BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND TWITTER BACKGROUNDS
There was an error in this gadget

Thursday, September 29, 2005

Search and Rescue : An op-ed piece from the New York Times



Link to the article in its original context here or through the thread title.

By TIM O'REILLY
Published: September 28, 2005

Sebastopol, Calif.
AUTHORS struggle, mostly in vain, against their fated obscurity. According to Nielsen Bookscan, which tracks sales from major booksellers, only 2 percent of the 1.2 million unique titles sold in 2004 had sales of more than 5,000 copies. Against this backdrop, the recent Authors Guild suit against the Google Library Project is poignantly wrongheaded.

The Authors Guild claims that Google's plan to make the collections of five major libraries searchable online violates copyright law and thus harms authors' interests. As both an author and publisher, I find the Guild's position to be exactly backward. Google Library promises to be a boon to authors, publishers and readers if Google sticks to its stated goal of creating a tool that helps people discover (and potentially pay for) copyrighted works. (Disclosure: I am a member of the publisher advisory board for Google Print. As the name implies, it is simply an advisory group, and Google can take or leave its suggestions.)

What's causing all the fuss? Google has partnered with the University of Michigan, Harvard, Stanford, the New York Public Library and Oxford University. Google will scan and index their library collections, so that when a reader searches Google Print for, say, "author's rights," the results point to books that contain that term. In a format that resembles its current Web search results, Google will show snippets (typically, fewer than three sentences of text from each page of each book) that include the search term, plus information about the book and where to find it.

Google asserts that displaying this limited amount of content is protected by the "fair use" doctrine under United States copyright law; the Authors Guild claims that it is infringement, because the underlying search technology requires a digitized copy of the entire work.

I'm with Google on this one. It would certainly be considered fair use, if, for example, I circulated a catalog of my favorite books, including a handful of quotations from each book that helps people to decide whether to buy a copy. In my mind, providing such snippets algorithmically on demand, as Google does, doesn't change that dynamic. Google allows click-through to the entire book only if the book is in the public domain or if publishers have opted in to the program. If it's unclear who owns the rights to a book, only the snippets are displayed.

A search engine for books will be revolutionary in its benefits. Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors than copyright infringement, or even outright piracy. While publishers invest in each of their books, they depend on bestsellers to keep afloat. They typically throw their products into the market to see what sticks and cease supporting what doesn't, so an author has had just one chance to reach readers. Until now.

Google promises an alternative to the obscurity imposed on most books. It makes that great corpus of less-than-bestsellers accessible to all. By pointing to a huge body of print works online, Google will offer a way to promote books that publishers have thrown away, creating an opportunity for readers to track them down and buy them. Even online sellers like Amazon offer only a small fraction of the university libraries' titles. While there are many unanswered questions about how businesses will help consumers buy the books they've found through a search engine for printed materials that is as powerful as Google's current Web search, there's great likelihood that Google Print's Library Project will create new markets for forgotten content. In one bold stroke, Google will give new value to millions of orphaned works.

I'm sorry to see authors buy into the old-school protectionism of the Authors Guild, not realizing they're acting against their own self-interest. Their resistance can come only from a failure to understand the nature of the program. Google Library is intended to help readers discover copyrighted works, not to give copies away. It's a tremendous service to authors that will help them beat the dismal odds of publishing as usual.

Tim O'Reilly, a publisher of computer books, is the co-producer of theWeb 2.0 conference.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

A message from Google Print

Many thanks to those of you who took the time to write notes of
support about Google Print. There have been some incorrect
characterizations about this program in the press, and we want to
be sure you have a clear understanding of the program, and of your
options relating to it.

The goal of the Google Print Library Project is to create an
electronic, full-text card catalog of books (just as we've done with
web pages). Our goal is to help people discover books online, not
read them online; a user who finds a copyrighted books that was
scanned through the Library Project can't view even a single page
from this book, unless the copyright holder has given us explicit
permission through the Publisher Program to show more. At most
we show three examples of where the user's search term appears in
the text, along with basic bibliographic info and links to online
booksellers and libraries.

Here's what an in-copyright book scanned from a library looks like
on Google Print:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/LibraryProject_screenshot-745613.JPG

It's also important to bear in mind that, just like web search, any
copyright holder can ask to have their books excluded from the
Library Project by following these instructions:
http://print.google.com/googleprint/publisher_library.html#options3

We realize that you may have more questions about the Library
Project, and we're always happy to answer them. You can read
more about our thoughts on our blog:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/google-print-and-authors-guild.html
or can check out what other folks are saying about
Google Print: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/buzz-about-google-print-and-lawsuit.html.

Feel free to email us at print-support@google.com.
Once again, thanks for writing. We hope and expect that continued
dialogue with the publishing community will help us build a
program that benefits everyone.
Sincerely,

The Google Print Team

Saturday, September 24, 2005

Copyrights: What (I think) You Need To Know



So today I am at last posting about copyrights. Here's the thing: Copyrights law can be quite convoluted, copyright disputes can be quite lengthy, and theft of an improperly copyrighted work can fuck you, the writer, royally. Copyright-related issues are very complicated. But registering for copyright and therefore protecting your work as a writer is so ridiculously simple you shouldn't even have to think about doing it.

I think as writers we all know how important it is to register for copyright of our work. Granted, most copyright law states that the instant you as a writer create an original work that it is yours, we also know--sadly, many of us from experience--that this is not enough protection for a work we create.

A lot of you out there probably believe that the "poor man's copyright" is as good as registering for copyright. Well, it isn't. You can't smugly walk into a courtroom holding your sealed enveloppe marked "Exhibit A", hand it to the judge and walk out with a million dollar settlement. In fact, you might even get laughed out of court doing that. In my opinion the best protection is a combination of copyright registration, and getting a "poor man's copyright".

Oh, for those who don't know, a "poor man's copyright" is putting a copy of your work in a sealed enveloppe and mailing it registered letter to yourself.

Obviously as a Canadian writer I can only speak about Canadian copyright law. Recently the Copyright Act was changed in Canada to "simplify" the process. Basically when registering for copyright, you no longer have to give a short description of your work. I find this is actually detrimental, because it reduces copyright to essentially trademark registration. All the government has a record of is that you, the author, have copyrighted a work by a certain name. In a legal dispute, believe it or not, this might actually NOT be enough to cover your ass.

My reccomendation is that when you register for copyright, you also mail by registered mail a copy of your work to yourself, including any notes, drafts, and media (Discs CDR CDRW) you used in the process. If you have the "quirk" of writing your first draft by longhand, even better. You mail the longhand first draft along with notes, media, etc. at the same time you register for copyright. It's not necessarily 100% bullet-proof (Where there's enough money there's a lawyer who can fuck you), but it is the best protection you can afford yourself.

Now, when you recieve your copyright registration certificate and your sealed enveloppe, the best thing you can do is put them in a bank safe deposit box. Rent is cheap--or, at least inexpensive--on safe deposit boxes, and it protects your work against fire, flood, or loss.

If you don't want to get a safe deposit box, or if you can't justify the cost of one, then keep it in a home safe, metal lock box (preferably fireproof) or large plastic container somewhere cool, dry and dark.

I've provided a link to the Canadian Intellectual Propery Office, the US Copyright Office and the UK Patent Office and I've just added the Australian Copyright Council. If anyone needs copyright info for another country, please contact me and I'll add the appropriate link.

The reason I mention these links, is because any additional information you need is probably going to be best coming from the Horse's Mouth, as it were. What I've told you is the basics, which is pretty much all you need when applying for copyright. If you're anal retentive you'll probably contact your copyright office to find out the nitty gritty anyway.

Obviously, if you are lucky enough to sell something either to a publisher or a magazine, you will be required to sign over certain rights to the publishing party. At this stage of the game, before you sign anything you will want to talk either to a lawyer or a literary agent (If you can actually get one on the fucking phone).

If you self-publish or publish online, you retain 100% of the copyright, but you also become 100% responsible for watching out for the interests of your work. We'll look at some of the issues involved later on.

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

The (Un)American Author's Guild


I had been planning to make this post about copyright and related issues that Writers need to be aware of before self-publishing. However, there are things going on in the world of writing and online publishing that I feel need to be addressed.

I'm talking about the lawsuit filed against Google by the Author's Guild of America. (link) Google is trying to put several library collections online. In so doing, the Guild feels they are in violation of various aspects of the Copyright Act, and violating Author's rights in the process.

This, despite the fact that authors who do not want to be included in the collection are free to contact Google and opt out. This is, according to the Author's Guild, too much burden to put on the backs of the Author. Apparently one may be brilliant enough to write a Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, but still be too obtuse to click on an opt-out box on a web-site.

What Google is proposing is to only post small portions of the books in question, unless the content owner gives permission to show more. They're not reprinting entire works for free. At least, not without the Author's permission.

Having once been involved in a copyright dispute myself and having also seen certain concepts and story sequences I'd developped "expropriated" by others, I'm a very strong supporter of a Writer's rights to his or her work. However, the Authors' Guild is not the advocacy group it claims to be.

Yes, many established, best-selling and famous authors are members of the Guild. However in my opinion this organization is essentially a league of 500-lb gorillas looking out for their own enlightened self-interest.

The Author's Guild is not an advocacy group for the rights of anyone that doesn't meet their stringent standards. Elegibility for membership in the Author's Guild (link), you see, is incumbent on being :


"…published by an established American publisher. Freelance writers must have published three works, fiction or non-fiction, by a periodical of general circulation within the last eighteen months."

In their own words, Authors with a small publisher, self-published and E-published authors need not apply:


"…A contract with a vanity press does not qualify for membership in the Guild."

Doesn't it seem odd that a Guild whose mission is supposedly to represent the interests of authors would make it that much harder for new and untested authors to gain recognition, acceptance and most importantly, legitimacy? Because despite the legitimacy that book distributors and online book sellers are giving by recognizing the self published, it is somehow beneath the Author's Guild to do the same.

We already know that unpublished writers have a piddling-to-nil chance of getting published by what the Author's Guild so pompously refers to as "an established American publisher". As they are not part of the solution for the Unpublished Voices, they must, therefore be part of the problem, helping to perpetuate a cycle that locks the New and the Unknown writer out of the field. Google's plan could potentially increase recognition for Self-Published Authors and E-Published Authors by including us in their online catalogue. So why does the Author's Guild oppose this?

The Authors' Guild Mission Statement says, in part

“The Authors Guild is the professional organization for every published writer Today's Guild is industrious, dynamic and works exclusively for our benefit...From 1919 on, the Guild has worked on behalf of its members to lobby for free speech, copyrights and other issues of concern to authors and bring authors the latest news in the publishing industry..."

And yet, the Authors' Guild feels that these rights and interests should only belong to those published with an "established American publisher". They do nothing to work for the rights of Unpublished Voices. Why should they?

Well, when you consider the entreprenneurial spirit upon which the United States of America was founded, doesn't it seem somehow un-American to refuse to recognize ambitious Self-Publishers who are following their dreams and ambitions by the only means available to them? Doesn't it seem to run contrary to the goal of working for Authors' rights do deny these literary pioneers the legitimacy they are working for?

The problem is, the fallacy that "If you haven't been published by a REAL publisher you're not good enough" is far too prevalent. But though a thousand men may repeat a lie, it will not make that lie into the truth.

What is needed is an advocacy group to look after Self-Published Authors, and the Unpublished Voices that are still struggling to be recognized. If we will not be given recognition, if we will not be given legitimacy, perhaps we should take it for ourselves.

UPDATE!

Please check my Weblogs section and read the Google! blog, for their official response to the legal action sought against them by the Author's Guild of America

The direct link to their response can be found here

Saturday, September 17, 2005

Online Publishing


Today, I want to talk about Online Publishing, and how it can help those of us numbered among the Unpublished Masses to expose and sell our work.

Again, the advice I give is not the advice of a professional, but of someone not published and exploring the alternatives to "traditional" publishing. Am I an amateur? No; I've studied the so-called literary market for years, which is pretty much why I chose to abandon attempting to publish by "normal" means.

Often, online--or electronic--publishing is applied to journalistic websites. For example, the Online Publishers Association says in their mission statement that they are

"...dedicated to representing high-quality online content providers before the advertising community, the press, the government and the public..."

Online publishing also applies to hosting multimedia works of social, cultural, artistic , audio, educational, or historical interest. Likewise if you operate an online journal, weblog or post regularly to one or more discussion boards, you're already part of the fast-paced and exciting world of online publishing.

For our purposes, online publishing is all about finding a server, site or archive that will host our work.

So, what is the difference between self-publishing and online publishing? Well, my research--and my opinion--is that there's not one hell of a lot of difference between the two. Unfortunately, that also means there's not much difference between online publishing and vanity publishing.

There are a couple of things that distinguish self and online publishing from one another. First and foremost, of course, is the media. Instead of being printed, of course, it is hosted online, either as an HTML page or pages, or in one of any number of text formats: *.pdf, *.txt, *.doc, *.rtf.

Likewise, with online publishing you have a little bit more control over the style and format of the document. You control layout, font, graphics, pretty much all design aspects, really.

Unlike self-publishing, if you publish online, it's a little harder to make money with your work. Essentially, publishing online means you're giving it away for free.

My personal recommendation is that if you go with online publishing, you should publish in *.pdf format. Adobe Acrobat Writer allows you to embed all kinds of protection into your document, making it quite securely read-only.

Adobe offers a downloadable "trial" version of Writer, but in my opinion, the full version of Acrobat Writer is--at $299.00 USD--a sound investment whether you intent to publish online, or to self-publish.

Mac users are fond of reminding me that they have the ability to save their word processing documents in *.pdf format because Apple Computers and Adobe have certain licensing agreements that Microsoft doesn't enjoy. So if you own a Mac, once again the advantage is yours.

Anyway, back on-topic.

Online publishing is dangerously close to vanity publishing; much closer in fact than it is to true self-publishing. Because once again, it is the author who is responsible for the quality of the content.

This means if you're a JRR Tolkein who doesn't believe your work needs to be edited down to be readable, it means your work won't be edited down against your wishes.

Sadly, it also means that like Tolkein, you can end up with a lot of totally superfluous and redundant words, sentences, paragraphs, chapters and volumes in your work.

(That's right: I spit on the sacrosanct Lord of the Rings story cycle: the goddamn thing had so many irrelevant subplots and extraneous details it makes it a plodding, pendantic read!)

It also means that a truly awful story can be hosted just as easily as the Great American Novel.

Let's assume you've got a good work written; one that you can deservedly be proud of. You can't afford to self-publish, but you still desperately want to expose your story. What are the options?

The first option is to set up your own website. While most internet service providers allow you a certain amount of "free space" on their server for a web page, it's usually so miniscule an amount of space and bandwidth as to be completely useless.

Likewise, the free web page services offered by sites like GeoCities or Yahoo! or MSN aren't generally reccommended for a plethora of reasons.

That means you need to register your own domain name, and find a web-host. If you enjoy doing HTML you can handle the website design yourself, but chances are you'd want to either pay for website design or get a hosting package that comes with design assistance.

There are numerous advantages and disadvantages to having your own personal web space; the benefits usually being the amount of control you have over the management of your page, the content and the marketing; the disadvantage being the expense, the maintenence, etc.

The second option is to host your work, either from a paid service or a free service, and then link to your story from other sites. This is what I've done with The Artifact. Because I keep this weblog as well as one on LiveJournal, and because I post regularly to the Free Writers' Forum and to other discussion boards, I am gambling that my existing presence on the Internet, as well as word-of-mouth will be enough to get exposure for the story. While my cost outlay is essentially nil, it also means I am limited in my ability to market the story.

Once a story is posted in full to an internet archive, file host or to a personal web page, it is no longer going to be considered "publishable" by conventional means. The "first rights" to the story have been destroyed. It is now online, archived, downloaded and distributed in such a way that no publisher will touch it. Why?

Well, suppose Dan Brown had decided to put The DaVinci Code online, before it got sold to St Martin's Press. So, after selling it, DaVinci Code becomes the insanely huge success that it has been. When everyone who hasn't bought a copy discovers that all they have to do is download it from the Web, sales of the book could potentially plummet, and Brown could be sued by his publisher for having falsely sold them the first rights to a book already available online.

While Online Publishing or Electronic Publishing is a means of getting your work out there, you have to be very sure you know what you're doing. You have to consider issues like copyright, libel, licensing and subsidiary rights. You have to know exactly where you stand, and what risks you are taking. This is likewise true of self-publishing.

I'll be looking at the importance of registering for the copyright, licensing and subsidiary rights, as well as issues such as libel, fair use of another's work in relation to yours and related problems in future articles, so stay tuned.

Monday, September 12, 2005

Vanity And Self-Publishing


For the past couple of days I’ve been doing research on self-publishing and online publishing. In my last post I mentioned how the Unpublished Masses are often seen as not being good enough by virtue of the fact that they aren’t published by “real publishers”. Well, I know when to call bullshit “bullshit”, and anyone who feeds you that line is full of it. I concede that, yes, many if not most would-be authors are amateurs whose dreams outstrip their talent. However, the minority among the Unpublished Masses who have talent, who have skills, who have honed their craft and their writing to the Nth degree is not as insignificant as the less than one percent of all Unknowns who are likely to get published by “legitimate” means in any given calendar year. As more and more of us realize this, more and more of us are turning to vanity publishing and self-publishing.

Of course, a lot of us are afraid to go this route, because of the perceived stigma attached to self-publishing. So, let’s be clear: the stigma is attached not to self-publishers, but to vanity publishing. Vanity publishing and self-publishing are often confused with one another, because they are so similar. A writer decides to put his or her work into print. The writer pays a printer or a publishing company to print up copies of the book.

Where one differs from the other is that vanity publishers often try and pass themselves off as a “small” publishing houses that will enter into a “cooperative” venture with the writer. They may even claim that a writer must “submit” the book for approval, when the fact of the matter is, every book submitted will be “approved” for publication. For this reason, neither book sellers nor reviewers will take this type of publisher seriously; often your book won’t be listed for sale anywhere other than the publisher’s website.

You as the author will be solely responsible for ensuring the editing, proof reading, fact-checking and in many cases book formatting are done properly. You have few rights to the actual book printed, as they remain the property of the printer until sold. The production quality of the book is often very poor; they are more interested in selling publishing than they are of selling books. A good example of a vanity press outfit can be found at http://www.writers-exchange.com/ Educate yourself; take the time to read what they offer, what they want in return, and the amount of hype they use to sell their “services”. Then look at their online catalogue, from the quality of the cover art to the quantity of genres covered. The website’s design and layout and the book excerpts speak for themselves.

Self publishing is vastly different. There are two routes to go: First, the DIY route, where the only thing you pay for is the printing and binding. You take care of editing the book, proofing it, etc. and then hire a printer to format, print and bind the book. You handle acquiring an ISBN (More on International Standard Book Numbers later), the marketing, sale and distribution of the book yourself. This method is often seen as being a form of vanity publishing, and while the writer retains far more control over the product the disadvantage is that it is often more difficult to get a book distributed and sold.

The second method of self publishing involves working in conjunction with a publishing service provider that offers not just publishing services, but copyediting services, marketing services and who will acquire an ISBN for your work. They do not seek any rights of ownership or exclusivity to the work’s publication. While you will retain the rights to your work, you will also be solely liable for its content. A good publishing service provider will be able to list your book with the online stores, (Barnes & Noble, Amazon.com) etc. as well as listing you with book distributors, who are the ones who sell books to retailers.

The drawback, of course, is cost. Self publishing can be prohibitively expensive; on average, the fees for service range from $300 USD to $1500 USD, depending on the company and the service level being purchased. It isn’t necessarily cheaper to use the first method to produce your self-published work. A lot of printers charge exorbitant rates, considering all they are doing is printing and binding your work.

Changes in the printing industry means Publish On Demand or Print On Demand publishing has become increasingly popular. In many cases you may still have to pay for the printing of a “minimum” number of books, but be careful when it comes to that minimum. If they’re all printed at once, you may be charged a warehousing fee, whereas if they are truly printed “on demand” then you’ve simply paid in advance for the printing of N number of books.

A good example of a Publishing service provider is Xlibris, who are affiliated with Random House Ventures. Their website is at http://www2.xlibris.com/index.asp

Finally, about ISBNs: An International Standard Book Number is a “fingerprint” assigned to published books, software and other print media. It is a serial number recognized in over 160 countries which instantly identifies a published book.

AN ISBN IS NOT A COPYRIGHT. Because copyright law varies from country to country, before you even BEGIN to look at publishing or self-publishing a book, read up on your country’s copyright law and apply for a copyright of the material as soon as your work is complete!

Regarding ISBNs, avoid an ISBN “broker” wherever possible. These people are charging you to fill out the application forms for you. The International ISBN Agency, at http://www.isbn-international.org/index.html is the authority on all things ISBN. They offer a complete list of the national agencies for each charter country.

For the US, Canada and Great Britain, the information is as follows:

In the United States:
R.R. Bowker Co., LLCAtt. Ms. Doreen GravesandeSenior Director ISBN/SAN/PAD630 Central Ave.New Providence, NJ 07974
Tel: Toll Free/United States: 877-310-7333

In Canada:
Canadian ISBN AgencyLibrary and Archives Canada / Bibliothèque et Archives CanadaAttn.: Mr Jean-Eudes BériaultDirector, Acquisitions Directorate395 Wellington StreetOttawa, Ontario K1A 0N4
Tel: (+1 819) 994 68 72 or (+1 866) 578 77 77 toll free) (select 1+5+1+3)

In the UK:
ISBN AgencyAttn: Mr Julian Sowa 3rd Floor Midas House62 Goldsworth RoadWoking Surrey GU21 6LQ
Tel: (+ 44 (0) 870) 777 8712

If you found this article of value, please feel free to comment on it, or email me. Likewise, if you have questions or comments, or want to further discuss anything in the article, I would like to hear from you.

Friday, September 09, 2005

My Name Is Steve Karmazenuk And I Am A Writer

Today, I'd like to take the time to tell you a little more about me, and about my reasons for starting this Weblog.

I've been writing for more than twenty years. It's scary to think about how long I've been at this; two-thirds of my life thusfar! Writing has always been my passion, my pleasure, my obsession. Over the years I have not only practiced the art, but I have also studied it in order to hone my skills.

I've had some successes, many failures; I've written things that are almost embarrassing to read over when I open the Storage Drawer in my desk. I've written other things that I'm quite proud of, too. Mostly, I'm happy with what I've done.

I've written poetry and op-ed pieces, articles and reviews that have been published on a local level. In the last ten years of "serious" writing that I've done, I've written six novels, one of which was actually published online a few years ago on a web portal called Jumpgate. You can link to the web portal (but not the novel--long story) from WTL's Weblog in my "links" section.

So, why have I decided to expose my writing here instead of getting published by a "real" publisher?

The fact of the matter is, traditional publishing is no longer about literature--if it ever was. It's about the bottom line.

Mass market publishers want to make as much money as they can, printing and selling books that are geared to the lowest common deonominator. This is why only a handful of new writers are seen every year, and it is also why a majority of the bestsellers are written by authors hung up on formulaic writing. As much as I enjoy Dan Brown or John Grisham, Nelson DeMille or Greg Iles, their books are essentially all interchangable:

Ordinary Man becomes Reluctant Hero placed in Extraordinary Situation. Bystander Woman gets swept up as Events Unfold, Casting Her Lot in with Ordinary Man. Shocking Plot Twists make Ordinary Man and Bystander Woman question Who They Can Trust. Last Minute Race To The Finish makes for Reader Excitement. Book Ends with Ordinary Man and Bystander Woman either Getting Married or Getting Laid.

Small and Mid market publishers only print a few titles a year, so simply can't afford to take chances with new authors if they are to ensure their survival. While often far more original and innovative in their storytelling, their authors tend to be less accessible to the most readers.

Yes, there are exceptions to both of these cases. But even the Great New Voices of writing have to play by the rules.

Canadian SF Author Robert J Sawyer states things a little more clearly: Less than 1% of all new writers will ever get published.

Does that mean that the 99% of new writers out there don't DESERVE to get published? Does that mean that if you don't get published you're just not GOOD ENOUGH?

Fuck, no.

I've come across too many unpublished gems in my time on sites like the Free Writer's Forum (see my links) and other places to know that this is not the case.

Again, Robert J Sawyer states the following:

"Online publishing" is an oxymoron; don't do it. If you can't make it in print, you're not yet good enough. Become a better writer, and continue to try to crack the print markets.

But you know what? He's wrong; dead wrong. Like I said above, "Traditional" publishers either don't give a fuck about new voices or new works or they just can't afford to gamble on something that hasn't got a proven Marketability.

I don't think I'm the first to turn to Online Publishing, and I won't be the last. I don't give a good Goddamn if I'm able to make a career out of this or not. I am here because I want people to read my writing. I want people to discover the stories I have to tell.

Anything more than that is gravy.

My name is Steve Karmazenuk, and I am a Writer.

Thursday, September 08, 2005

The Beginning

Hello and welcome to K Space.

K Space is my corner of the Universe; a place where my creations can and will be found; a place where you will be able to read those creations, and comment on them.

While K Space may seem at first glance to be quite sparsely populated, rest assured it isn't. You will soon find many different things going on here.

Thanks for coming, and enjoy your stay. Bookmark, comment, and come back often!

Regards,

Steve Karmazenuk
Keeper of K Space