@GeofCox@climatejustice.social
2026-10-15 06:53 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@guardeddon@mas.to 2026-10-15 08:02
@GeofCox@climatejustice.social I understood it not as a ban on the sale of Sally Rooney’s books but that Faber is now unable to pay her for earnings due from book sales. As a consequence, they will no longer distribute the books for sale (existing stocks remain available). Isn’t it true that books do not attract any VAT or duties (and thus inspection) when delivered from foreign sellers to UK customers? Perhaps booksellers located in Ireland could offer readers ready access to Sally Rooney’s books while Faber & Faber recognise sales in Ireland and no legal hindrance to paying the earnings due?
-
@_chris_real@kolektiva.social 2026-10-15 08:49
@GeofCox@climatejustice.social Yeah, governments only bother censoring books when they feel like they're losing control of the public everywhere else. Banned books that are great have historically endured anyway, even inspired new ways to evade bans. For example, porn became de facto legal, not because of a change of attitude, but because enforcement became impossible. And writers have pdf's . . .
-
@petealexharris@mastodon.scot 2026-10-15 10:38
@GeofCox@climatejustice.social I suspect the whole situation with Faber claiming they can't pay Sally Rooney because of legal restrictions is, in a word, bullshit. Proscription of an organisation isn't like measles; you don't catch it by being in the same room. It's not transitive. Otherwise my employer is breaking the law by paying me after my saying I support her free speech. Unless Sally Rooney is a *member* of Palestine Action, I don't think there's any legal prohibition on financial dealing with her at all.
-
@bodhipaksa@mastodon.scot 2026-10-15 11:05
@GeofCox@climatejustice.social There is no book ban. Her publisher withdrew her books from sale voluntarily because, they say, they can't pay her royalties. It seems extremely unlikely that they could be prosecuted for paying royalties to an author because she'd said she would donate those royalties to a proscribed organization. Maybe that has happened, but I doubt it. It seems more likely that they and Rooney withdrew the books for publicity reasons — to highlight the injustice of PA's proscription.
-
@Susan60@aus.social 2026-10-15 12:11
@GeofCox@climatejustice.social Maybe she & her English publisher could donate her royalties to a charity supporting trans people? Would that satisfy th government?