Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:12:05 -0400
From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at press.jhu.edu>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>, <wsfa-forum at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re:  Amazon starts SF imprint
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

And the use of Benford's title was done with Benford's permission - and I =
think some $$ went his way too.  & still in print - now from Bamtam.

mjw

>>> "Mike B." <yahoo at omniphile.com> 10/11/2011 6:02 PM >>>
A publishing line with the same name as a book isn't quite the same as =
a
book with the same title as a story.

Re-using the title of a book that isn't well known isn't good, but
re-using the title of a story that is one of the better known titles in
a genre seems at best unwise, and at worst a sign that you don't know
what you are doing.

-- Mike B.

On 10/11/2011 3:31 PM, samlubell at verizon.net wrote:
>
> For that matter, Pocketbooks had a publishing line called Timescape,
> which was a Benford novel.
> And the reuse of titles for books goes back a long way. Asimov wasn't
> the first to have a book called I, Robot for instance.
>
> Oct 11, 2011 03:40:45 PM, wsfa-forum at yahoogroups.com wrote:
>
>      > "Mike B." 10/11/2011 11:30 AM
>      >>>>
>      >On 10/11/2011 9:26 AM, Michael Walsh wrote:
>      >> http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html?docId=1000715991
>      >
>      >Is it a bad sign when they know so little about the genre that
>      >they
>      >re-use the title of a classic?
>
>     Like this: "Foundation: Book One of the Collegium Chronicles" ??
>     http://www.amazon.com/Foundation-Collegium-Chronicles-Valdemar-Novel/=
dp/0756405769/