Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10
1
You can wait until your 90 days is up or ask Amazon to remove your books now.



I just asked them to let one of my books out of KU and they responded saying no, all I can do is wait until the 90 days are over. Ugh.
2
Okay, I've got the banner up with the "Coming Soon" post for the promo on my blog. Participating authors are welcome to use the banner to alert your newsletter sign-ups that it will be starting Friday. I'm alerting my newsletters and letting them know to update their profiles to receive the information in time. It might help people see what they might be missing with the GDPR law coming into affect on Friday. If any participating authors have questions, send me a PM.

**If you'd still like to sign up, I've got a few FREE LISTING spaces left. ;-)
-Lynda

Blog Post for Memorial Day Weekend Promo Banner:
https://lyndabelle.com/2018/05/23/coming-this-friday-erotica-and-erom-deals-for-memorial-day-weekend/
3
Writers' Cafe / Re: amazon author review of his own book
« Last post by Jack Krenneck on Today at 04:05:52 PM »
Agree 100%.

Also, it's sometimes mutually beneficial to cooperate with the competition (share data, co-author books, promote each other, etc.).  Competitors don't have to treat each other as enemies.

Having said that, I'm under no delusions. I'm after the same finite resources (customers' time, money, fandom, etc.) as my competition.


Thank you. I also agree that authors can cooperate and don't have to treat each other as enemies. A good comparison might be athletes. For instance, marathon runners often train together day after day, helping each other and motivating each other and sharing information. But on race day, they each try their hardest to win (or achieve a PB).


But rankings equal visibility, and nearly every author with extensive experience whose posts I've read seems to state that visibility equals sales to a certain extent. That's why a lot of authors pay for ads. They want that visibility that sets their book apart from the rest. That's competition in action.


You're not wrong. Increased visibility leads to increased sales. Massive visibility leads to massive sales. The better the cover, blurb and preview are the better the sale conversion rate and the stickier the book will be. Essentially, people have to see a book before they can buy it.
4
Nice. I didn't know that.

I'm not sure the evidence all has to be prior. My understanding of what Kevin wrote is that the descriptiveness objection =/= the first-to-use objection Passive Guy discussed. Rather, you're just showing that the word is commonly used in books and series titles because it describes the books' contents.

I could be misunderstanding this, though.

Even if not, I can't imagine that establishing prior art hurts the challenge in any way.  :)
5
I'll just point out, one nice thing about Goodreads searches is it shows publication date in the search listings. So it makes finding prior art fairly easy.
Nice. I didn't know that.

I'm not sure the evidence all has to be prior. My understanding of what Kevin wrote is that the descriptiveness objection =/= the first-to-use objection Passive Guy discussed. Rather, you're just showing that the word is commonly used in books and series titles because it describes the books' contents.

I could be misunderstanding this, though.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

6
Writers' Cafe / Re: "message" books for kids
« Last post by SevenDays on Today at 03:58:54 PM »
I never buy or borrow message books for my five-year-old. Nothing bores a kid faster than an overt message.
7
I've used Jade's proofreading services on two projects thus far and have another one scheduled to go for next week. I appreciate her thoughtful suggestions and find they have strengthened my stories.

Thanks, Jade!

Thank you so much! It's a pleasure
8
The evidence you submit should be concrete, factual material, Kevin points out. His suggestions:
- screenshots of websites where the term is in already use descriptively;
- dictionary definitions;
- Wikipedia entries;
- results of Goodreads searches on the term;
- Google results for the term.

I'll just point out, one nice thing about Goodreads searches is it shows publication date in the search listings. So it makes finding prior art fairly easy.
9
Writers' Cafe / Re: Opening lines
« Last post by Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' on Today at 03:49:37 PM »
"I was in London when I first heard of Dinah Slade. She was broke and looking for a millionaire, while I was rich and looking for a mistress. From the start we were deeply compatible." The Rich Are Different, Susan Howatch

Howatch turned out to be my favorite author.
10
Placing some notes here, after reading Kevin Kneupper's tweetstorm about letters of protest:

A letter of protest consists of a brief factual letter, an index of evidence, and the evidence itself. You should compile this before you go to the USPTO website to begin submitting.

When you file a letter of protest, you have to check off the legal reason (click to see that part of the form) you're objecting. I filed one of these a while ago, and I wasn't sure what to check.

Kevin suggests "collecting evidence that the mark is GENERIC or DESCRIPTIVE." If you claim descriptiveness as the problem, you're claiming the proposed mark simply follows the dictionary definition of the word in question. The example he cites is "cocky" being in a book title because the book's hero is cocky -- the word is descriptive. If you claim genericness as the problem, you're claiming the proposed mark "describe(s) a class of goods." The example he gives is trying to trademark the word "books."

Thinking about it, it seems to me that descriptiveness is the course most authors' objections are likely take. Comparing "cocky" to, say, "Apple" as a trademarked name for the tech company ... there's nothing particularly descriptive about the word "apple" when applied to tablet, laptops, phones and so forth; these devices are not fruitlike. You could get allusive and connect "apple" and the Apple logo (a bitten apple) to the desire for knowledge (as in the Garden of Eden) -- like, the company's devices are the gateway to all knowledge, or something -- but that's a very non-literal connection. If you write a book about a person who is literally cocky and put "cocky" in the title, that's much more clearly, directly, and simply descriptive ... right? Same with "forever." If you're writing a romance about how two people fall in love and stay together for the rest of their lives and put the word "forever" in your title is a way of describing the book.

The evidence you submit should be concrete, factual material, Kevin points out. His suggestions:
- screenshots of websites where the term is in already use descriptively;
- dictionary definitions;
- Wikipedia entries;
- results of Goodreads searches on the term;
- Google results for the term.

He says you should precede the evidence with a brief, sticking-to-the-facts letter and an index, with URLs, of the evidence you're including, but the index itself is not sufficient; you can't just send a list of URLs and expect the USPTO people to look them up.

I know from having done this myself that you need to compile the evidence into a PDF file (or a set of JPEGs?). There are page and file-size limits. The filing is free. You DO NOT need to show the proposed mark will have a personal impact on you.

Once a mark has been filed for opposition, it's too late to submit a letter of protest. Letters of protest should be submitted as quickly as possible after @cockybot flags the application.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10