Julie Garwood | Bobbi Ann Johnson Holmes

The newest twist in the Cockygate saga is author Faleena Hopkins’ recent legal filing for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. If you want to read the filing, check out Kevin Kneupper’s twitter page @kneupperwriter. He is the retired attorney and author filing to have Hopkin’s trademark cancelled, and he is one of the parties mentioned in Hopkins’ filing.

One of the passages in Hopkins’ recent filing has gone viral on Twitter. It states: “Romance Novel Series Consumers Do Not Exercise a High Degree of Care. Unsophisticated consumers aggravate the likelihood of confusion.”

It goes on to explain that these unsophisticated consumers are basically confused by similar covers and end up buying the wrong book—hence the reason for the trademark, to protect those hapless consumers.

One trademark attorney pointed out that the only way to infringe on a trademark is to argue the “likeliness of confusion” in the mind of the consumer. Another lawyer friend mentioned this to me when I expressed annoyance at what appeared to be Ms. Hopkins disparaging romance readers.

But, even if it was nothing more than a legal tactic by her attorney, and she had nothing to do with the wording, the assertion is ridiculous and false.

At one time I was a voracious romance reader. This was back when Fabio romance covers were the rage. For several years I would read three to four books a week. I wasn’t much for television, and during the week my husband was away at work, so on my way home from work I would stop at the used book store or library and pick up a book. This was before eBooks.

All those Fabio covers never confused me. But, they were a clue. I knew that if I was in the mood for a “certain” type of romance I’d look first for Fabio. We called them bodice rippers back then.

But it was mostly about the author. I would find a favorite romance author and then read all her books—one after another. Authors like Judith McNaught, Julie Garwood, Jude Deveraux, Johanna Lindsey, Mary Jo Putney, Kathleen Woodiwiss, and others. When I finished all the books I could find written by the author I enjoyed, I would then look for a new author. If I wanted a similar read to the author I had finished, I would look for similar covers. I would then read the blurb on the back of the book before making the purchase.

If I liked this new author’s book, I would then buy all her books. Did I find them by the covers? No, by the AUTHOR NAME.

You see, romance readers use covers as a clue to the type of read they enjoy. And they are fully aware authors within the same genre may have similar covers. THAT is how it is done. THAT is how it has been done for over 40 years. I know, because I have been reading romance books for longer than that.

Romance readers KNOW their authors. This is especially true in the age of the internet. Romance authors now have Facebook pages, Instagram, online fan groups, newsletters, and other forms of social media. Readers seek them out, not by cover, but by their name. I find it odd that Ms. Hopkins is using the cover confusion factor as a reason for her trademark, when she herself has her own online fan group and claims to receive fan letters from readers. How does she think they are finding her?

To insinuate romance readers just look at the cover and pay no attention to the author’s name—well that doesn’t say romance readers are stupid. But it does make the attorney (or his client) who made that argument look clueless in regards to his/her knowledge of romance readers and how they make their purchases. To be honest, that claim is utterly cringe worthy.

SaveSave

The summer between my Freshman and Sophomore year of high school I decided to write a book. At the time our family was living on Lake Havasu, and my summers were spent working at Havasu Palms’ small convenience store and marina. It could get a little boring working at the store, so I hauled my manual Royal typewriter to work with me and would sit behind the counter in my bathing suit, working on my manuscript when I wasn’t waiting on customers or stocking shelves. My friends inspired my characters. It was a mystery, sort of love story, about a bunch of teenagers, told by the family dog’s perspective. I called it The Privileged Ones.

My next manuscript was also a mystery, based on a screenplay I wrote for a college course. Characters in that book were college age. I used the same title for the book that I used for the screen play, which was, Mischief or Murder?

In my 30s and 40s I was a voracious romance reader. Favorite authors during that time included Julie Garwood, Judith McNaught, Jude Deveraux, Johanna Lindsey, and Kathleen E. Woodiwiss. Inspired by my favorite authors, I decided to write an adult romance. It’s setting was based on a fictionalized Havasu Palms. I called it, Desire at Chief’s Head

I may have finished The Privileged Ones, Mischief or Murder, and Desire at Chief’s Head, but they will remain unpublished. I think of them as my practice novels.

After finishing my first romance, I decided to start another one. I called it After Sundown. Life got in the way, so instead of finishing the book, I tucked the manuscript in a box and forgot about it.

Fast forward to 2012, and I have already published Lessons and The Senator’s Secret (which eventually became Coulson’s Lessons and Coulson’s Secret, books 3 and 4 in the Coulson Family Saga.) I decide to write a standalone romance under my Anna J. McIntyre pen name and dug out my unfinished manuscript.

The problem with After Sundown—which I didn’t realize at the time—it was influenced by many of the romances I had read years earlier—and romances had evolved, readers had changed, and frankly my male protagonist was more in line with those found in books 30 years earlier.

When my mother beta read the book, she told me she hated the male protagonist, Cole Taylor in the story. He could be something of a jerk. So, I toned him down, yet not enough. If you read its reviews, you’ll see many of the reviewers agreed with Mom. I personally saw Cole as a flawed individual who evolved, and while he did behave inappropriate early in the book—much of it was because of his life experiences—I thought he had redeemed himself by the end of the story. Unfortunately, a significant number of readers disagreed with me.

I may have a soft spot for Cole Taylor—but I’m afraid many of my readers didn’t. It’s not like everyone hated the book, some people actually gave it five stars.

I’ve no regrets writing After Sundown, and I have no desire to rewrite it to make Cole more likable to more readers. Cole Taylor simply is who he is, and I have moved on.

SaveSave

Archives

Are romance readers unsophisticated?

After Sundown