or poorly paid, even some authors listed as bestsellers on Amazon, the complaint says, said they had no reported sales and that it was difficult, if not impossible, to obtain proper commercial accounts.

The next step is waiting now and Author Solutions and Penguin will keep up with demand, but things could pick up speed quickly. After all, for all the self-published success stories, there are surely many sadly self-published authors, as well as a growing number of services available. And, as is often the case with class action lawsuits, it will be interesting to see if other companies file “copying” cases, as often happens, and it happened in the e-books case. General public.

“The marketing and advertising of itself as an independent publisher invested in creating quality titles when in fact defendants are a print-on-demand vanity press is unlawful,” the suit alleges. “There is no benefit to consumers or competition in falsely advertising that defendants operate as an independent publisher and in not disclosing the true nature of its business. Indeed, the harm to consumers and competition is considerable.