The Times and The Guardian report today that police arrested three men on suspicion of plotting to murder the publisher of a controversial novel in a petrol bomb attack.
Martin Rynja is to publish Sherry Jones' The Jewel of Medina which reportedly contains a sex scene between Mohammed and his wife A'isha under his company Gibson Square Publishing.
The book was dropped by Random House earlier this year because the company was concerned it might anger muslims. Turned out it was right.
I don't know who has been contracted to print the book, but given what has befallen the publisher, it would most likely be unwise to publish the name here in any case.
However, the episode does pose questions for print-on-demand publishers. Given the direct model in operation - author uploads the book - buyer buys it - then are they effectively acting as publisher but with little or no vetting of what it is they actually publish?
This thorny issue has had a legal precedent already set in the US in terms of defamation in Sandler v. Calcagni. I'll let Mark Glaser precis it (from his Media Shift blog)
"The case started with a dispute between two high school cheerleaders
over (what else?) a boy. According to the court’s opinion, one of the
cheerleaders, Calcagni, and some of her friends harassed Sandler with
religious epithets. Eventually, Calcagni was convicted of a hate crime
for allegedly spray-painting a swastika near Sandler’s home.
"Calcagni’s parents decided to tell their side of the story with a
tell-all book about the incident. They printed the book through
BookSurge, and purchased several hundred copies, which they distributed
to friends, family and local bookstores. Several other parties also
purchased copies of the book online.
"Not surprisingly, Sandler sued Calcagni, her parents, the freelancer
and BookSurge. BookSurge made a motion to dismiss the claims against
it, arguing that it should not be held liable as a publisher for
purposes of defamation law."
The court found that Amazon's BookSurge was not liable. Why? Because it had had little involvement with the author or the content of the book and so could not be considered publisher.
But it still leaves POD companies between a rock and a hard place. You either don't get involved at all and run the risk of arson attacks and who knows what else depending on what it is you are printing (remember, you DON'T know what it is - it could be anything), but in a (US) court not be held liable as publisher. Or vet what you print but face all the legal responsibilities of being a publisher.
I'm not sure I have an answer for that.