gitman v. pearson ed. complaint
TRANSCRIPT
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 1/67
UN ED
S T ~ s f L T R C V o u R T S
6
2
6
SOUTHERN
I ~ ~
OF NEW YORK
LAWRENCE
J
GITMAN AND MICHAEL D
JOEHNK, on behalfof themselves and all others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v
X
14 Civ.
CLASS CTION
COMPL INT
JURY
TRI L
DEMANDED
0
PEARSON EDUCATION, INC., PEARSON
PLC, and PEARSON, INC.,
~ - ~ :
Defendants.
X
_
Lawrence J Gitman and Michael D Joehnk, by their attorneys, make the following
allegations and claims for their Complaint against Pearson Education, Inc. ( Pearson
Education ), Pearson PLC, and Pearson, Inc. (hereinafter referred to collectively as Pearson ),
its divisions, predecessors, and successors in interest. The following allegations are made upon
information and belief, except as to allegations specifically pertaining to Plaintiffs, which are
made upon knowledge.
PRELIMIN RY ST TEMENT
1 Plaintiffs are emeritus university professors who have authored several widely
used finance textbooks and entered into publishing agreements with various predecessors in
interest to Pearson Education. Plaintiffs bring this action on their own behalf and on behalf
of
other authors of textbooks to seek redress for Pearson's practice of systematically short-changing
textbook authors on the royalties they are owed.
2. Prices for college textbooks have, on average, increased by more than 82% over
the past ten years. The wholesale prices for college textbooks (which is the basis for the
calculation
of
royalties owed to Plaintiffs and the class they represent) have increased at a similar
rate. This increase in the retail and wholesale prices
of
textbooks should result in increased
1
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 2/67
royalty payments to textbook authors, including Plaintiffs and the class they represent, who
receive a royalty that is a percentage
of
the selling price
of
their works.
3
However, even though there has been no reduction in the royalty rate Plaintiffs
are entitled to over the past ten years, Plaintiffs' royalty payments for each copy
of
their works
have remained constant
or
declined, when they should have increased.
4
For example, between the year 2000 and 2011, the retail price for Plaintiffs'
textbook
FUNDAMENTALS OF
INVESTING increased from 108 to 260. Given the increase in the
retail and wholesale price
of
this textbook (it would be helpful to have wholesale cost since we
allege wholesale price increased commensurately), Plaintiffs' per unit royalties should have more
than doubled over this time period. However, Plaintiffs' per unit royalties remained virtually
stagnant as they moved from approximately 12.59 per copy to only 14.30 per copy, an
increase
of just
1% a year, as compared to a 140% increase in retail prices during this time
period.
5.
While
pnces
for Plaintiffs' works have increased dramatically, the sole
beneficiary
of
the price increases has been Pearson. A recent audit
of
the royalty statements
Plaintiffs received over a five-year period for four textbooks revealed that they are owed more
than 4 70,000 in additional royalties. Numerous other textbook authors who entered into
materially similar standard form agreements with Pearson Education or various predecessors in
interest have also been underpaid royalties. Extrapolating from the amount of underpaid
royalties owed to the Plaintiffs, it appears that Pearson Education has improperly retained for
itself millions of dollars in royalties owed to the proposed class. ow does Pearson manage to
enrich itself at the expense
of
Plaintiffs and the class they represent?
6. There are seven systematic practices employed by Pearson that have permitted it
to steadily usurp
an
ever greater share
of
the revenue from sales
of
textbooks, all at the expense
of
the textbook authors.
7
First in order to expropriate a greater share
of
sales revenue from textbook
authors, Pearson Education improperly categorizes domestic sales as export sales in order to pay
the lower royalty rate applicable to export sales. Under the standard form contracts at issue,
2
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 3/67
authors usually receive a royalty of 10 of export sales (i.e., sales that involve the exporting
of the book to a foreign country), and
15o/o
or
18
of domestic sales. Pearson short-changes
authors by counting mere bookkeeping entries in which Pearson Education notes a sale from
Pearson Education to another Pearson entity controlled by Pearson PLC or Pearson, Inc., as an
export sale, even though the books never leave the United States as part
of
this purported sale.
The bookkeeping entry does not reflect an arms-length transaction between different Pearson
entities; indeed, it is generally a single Pearson employee based in the United States that makes
the bookkeeping entry reflecting the export sale. The actual exporting of the books occurs
only when the Pearson, Inc., or Pearson PLC subsidiary with nominal ownership of the books
actually makes a bona-fide sale to an unrelated third-party. With respect to the textbook
FUNDAMENTALS OF INVESTING, between
25%
and 50o/o of total unit sales were categorized by
Pearson as export sales, even though a very small portion of those units were actually sold in a
foreign country.
8. Second Pearson Education short-changes its authors by failing to use
commercially reasonable best efforts to make bona-fide export sales to unrelated third parties,
and pay authors royalties on those sales. Instead, a single Pearson employee simply makes
bookkeeping entries in which a sale is noted from one Pearson entity to another, at a price
determined by Pearson. Essentially, royalties are paid to authors based upon the price at which
Pearson decided to sell itself the books.
f
the Pearson entity with nominal ownership of the
books later sells and exports the books to an unrelated third-party at a higher price than the price
set by Pearson in its internal bookkeeping entry, Pearson does not remit additional royalties to
authors based upon the higher sale price eventually realized by Pearson. With respect to the
textbook
FUNDAMENTALS
OF
INVESTING,
the net effect of this practice is that the sale prices
(i.e., the royalty basis) for export sales is often less than
25%
of
the price realized for bona-fide
domestic sales.
9. The bottom line impact
of
these sham export sales with respect to
FUNDAMENTALS OF INVESTING is that export sales accounted for approximately 34% of the
total units sold, but only
12 of
the royalties received by Plaintiffs. With these sham export
3
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 4/67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 5/67
allocating revenues from kit sales to royalty-free or reduced royalty study guide products,
Pearson creates custom bundles with unique ISBN numbers, and claims that this customization
justifies the reduction in the share o
the royalties allocated to Plaintiffs' textbooks. For the
textbook
FUNDAMENTALS
OF
INVESTING
the number
o
custom editions with unique ISBN
numbers has more than quadrupled in the past ten years. These custom editions have little or
no additional material that would justify the artificially low royalty allocation to Plaintiffs
textbooks.
12 Sometimes, these custom editions are created as part o an academic payola
scam in which Pearson gives a kickback in the form
o
a royalty to professors who select
Pearson published books for their class. After agreeing to use a Pearson textbook in a course, a
professor or academic department will supply a small and worthless amount
o material to create
a custom edition, and in return receive a royalty/kickback for the material supplied for the
custom edition. These kickbacks further reduce the royalty basis for Plaintiffs and the class they
represent. t
is
unknown at this juncture whether Plaintiffs have been victims o this kickback
scheme.
13
The bottom line impact o these practices with respect to the textbook
FUNDAMENTALS
OF
INVESTING
is that the royalty basis for these kit sales was typically
between 75% and 40% less than the royalty basis for regular domestic sales.
14
Fifth in addition to lowering the royalty basis through kit sales, Pearson
categorizes the kit sales
as
discounted domestic sales, and apply arbitrarily low royalty rates
ranging from 2.5% to 10% to those sales, rather than the higher domestic royalty provided in the
standard form contracts entered into by Plaintiffs and the class they represent. These
discounted sales, as a percentage o total sales, have dramatically increased since the
development
o
the My Lab web-based study guides. For example, for the textbook
FUNDAMENTALS OF
INVESTING
these discounted domestic sales now represent a majority o
the sales o that textbook. Thus, Plaintiffs are receiving a lower royalty rate calculated on an
artificially low basis, while Pearson reaps an ever-greater share o the revenue from textbook
sales.
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 6/67
15. Sixth Pearson Education breaches the covenant of good faith and fair dealing by
(i) routinely engaging in below-market sham sales in order to reduce the basis on which royalties
are calculated, and (ii) overstating the value
of
materials contributed by Pearson as part
of
any kit
sales in order to reduce the basis on which it owed royalties for the kit sales. n order to injure
the ability
of
authors to receive the royalties they are due and reasonably expect to receive under
the standard form contracts, Pearson Education enlists various Pearson
PLC and Pearson, Inc.,
subsidiaries and related parties to participate in sales at below-market prices, and then pays the
authors a royalty based upon this below-market sales price. These below-market sales, which
Pearson Education seeks to disguise by calling them export sales (even though the books never
go anywhere), are designed to deprive authors
of
the benefits they are owed under the publishing
contracts they entered into. Then, subsidiaries of Pearson PLC and Pearson, Inc., and/or related
parties sell the books at market price and retain the proceeds, allowing Pearson to reap excess
profits at the expense of the authors. To the extent Pearson Education is permitted to engage in
these related-party transactions, it is required to act in good faith by selling the books at the
market price, so that these sales
do
not injure or destroy the authors' ability to reap the benefits
of
their contracts with Pearson Education. With respect to kit sales, to the extent such sales are
authorized, Pearson Education must act in good faith in determining the relative value
of
the
components contributed by Pearson Education or other Pearson entities, so as not to deprive
authors of their fair share of royalties owed on kit sales. Instead, Pearson deliberately
understates the relative value of Plaintiffs' works in order to deprive them of royalties.
16. Seventh Pearson PLC and Pearson, Inc., interfere with the contracts between the
authors and Pearson Education by: (i) participating in the sham bookkeeping entries reflecting
export sales that never actually occurred, and (ii) engaging in below-market sham transactions
with Pearson Education in order to lower the basis upon which the authors' royalties are
calculated.
JURISIDI TION
AND VENUE
17. This Court has jurisdiction over all causes of action asserted herein pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §1332(d), because the aggregate claims of the Class exceed the sum or value of
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 7/67
5,000,000.00, and there
1s
diversity
of
citizenship between proposed class members and
Defendant.
18. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §1391(a)(l) and (2). Defendant
Pearson, Inc., maintains its headquarters at 1330 Avenue
of
the Americas,
New
York,
New
York,
and otherwise conducts substantial business in this District, including conduct directed at
members of the Class, such as contracting for the publication of books and the accounting,
reporting, and payment of royalties owed to Plaintiffs and the proposed class. Defendants
Pearson, PLC and Pearson Education, Inc., engage in interstate commerce by regularly
conducting business in this district by selling, promoting, and marketing books and other items in
this District. In the past year, Pearson,
PLC and its subsidiary Pearson Education, Inc., have sold
millions of dollars of textbooks, and other types of books in this District.
P RTIES
19. Plaintiff Lawrence J. Gitman is a citizen and resident of the State of California,
County of San Diego, and an Emeritus Professor of Finance at San Diego State University. Mr.
Gitman entered into standard form publishing agreements with Harper Row Publishers for
three text books that were tentatively titled: BASIC FINANCE: A MANAGERIAL APPROACH
PRINCIPLES OF MANAGERIAL
FINANCE
2nd ed. ), ESSENTIALS OF INVESTMENTS (co-authored with
Michael Joehnk), and
BASIC
MANAGERIAL
FINANCE.
Mr. Gitman also entered into a standard
form publishing agreement with Addison Wesley-Longman for a textbook tentatively titled
INTRODUCTION TO FINANCE
(co-authored with Jeff Madura). These textbooks have been widely
used for decades.
1
20. Plaintif f Michael D. J oehnk is a citizen and resident
of
the State
of
Arizona,
Coconino County, and an Emeritus Professor of Finance at Arizona State University. Mr.
Joehnk entered into a standard form publishing agreement with Harper
&
Row
Publishers for a
textbook that was tentatively titled ESSENTIALS
OF INVESTMENTS
(co-authored with Mr. Gitman).
1
The actual names of the textbooks were changed upon publication to: FUNDAMENTALS OF
INVESTING PRINCIPLES OF
MANAGERIAL
FINANCE PRINCIPLES OF
MANAGERIAL
FINANCE
BRIEF and INTRODUCTION TO
FINANCE.
7
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 8/67
21. Defendant Pearson, PLC ( Pearson PLC ) is a corporation formed under the laws
of
the United Kingdom with its principal offices located in London, England and ew York,
ew
York. Pearson PLC operates in the United States through its wholly owners subsidiaries
Pearson, Inc., headquartered in
ew
York City, and Pearson Educational, Inc., headquartered in
Saddle River,
ew
Jersey. One of Pearson PLC' s businesses is educational publishing, and it is
presently one
of
the largest publishers
of
educational textbooks in the world. Through a series
of
acquisitions and mergers, Pearson PLC acquired the College Division of Harper & Row
Publishers as well as the publishing house Addison Wesley Longman, the entities with which
Plaintiffs entered into standard form publishing contracts.
22. Defendant Pearson, Inc. ( Pearson Inc. ), is a Delaware Corporation, with its
principal place of business located in ew York, ew York. Pearson Inc., is a wholly owned
subsidiary of its parent Pearson PLC, and one of the entities through which Pearson PLC
operates in the United States. Pearson Inc., is one
of
the largest book publishers in the world.
23. Defendant Pearson Education, Inc. ( Pearson Education ), is a Delaware
Corporation with its principal place
of
business located in Upper Saddle River,
ew
Jersey, and
a wholly owned subsidiary of Pearson, PLC. Pearson Education is one of the largest publishers
of educational textbooks and was created through a series
of
acquisitions and mergers by which
Pearson PLC acquired the educational publishing business of Prentice Hall, Simon Schuster,
Harper Collins, and Addison Wesley.
24. Pearson Education is the successor in interest to the College Division ofHarper
Row Publishers and Addison Wesley Longman, the two publishing houses that are the actual
signatories to the publishing contracts with Plaintiffs. In 1996, Pearson PLC acquired Harper
Collins Educational Publishing (a division of Harper Collins, the successor to Harper Row
Publishers) and merged it into Addison Wesley Longman, the educational publishing subsidiary
of Pearson PLC. In 1998, Pearson PLC purchased the educational publishing businesses of
Simon & Schuster, and merged that business with the Pearson PLC subsidiary Addison Wesley
Longman, which was renamed Pearson Education.
8
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 9/67
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
A. TH STANDARD FORM PUBLISHING AGREEMENTS
25. Pearson Education and its predecessor entities (e.g., the educational publishing
businesses ofHarper Row, Addison Wesley Longman, Prentice Hall, Simon Schuster, etc.)
regularly entered into written publishing agreements with authors of textbooks and other
academic books. These publishing agreements (the Agreements ) are standard form
agreements drafted by Pearson Education or its predecessor entities with blank spaces for the
date
of
the contract, the title
of
the book to be published, and the name
of
the author
to
be filled
In.
Copies
of
the publishing agreements entered into by the Plaintiffs are attached hereto
as
exhibits A through E.
26. These Agreements are typical publishing agreements in which the author grants
the exclusive right
to
publish a book to the publisher, and in return, the publisher pays to print
the book, use reasonable best efforts to try to maximize the total sales
of
the book by dollar
volume, and pay the author a royalty equal to a percentage
of
the gross receipts realized from
sales
of
the book. The author is not paid a fixed amount up-front in the Agreements, because it
is uncertain how many books can be sold and at what price. Thus, the Agreements contemplate
that the publisher will sell the books
to
various third parties, with the number
of
books purchased
and the price
to
be paid a matter
of
negotiation in a future arms-length transaction between the
publisher and the third parties to whom the book is sold.
27. The Agreements also invariably provide for a higher royalty rate for sales made in
the United States and Canada than for export sales in which the books are shipped abroad.
(The Agreements exclude sales to Canada from export sales and provide for payment
of
royalties at the domestic rate for sales in Canada.) The Agreements typically provide a
standard royalty rate of
10
for export and international sales. The royalty for domestic sales
and sales
to
Canada
is
invariably higher than 10 , and typically ranges between
15o/o
and 18%
9
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 10/67
of
sales. For the textbook
FUNDAMENTALS OF
INVESTING
the royalty rate for domestic sales is
18%.
28. With respect to the royalty basis for kit sales, many
of
the Agreements do not
authorize Pearson Education to sell the books as part of a kit or pay a reduced royalty for such
sales. To the extent such sales are authorized, or the Plaintiffs have permitted such sales,
Pearson is required to act in good faith and not place its own interest ahead
of
the Plaintiffs in
conducting
of
those sales and calculating royalties on those sales.
29. Plaintiffs entered into five of these standard form Agreements with Pearson. The
agreements entered into between Plaintiffs and Pearson grant Pearson the exclusive right to
publish the texts in exchange for the payment
of
a royalty equal to a percentage
of
the dollar
value
of
any sales. The four agreements with Harper Row publishers for the texts
BASIC
FINANCE:
A
MANAGERIAL APPROACH PRINCIPLES OF MANAGERIAL FINANCE 2nd
ed.),
ESSENTIALS
OF INVESTMENTS and
BASIC MANAGERIAL FINANCE
each provide for a royalty
of
between 15% and 18% for domestic sales and export sales to Canada, and a royalty of only 10%
on export sales to countries other than Canada. The standard form publishing agreement with
Addison Wesley Longman for the text
INTRODUCTION
TO
FINANCE
is substantively identical to
the Harper
Row
contracts with respect to export royalties, and provides for a royalty
of
between 15% and 18% for domestic sales and export sales to Canada, and a royalty of only 10%
on export sales to countries other than Canada.
B. ALLEGATIONS RELATED
TO TH
CLAIM
FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT
30. In 2011, Plaintiffs retained IP Royalty Auditors LLC, an accounting firm that
specializes in royalty audits, to conduct an audit
of
their royalty account with Pearson Education.
The audit, as well as a further examination of Pearson Education's business practices, revealed
that Pearson Education short-changed Plaintiffs on royalties owed under the Agreements, and
that Plaintiffs are owed more than 470,000 in additional royalties.
10
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 11/67
Pearson Misclassi/ies U.S. nd Canada Sales as ((Export Sales
31. Pearson Education engages in the systematic practice o improperly classifying
domestic sales as export sales in order to reduce the royalty rate owed to authors under the
Agreements. Under the standard form contracts at issue, authors usually receive a royalty
o
10%
o
export sales (i.e., sales that involve the exporting o the book to a foreign country other
than Canada), and 15% to 18% o domestic sales and sales to Canada. In order to pay royalties
at the lower export royalty rate, Pearson Education classifies its internal bookkeeping entries in
which Pearson Education notes a transfer from Pearson Education to another Pearson entity
(typically a subsidiary o Pearson PLC or Pearson, Inc., or other related party)
as
a bona fide
export sale. The books, o course, are never actually exported or sold abroad. The transaction
exists only on paper; the books never
go anywhere and no money is actually exchanged. Indeed,
it is usually a single Pearson Education employee that sits on both sides
o
the transaction and
makes the bookkeeping entry. Pearson Education, however, treats these internal bookkeeping
entries as export sales, and pays royalties at the lower export rate on the books covered by these
bookkeeping entries.
32. The standard form Agreements, including the Harper Row and Addison Wesley
Longman contracts between Plaintiffs and Pearson Education, allow for the payment o the lower
royalty rate for export sales only on books that are actually exported.
33. Pearson Education cannot avoid its royalty obligations by cooking its books
with sales that are nothing more than an internal accounting artifice. With respect to the textbook
FUNDAMENTALS OF
INVESTING between
25%
and
50%
o total unit sales were categorized by
Pearson Education as export sales, even though a very small portion o those units were
actually sold in a foreign country.
34. Pearson's wild claims as to export sales simply defy reason, logic, and common
sense. Pearson has substantially underpaid Plaintiffs royalties they are owed by falsely claiming
that 25o/o to 50%
o
all unit sales were export sales subject to a 10% royalty rate, rather than an
18%
royalty rate.
11
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 12/67
Pearson Education Fails to Undertake ny Efforts to Make
Bona-Fide Export Sales or the Benefit ofPlaintiffs
and
the Class
35. The Agreements also contemplate that Pearson Education, as the holder
of
the
exclusive right to publish the works aboard, will use commercially reasonable efforts to make
bona-fide export sales to unrelated third-parties and pay authors royalties on those sales. Instead
of
undertaking efforts to make sales abroad for the benefit
of
Plaintiffs and· the class, Pearson
Education takes a shortcut by estimating how many units it will sell abroad and at what price,
and making an internal bookkeeping entry reflecting such a
sale from Pearson Education to
another Pearson entity, typically a subsidiary
of
Pearson PLC
or
Pearson, Inc.,
or
other related
party. Rather than reaping the benefits of reasonable best efforts to sell their books abroad,
Plaintiffs and the class are paid royalties only upon these internal Pearson Education
bookkeeping entries, which do not reflect any effort to actually sell the books abroad. Indeed,
the same Pearson employee typically sits on both sides
of
the transaction, and decides how many
books will be sold and at what price, and makes an internal bookkeeping entry reflecting this
purported sale.
36.
f
the books are later sold and exported to an unrelated third-party (i.e., the
export sales and sales to independent distributors or bookstores contemplated in the form
Agreements), at a higher price than the price set by Pearson Education in its internal
bookkeeping entry, Pearson Education does not remit additional royalties to authors based upon
the higher sale price eventually realized.
37. Pearson Education essentially turns its obligation under the Agreements to sell
and market the books abroad for the benefit of the authors on its head. Rather than undertake
such efforts for the benefit
of
Plaintiffs and the class, Pearson Education undertakes such efforts
only for itself. When bona-fide export sales are actually made, Pearson retains the benefits of
such efforts for itself.
38. With respect to Plaintiffs' textbook
FUNDAMENTALS O INVESTING
the net effect
of this practice is that the sale prices (i.e., the royalty basis) for export sales is, far more often
12
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 13/67
than not, less than 25
of
the price realized for bona-fide domestic sales. There are no cost
savings or market efficiencies related to sales of English language textbooks abroad that would
account for the substantially lower sale price and resulting royalty basis. The only plausible
explanation for the price difference is that the sale price and resulting royalty basis reflects
Pearson's efforts to reduce royalty payments to textbook authors, and retain a greater share of
sales revenue for itself.
Pearson Arbitrarily Reduced the Rovaltv Rate in Violation o he Publishing Contracts
39.
The standard form agreements require Pearson Education to pay a royalty to
textbook authors
of
between 15-18% on all domestic sales. For example, for Plaintiffs' textbook
FUNDAMENTALS
OF INVESTING Pearson Education is required to pay them a royalty of 18% of all
domestic sales. During 2005, in an effort to retain a greater share of the domestic sales revenues,
Pearson Education introduced a
new
category of sales called discount domestic sales, and
initially started paying royalties at rate of only 10 for such sales. This trend of Pearson
Education expropriating an ever-greater share
of
the revenue from sales
of
textbooks has
accelerated since 2005. In 2012, Pearson Education started to unilaterally impose royalty rates
of only
5
and 10% for discounted domestic textbook sales. In 2013, Pearson Education
unilaterally dropped the 10% royalty rate altogether, and unilaterally reduced royalty rates for
domestic sales of FUNDAMENTALS OF INVESTING to only 5%
or
2.5o/o. Presently, rather than
receiving the 18o/o royalty they are contractually entitled to on domestic sales
of FUNDAMENTALS
OF
INVESTING
Plaintiffs are receiving a royalty of only 2.5% on any domestic sales that Pearson
Education chooses to categorize as a discounted domestic sale.
40. A royalty auditor determined that Pearson owes at least $263,878.03 in additional
royalties for the purported export sales of
FUNDAMENTALS
OF
INVESTING PRINCIPLES
OF
MANAGERIAL FINANCE FOUNDATIONS OF MANAGERIAL
FINANCE
and
BASIC
MANAGERIAL
FINANCE.
13
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 14/67
Pearson Underpays Royalties {or Kit and ''My Lab Sales
41. Pearson Education will often commission a study guide for the textbooks it
publishes pursuant to the Agreements. The study guide is typically a work for hire for Pearson
Education, and Pearson Education is not required to pay any royalties to the authors
of
the study
guide. Pearson Education then sells the textbooks it publishes pursuant to the Agreements (and
on which it must pay royalties) as part
of
a kit with the companion study guides (on which no
royalties are typically owed).
42. In 2008, Pearson Education introduced the My Lab product, which provides web-
based textbook specific study guides for use with textbooks published by Pearson Education.
More than 9 million students are currently using a My Lab product in conjunction with textbooks
published by Pearson Education. Presently, many if not most textbooks sold by Pearson
Education, are sold as part
of
a kit
or
bundle that includes a key to access the related My Lab
study guide. The
My
Lab products are created as works for hire for Pearson, and as such,
Pearson Education is not required to pay royalties on sales
ofMy
Lab products.
43. In an effort to expropriate a greater share
of
the revenue from sales
of
textbooks
than it is contractually entitled to, Pearson Education underpays royalties
on
textbooks sold as
part
of
a kit
or
with the
My
Lab product. Regardless
of
whether a publishing contract
permits the sale
of
a textbook as part
of
a kit (and most do not), Pearson Education pays a royalty
on only the portion of the sale price of the kit or
My
Lab product that Pearson Education
attributes to the textbook.
44. Many
of
the standard form Agreements, including the four standard form Harper
Row agreements between Plaintiffs and Pearson Education, do not authorize the publication
of
the books as part of a kit, or allow Pearson Education to pay a lower royalty on such sales by
allocating the sale price
of
a kit between the underlying text (on which royalties are owed) and
the Pearson Education-created materials (e.g., My Lab) for which royalties are generally not
owed. Pearson Education breached many
of
the Agreements, including the standard form Harper
14
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 15/67
Row
agreements, by selling books as part of a kit, without authorization, and paying a
reduced royalty (arbitrarily determined by Pearson Education) on such sales.
45
To the extent kit sales are permitted, Pearson Education artificially lowers the
basis upon which domestic royalties are calculated by assigning an arbitrarily low value to the
textbook component
of
the bundled/kit products.
f
course, the written study guides as well as
the web and software based study guides that constitute the My Lab line
of
products are useless
without the underlying textbook upon which they are based. However, Pearson often uses a
royalty basis for the bundled kit/My Lab sales that is substantially less than the typical stand-
alone sale price for a textbook. Under Pearson's business practices, a textbook somehow
becomes worth less when sold as part
of
a kit or with the My Lab product.
46. Essentially, Pearson Education applies a bogus and artificially low valuation to
the textbook component
of
a bundle/kit product in order to reap a greater share
of
the revenue
from that product for itself, all at the expense
of
Plaintiffs and other textbook authors.
47. With respect to the textbook
FUNDAMENTALS OF INVESTING
the royalty basis for
bundled/kit sales was typically between 25o/o and 60%
of
the regular domestic sale price.
Further, these discounted sales as a percentage
of
total sales have dramatically increased since
the development
of
the My Lab product line, and with respect to the textbook
FUNDAMENTALS
OF INVESTING
these discounted domestic sales now represent a majority of sales.
48
Plaintiffs and members
of
the proposed class are owed additional royalties for (i)
all unauthorized kit sales, and/or (ii) kit sales in which Pearson underpaid royalties by
assigning an arbitrarily and unfairly low value to the textbook component of the kit. Plaintiffs'
auditor determined that Pearson owes Plaintiffs at least $187,413.18 in additional royalties for
kit sales
of FUNDAMENTALS OF INVESTING
and
PRINCIPLES OF
MANAGERIAL FINANCE.
15
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 16/67
C ALLEGATIONS RELATED TO THE CLAIM
FOR BREACH OF THE IMPLIED COVENANT
OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
49
The Agreements at issue are simple publishing agreements in which the author
grants the publisher the exclusive right to publish a work, and in return, the publisher agrees to
pay a royalty based upon a percentage o the sales o the work. Plaintiffs and the class can only
reap the fruits
o
the Agreements
i
Pearson Education acts in good faith in setting the price at
which it sells the books it publishes.
Pearson Education, however, routinely breaches the
covenant
o
good faith and fair dealing by engaging in two standard business practices to deprive
Plaintiffs and the Class
o
the royalties they are owed under the Agreements.
50 First, Pearson Education routinely engages in below-market sham sales in order to
reduce the basis on which royalties are calculated. Pearson Education makes sales at below
market prices to Pearson PLC, Pearson Inc., and various subsidiaries and related parties, and then
pays the authors a royalty based upon this below-market sales price. Because export sales are
typically made at a lower price than domestic sales (which includes sales to Canada in the
Agreements), Pearson Education typically seeks to disguise these below market sales by calling
them export sales, even though the books never go anywhere. Pearson PLC, Pearson, Inc., and
various subsidiaries and related parties, then sell the books at the higher market price to third
parties, and retain the proceeds o this sale, or remit the proceeds to Pearson Education. The
authors, however, never receive a royalty based upon this subsequent sale at the higher market
price. To the extent Pearson Education is permitted to engage in these related-party transactions,
it is required to act in good faith by selling the books at the market price, so that these sales do
not injure or destroy the authors' ability to reap the benefits
o
their contracts with Pearson
Education.
51
The net effect
o
this practice is that the sale prices (i.e., the royalty basis) for
export sales is often less than 25%
o
the price realized for bona-fide domestic sales.
6
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 17/67
52 Second, to the extent kit sales are authorized under any o the form
Agreements, Pearson Education routinely overstates the relative value
o
the study guides and
other Pearson Education-created content to the price
o
the kit. By selling the textbooks as part
o
a kit, and overstating the relative value
o
the study guide to the overall sale price
o
the
kit, Pearson Education reduces the basis on which it calculates the royalty owed on the
textbook.
53 For example, under the Addison Wesley Longman standard form agreements,
Pearson Education may sell textbooks as part
o
a kit with a study guide, and the proportion
o
the selling price
o
the kit attributed
to
the study guide is based upon a price Pearson Education
arbitrarily sets for the study guide, which
is
far higher than market price for sales
o
the study
guide as a stand-alone product. (The study guides have little or no value to students unless
accompanied by the underlying textbook.) By setting an arbitrarily high price for the study
guides sold as part
o
a kit, Pearson Education lowers the royalty basis for the textbook
component o the kit, and thereby deprives Plaintiffs and the class
o
the fruits
o
the
Agreements.
54 To the extent kit sales are authorized, Pearson Education must act in good faith
in determining the relative value o the components contributed by Pearson, so as not to deprive
authors o their fair share o royalties owed on kit sales. Plaintiffs suffered substantial damages
on account o Pearson Education's practice
o
overstating the price for the study guide relative to
the price
o
the underlying textbook for kit sales.
55
A royalty auditor determined that Pearson Education's conduct resulted in
Pearson Education retaining at least $613,228.27 that should have been paid to Plaintiffs as
additional royalties.
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
56
Plaintiffs bring this action as a nationwide class action, pursuant to Rule 23 o the
Federal Rules
o
Civil Procedure (hereinafter FRCP ) on behalf
o
themselves and all other
authors (and any
o
their respective successors in interest), who, as o the date o this Complaint,
7
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 18/67
have entered into publishing contracts with Pearson Education (or any of its predecessors or
successors in interest) and i) had Pearson Education purport to sell their works for export,
and/or (ii) had Pearson Education purport to sell their works as part
of
a kit (hereafter, referred
to as the Class ). Excluded from the Class are the Defendants herein, and any person, firm,
trust, corporation, or other entity related to or affiliated with the Defendants including, without
limitation, persons who are officers, directors, employees, associates or partners
of
Pearson
Education.
57. This action is properly maintained as a class action. This Class satisfies all
of
the
requirements
ofFR P
Rule
23
for maintaining a class action.
58. The Class is so numerous that joinder
of
all members is impracticable and the
disposition
of
their claims in a class action will provide substantial benefits to the parties and the
Court. Upon information and belief, thousands of persons have entered into Agreements with
Pearson Education, and have not been properly compensated by Pearson Education for sales of
their works that are purportedly sold for export or as part of a kit.
59. There are questions
of
law and fact which are common to the Class and which
predominate over questions affecting any individual Class member. Defendants pursued a
common course
of
conduct toward the Class as alleged. This action arises out
of
a common
nucleus
of
operative facts.
60. The common questions of law and fact include, without limitation:
a Whether Pearson Education breached the express terms
of
the Agreements
with members
of
the Class;
b Whether Pearson Education misclassified domestic sales as export
sales, and owes Plaintiffs and the Class additional royalties for such misclassified sales;
c. Whether Pearson Education failed to undertake efforts to effect export
sales for the benefit
of
Plaintiffs and the Class;
d
Whether Pearson Education owes Plaintiffs and the Class additional
royalties on export sales to Pearson PLC, Pearson, Inc., and various subsidiaries and related
18
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 19/67
parties, where the books are subsequently sold to a third party in an arms-length transaction at a
higher price than Pearson set for the export sale;
e. Whether Pearson Education breached the Agreements, including the
standard form Harper &
Row
agreements, by selling books as part
of
a kit and paying a
reduced royalty on such sales;
f Whether Pearson Education engaged in below market sales of works
authored by Plaintiffs and the Class in order to reduce the basis upon which royalties are
calculated, and whether additional royalties are owed;
g Whether Pearson Education, on the one hand, and Pearson PLC, Pearson
Inc., on the other hand, engaged in below-market sales transactions of works covered by the
Agreements in order to enrich themselves, while depriving Plaintiffs and the Class
of
the benefits
they reasonably expected to receive under the Agreements;
h Whether Pearson PLC and Pearson Education interfered with the
Agreements between the authors and Pearson Education by: (i) participating in the sham
bookkeeping entries reflecting export sales that never actually occur, and (ii) engaging in
below-market sham transactions with
Pearson Education in order to lower the basis upon which
the authors' royalties are based;
1. To the extent kit sales are permitted, whether Pearson Education inflated
the price
or
overstated the value of study guides or other Pearson supplied components of the
kits in order to lower the royalty basis for the textbooks sold as part of the kits;
j
Whether Pearson Education inflated the price or overstated the value of
study guides
or
other Pearson supplied components
of
the kits in order to deprive Plaintiffs and
the Class of the benefits they reasonably expected to receive under the Agreements;
k Whether Pearson Education breached the implied covenant
of
good faith
and fair dealing by engaging in below market sales and setting an inflated price (i.e., above
market price) for Pearson supplied components
of
kits;
1
Whether Plaintiff and the Class have been injured by the Defendants'
conduct;
19
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 20/67
m. Whether Plaintiffs and the Class sustained damages and are entitled to
restitution as a result o Defendant s wrongdoing and, i so, what is the proper measure and
appropriate statutory formula to be applied in determining such damages and restitution; and
n. Whether Plaintiffs and the Class are entitled to declaratory and/or
injunctive relief.
61. Plaintiffs claims are typical o the claims o the Class and Plaintiffs have no
interests adverse or antagonistic to the interests o other members o the Class.
62. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests o the Class and have
retained experienced counsel, competent in the prosecution o class action litigation.
63. A class action is superior to other methods for the fair and efficient adjudication
o the claims asserted herein. Plaintiffs anticipate that no unusual difficulties are likely to be
encountered in the management
o
this class action.
64. A class action will permit a large number o similarly situated persons to
prosecute their common claims in a single forum simultaneously, efficiently, and without the
duplication o effort and expense that numerous individual actions would engender. Class
treatment will also permit the adjudication o relatively small claims by many Class members
who could not otherwise afford to seek legal redress for the wrongs complained o herein.
Absent a class action, the Class members will continue to suffer monetary damages and i
Defendants conduct proceeds without remedy Defendants will continue to reap and retain the
proceeds o its ill-gotten gains.
65. Defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the entire Class,
thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with
respect to the Class as a whole.
20
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 21/67
FIRST
CAUSE OF
CTION
Breach
of
Contract
(against Pearson Education)
66. Each
of
the above allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 is incorporated
herein as though recited verbatim and at length.
67. Pearson Education breached the express terms
of
the Agreements with Plaintiffs
and the Class by failing to pay the royalty rates specified in the Agreements, and instead
arbitrarily substituting far lower royalty rates.
68. Pearson Education breached the express terms of the Agreements with Plaintiffs
and the Class by misclassifying domestic sales
as
export sales, and paying Plaintiffs and the
Class the lower royalty rate for export sales on these misclassified sales.
69. Pearson Education breached the express terms of the Agreements with Plaintiffs
and the Class by failing to undertake any effort to effect bona-fide export sales for the benefit
of
Plaintiff and the Class.
70. Pearson Education breached the express terms of the Agreements with Plaintiffs
and the Class by failing to pay to Plaintiffs and the Class additional royalties on export sales to
Pearson PLC, Pearson, Inc., or any of their subsidiaries or related parties, where the books are
subsequently sold to a third party in an arms-length transaction at a higher price than Pearson
Education, Pearson PLC, Pearson, Inc., or any of their subsidiaries or related parties set for the
export sale.
71. Pearson Education breached the express terms of the Agreements with Plaintiffs
and the Class, including the standard form Harper
&
Row agreements, by selling works authored
by Plaintiffs and the Class as part
of
kits and paying a reduced royalty on such sales.
72. To the extent kit sales are permitted, Pearson Education breached the express
terms of the Agreements with Plaintiffs and the Class by artificially inflating the value of the
Pearson content sold
as
part
of
the kit (e.g., the My lab product and study guides) relative to the
2
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 22/67
value of the textbook such content relates to, in order to assign an unfairly low royalty basis to
the textbook sold as part
of
the kit.
73. As a result
of
these breaches by Pearson Education, including the failure to pay
royalties owed under the Agreements, Plaintiffs and the Class have suffered damages
of
at least
$613,228.27, according to a royalty auditor, and continue to suffer damages.
SECOND CAUSE O ACTION
Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and
air
Dealing
(against Pearson Education)
74. Each
of
the above allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through
7
is incorporated
herein as though recited verbatim and at length.
75. Pearson Education is bound by the implied covenant
of
good faith and fair dealing
with respect to its conduct relating to the Agreements. The implied covenant
of
good faith and
fair dealing precludes Pearson Education from engaging in conduct that has the effect
of
depriving Plaintiffs and the Class
of
the benefits they are entitled to under the Agreements.
76. In order to enrich itself at the expense
of
Plaintiffs and the Class, Pearson
Education engaged in below market sales
of
works authored by Plaintiffs and Class in order to
reduce the basis upon which royalties are calculated. For example, Pearson Education might
engage in a related-party sale
of
a book for $50 a copy, even though the book could be sold for
$100 to a third-party in an arms-length transaction. Pearson Education then pays royalties on
only the $50 sale and not the market price
of
$100, thereby cutting the royalties paid to the
author
of
the book by 50%. These below market sales injure the ability
of
Plaintiffs and the
Class to receive the fruits
of
the Agreements. To the extent Pearson Education is permitted to
engage in related-party transactions to sell books authored by Plaintiffs and members
of
the
Class, Pearson Education is required to act in good faith by selling the books at the market price,
so that these related-party sales do not unfairly reduce the basis upon which royalties are
calculated.
22
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 23/67
77. Pearson Education also breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing by inflating the price or overstating the value of study guides or other Pearson Education
supplied components
of
the kits in order to reduce the royalty basis for the textbooks sold as
part of the kits. For example, if the kit consisting of a study guide and textbook sells for
$100, Pearson Education might set an arbitrary price of $50 for the study guide and $50 for the
textbook, even though the textbook sells for $80 as a stand-alone item, and the study guide sells
for $20 as a stand-alone item. Pearson Education then pays royalties on the lower $50 value for
the textbook when sold as part of a kit, rather than the actual stand-alone price of $80. By
inflating or overstating the price of the Pearson supplied components to the kit, and
proportionally reducing the relative price
of
the textbooks sold
as
part
of
kits, Pearson
Education is improperly lowering the basis upon which royalties paid to Plaintiff and the Class
are calculated.
78. Pearson Education must act in good faith in determining the relative value of the
components contributed by Pearson Education,
so as
not to deprive authors of their fair share of
royalties owed on kit sales. By arbitrarily inflating the value or price of the Pearson Education
supplied components to the kits, and proportionally reducing the relative price of the underling
textbooks sold as part of kits, Pearson Education is injuring the ability
of
Plaintiffs and the
Class to receive the benefits they reasonably expected to receive under the Agreements.
79. As a result of these breaches
of
the implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing by Pearson Education, Plaintiffs and the Class have suffered damages
of at least
$613,228.27, according to a royalty auditor, and continue to suffer damages.
THIRD
CAUSE OF ACTION
Intentional Interference with Contract
(against Pearson PL and Pearson, Inc.)
80. Each of the above allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 79 is incorporated
herein
as
though recited verbatim and at length.
3
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 24/67
81. Plaintiffs and the Class entered into the Agreements with Pearson Education,
which entitled them to royalties based upon domestic and export sales of their works.
82. Pearson PLC and Pearson, Inc., interfered with the Agreements between the
authors and Pearson Education by: (i) participating in the sham bookkeeping entries reflecting
export sales that never actually occurred, and (ii) engaging in below-market sham transactions
with Pearson Education in order to lower the basis upon which the authors' royalties are based.
83. Pearson PLC and Pearson, Inc., were at all times of aware of Pearson Education's
obligations under the Agreements, including the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and
sought to interfere with the proper performance of those obligations in order to enrich Pearson
Education, Pearson PLC and Pearson, Inc., and deprive Plaintiffs and the Class
of
the benefits
of
the Agreements.
84. Pearson PLC and Pearson Inc., were aware that there is no legitimate purpose for
the sham bookkeeping entries called export sales, but participated in those bookkeeping entries
in order to deprive Plaintiffs and the Class of royalties they are owed under the Agreements.
85. Similarly, Pearson PLC and Pearson Inc., were aware that there is no legitimate
purpose for the below-market sales to intermediaries, but Pearson PLC and Pearson Inc.,
participated in those sales in order to deprive Plaintiffs and the Class
of
royalties they are owed
pursuant to the Agreements.
86. Pearson PLC and Pearson Inc.'s, conduct was undertaken with the intent
of
preventing Plaintiffs and the Class
of
reaping the benefits they are entitled to under the
Agreements. By the foregoing conduct, Pearson PLC and Pearson Inc., caused Pearson
Education to pay Plaintiffs and the Class less than what they are owed under the Agreements.
87. As a result of Pearson PLC and Pearson Inc. 's, interference with the Agreements,
Plaintiffs and the Class have suffered damages and continue to suffer damages.
PRAYER OR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment
as
follows:
a Declaring that this action is properly maintainable as a class action and certifying
Plaintiffs
as
Class representatives;
24
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 25/67
b Issuing a preliminary and permanent injunction restraining Defendants, its
employees, agents and successors from, inter alia, engaging in the wrongful conduct and
practices set out above;
c
Awarding Plaintiffs and the Class damages for Pearson Education s breach
o
contract;
d Awarding Plaintiffs and the Class damages for Pearson Education s breach
o
the
covenant o good faith and fair dealing;
e
Awarding Plaintiffs and the Class damages for Pearson PLC and Pearson Inc. s,
intentional interference with the Agreements between Plaintiffs and Pearson Education;
f Awarding pre- and post-judgment interest;
g
Awarding Plaintiffs and the Class costs
o
this action, including reasonable
attorney s fees and expenses; and
1.
Awarding Plaintiffs and the Class such other and further relief
as
the Court may
deem just and proper.
25
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 26/67
JURY DEM ND
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
DATED: October 29 2014
MILBERGLLP
SANFORD P. DUMAIN
MILBERGLLP
Sanford
P.
Dumain
Leigh Smith
One Pennsylvania Plaza
New York, New York 10119
Telephone: 212) 594-5300
Facsimile: 212) 868-1229
lsmith@mil berg.com
Robert I Lax
3 80 Lexington A venue, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10168
Telephone: 212) 818-9150
Facsimile: 212) 818-1266
THE SOBELSOHN LAW FIRM
Daniel E. Sobelsohn
1801
Century Park East, 24th Fl.
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: 31 0) 775-0504
Facsimile:
31
0) 861-5205
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
26
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 27/67
EXHI IT
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 28/67
PUBLISHER'S
AGREEMENT
made rhis
. . . . . .
l.6.t)J • .•. . d a y of
. .
; ... J;:z_nu.ary
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . •
bctwec=n
. .
L
l.W.
r
EHl
:1 . .. .. . ' ... .....
. ,. • • • "' • .• • • t • • • ' '
.
• .••
9. _ • .. , .- , . • -
-A
·
·"' ••
,.
·• .., . • i:
·' • •r • '
''
(the ti'THOR
~ R P £ R
ROW
_·PHSLISU RS,
INC. ( .he
Pt;BLI 'HER t:
' Thr AU'THOR.
and
PfiBLISRl R a g r ~ th;lJ
'1• The AUTHOR will ~ T i t e or publication work len . liv-ely utlcd .
c;
I C . I . : \ S ~ F . ;
~ f ~ n a g e . r i ~ l
..
Ap.pr.oa(:b. . .. .
. . . . .
,
. . . . . ..
.. . , . .. .
..
. .
......
, . . .
h ~ r c i n referred to
3s
• rhc work") and the AUTHOR grams and a to rhc 1 R
tht"
exchuh·c
ri
he
fO
prinr,
publish,
nd
St'll tht" work in
311
l a . n ~ a ~ c : s
on
[he
t
rms
t
fo rth under it own n ~ m (
"nd
under
other imprints,
throughout
the world during 1hc full tc:-rm f cop · hr :mci
11 r ~ n c w : l l . s
· h f and to procure and register Unire'd S ( a t ~ c o p ) T i ~ h t therein in th(' n me of
the
bll'ltlfQIC
:,
Qt AU'niOR; abo the cxclusi\'e
rights
listed in Para raph K
he
w,
with I ·e
uthority ro dispos<'
of
th
e
righu
in
all
countries
3nd in all I
n ~ ~
•
2.
Th(
f't..'BUSFI ER
a g r ~ co pubi.Uh th('
work, ....
hen rhr m n n u s c r i
• to rhc P BUSHER, 3 t
ir
own C:q>CO$<: in uch style: nd tn;tnnc:r . th
~
to
i .
.•
nd
to pay to the At."TIIOR:
in
t.
he
United Slates
nd it.s dependencies
~ n d in
..
lnild.:t . roy:lh
percent ( 1 5 ~ ) of thu actual : 1 ~ o u n t recc· cd ' ·
t
r on al l ~ ~ p i e s sold
(2)
on export
S f a royalty of 10% of the a
Nal mount
~ i\'ed by the:
Pt:BW.SH .R .
3. Tb P ·uusRER
grea
th
t
s f a t c : m ~ n t
of
ccounL
will he rend
red
by m.;:
.U
o
and April I
of
e ch year for the six-month period ending chc prior Ju n
('
30 D ~ m t · 1 r l
S p « ( i V ~ Y J 3CC0rnp
n ied
b)'
l"rmtlt:lnCC forth r ' C S ~ C ' f i \ ' C alllYUf'(
thereof,
4. ~ a p h s A rhrough .T . . . inclwi . e, on pag-es. 2
t h r o u ~ h f
ll , . n ~ . rr p rts of
thiJ grt enc though placed before th e
s i g n : u u ~
.
. .
oP.: · · · ·
···
n /
'
'
'
~ ~ ..ijb ~ - - ~
. ·;_ -:;-_
'
.. .... .. ;·' ...... . .. ·•..
.. ..
.
.'
·
. ,.. .. , ·•
,.
,.,
..
.
u t h ~ r · s
Citizenship
SociaJ
Sccurily
Number·
Q J . t ~ 1 0 ~
~
· J , ~ . ~ \ ..
< '
• •
• 6 t. • • 4 •
t •• •
,.
•
,.
e • I t • o o o I . ··
.
'
I • < :.
'
"" "'
(fhU iAtorautioa i.J r r q u i ~ d lo
T
· n g h
and
tu: purposo.)
I
i '
/
.
,
. .· ;:. . . ·. ...\
I
' - \
t L J S J . j f L ~ 7 ' /
I
-
";:.
.•
liJSJ.J.LJ.J l
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 29/67
. ' . . 2
.;
().
A The AtrrHOR a g r ~ c s
ro
ddwe:: ,a m ~ n u ~ n p 1 coot.
mmg
odOOUt
- .
9 ? ~
AUTHOR 'S COPIES
,
J .
Tb p
Bt.lSH-ER • grea to ')t\'e
the
FREE COPIES t."THOll
with
any
furt
hC t
copies
fo-r
pt:N()nal u
COPIES
text r ' price.
The
1•\IBI....lSHER
funh( T 3Crt ( t
SOLD
AT
A
1he
.R
tbinu
dcsira Jic. royalty h I
be
p.
iJ
(111
o
pic. 'S
d ~ t r i l
1u
red
a:..
. ,
..... .< DISCOUNT ks
sold
~ a t
a price- equal
ro.
or
below, th.c
eo.n
o manu
cturc.
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 30/67
. : ; " · ' \ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ · : :
ROYALTY
STATEMENTS
DEFERRED
PAYMENTS
SEPARATE .
f ~ ~ m the dispoiidon of subsidiary r i ~ h t s
sh
11 be < l i v i d ~ d e q u ~ d l . . - bctw(·c:u
t
f • no n<.l th
.
LISH£R.
Authorization
m : ~ y be
g r ~ n t c d by
the
Pt:BL HER
ior
wch
u
c
lw urhr:- \ \ i t
t
c mp ru
i in the u d ~ m nt
of
the:
PUBLISHER
such usc m v
be·
hrncfi iJI
roth"
s ;
1<-
of
thr- \\'
k.
Ir
th<
ir f c : . ~ a c i
any
of the .
ubs.idiarv
rit:hr.: li t
·d
. OO\'C in lh1s p a r a ~ ; 1 p h . th
AI 1
·u
5£','
o lhe c. sh received from the said U(,( . If
rh<
P t ~
t
n R 1 elf hJII : s . ~ u C " p ~ . c.k 1 n
thi work the A HOR
will
be paid r
y lly
of Oc- r tbC' ra h rcccivcd Ti th f' 1.. I f .R
decide that
it
in the l ~ s l imc:rest of salr o t
e
y,orJ... co
~ d J
copi of 11
dtrC ·tly
by v lu
{rom
ch
saJ
shall
be
subject
to
(uturca
r:e
r : n e r y c b c ~ ~ ~ · c o the At7HOlt
• nrl r·
·COMPILATION
Uing
ch
.
OF
ROYAl TIES
I I ~ , . Oep: nmcnt
:10 'll .
<TY' ALTERATION ND
ASSIGNMENT
0 . T h ~
Agreement m<ly
noc b ch ngcd
unl
rhr: pnrri a ~ n · c to l i ~ r -
ignmcnc of
rhc
AUTHOR's
interes-ts or
obli ations und r thi
· Agrc rnrnt rn
wrilin
.
Y.ith.out
t\ 'C
p 'f·
/·
F
.,
AGREEMENT
cnc: written co nt of the PVDLISI{ER, except that the Atn HtJR rnay ig11 hi' ri
menu wirhout consulting the PUBLISHER. '
··
wiTHHEL
D
TAXES . b}•
INTER
PRE •
TAllON,
REPRESENT A .
liVES
BOUND
-?PI on
a c ~ ~ ~ ~ e
o ~ u ~ ~ s ~ ~ t : ~ ~ e e ~ d
~ t J ; ;
u n s " ~ ; ~ ~ r d e ~
t ~ \ ~ d ~ ; y ~ c
~ . ~ - , . C l J . ' t : i n ~ th .
um
O f
,
t?iousand
i
VC undred
dol la r s ( 1 ,5 'H ' ) -
.t:t upon h l ~ wr1t ten
rcqu
s t af t e r the
~ n i n g
of t ~ i ~ . - \ ~ r e e m e n t ·Al ._t-
, .aAd d u r 1 n ~ th 1974 calc lqar y
ar , .w... 'JJ.lr
...t. I J J . ~ · n o .
...:... , J ,
1
• > ·
. The Publisher r e e ~ to · to 1 c
Author,
ns a con -
t r ibut ion
tow
r x ense incurrt 'd. in th r r p ~ r n t i o n o f t h ~
. m nuscri t , n outr ight r 3 n t of on t . o u s n n ~
d o 3 r ~
rst,0nn)
I····; ti
-p\>'
h i
'"ri
n request 3 t ~ r
t ~ e · ·
: .unin. of
t h i ~ .\g
recmcnt
during th 1 7 cal
dar
year.
r .If th rna:nuscriT't for the "o rk in 3 f or-r. S(l t isfactorv
to
the
Publisher
hall
~ o t ~ e
deliv
s ix
( ~ )
~ n n t ~ ~
a f t e r the
date
eci
ic
in Par3,S ran·.
A. h
uhl
i
s .er
~ ~ a
11
h:Jve
the
r i g h ~ of 1 ct ion to continue
t
i
reement
in effec t ·
or
to te rminate i t and
to
receive nck f o t ~ u ~ al l
monies pa id .1e r
under
p
r i o r
to such
Lt
~ i f ~ ~ F
,._._-t
~
~ ' · - - -
t ~ ~ f : Y
: vat
w ~
......:U
· L ~ . c , . J e .
,.a ; J I t ~ . • ,,. I
t. ,-
k ~ tL L < - ~
~
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 31/67
i
. I •
I
I
.
"Rid
'
er
to P a r a ~ r a 1 h "· T 1e Aut
or s ha l l the
ub l isher
at the time
nrovided
for
d l iver y c f ~ ~ lSCri
t
·n
Paraoraph • sketches from \oJ ich th e
P u
l i s r h
3
lc
to
prepare f inished
~ r t \ \ O r k to i
11
s t r t
e
t
Pu·
l isher
shal l bear
the
expen
e o{
?reparin g finish 1r
t-:or · of
up
to thousand
~ i ¥ e han d &ed d-o-lltt=t (;;) 3
9'6-}-
.
i
e o
,
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 32/67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 33/67
GR t \ E NT
made rhi.s .
. .
. 2J,.st . . .
. .
. . . .d
y
of . . . h a.:::.ch
..
. . . .... . . . , . .. 97 '.
rw
n . .
~ e q q
. .
9,1
,,..,,.
~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ . 1 ~ ¥ o f T u ~ _ S : . .
. .
. . . .
.
, ,
•.
•
,
. . , . . . . . , . (th
At,nlCOR)
#
n S
; ttbRPEi\ ROW, P
'8
ISH R ; •
( the '
'BUSHl:.R1:
The AUTHOR
nd PVDLESII R. ~ that
· AUTH OR'S GRANT
1.
·The AUTHOR
will write
for
p u b l i c ~ t i o n
1
work
tentati\'dy
titled-. , ... . . . . , .
. .
, ,
. . . . . • . . . . ~ I Q : ~ ~ : t ; ~ ~ ~ .
QP:
~ S i E ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < ? ~ I
_ON
. .
(herem referred co as the work ) 3nd the
AtrTliOR
grants nd assi ns to the
PUBL
u
R
rh exdusi .•e
· ht
ro
print,
publish,
and sell
the work in
aU l . a n ~ u ~ ~ t J on the t.enns
~ e f
fort h, und('r ir
and under other
i m p r i n t s ~ throughout
the ' ·orld d u r i n ~ fuJI
tenn
of c o p y r i ~ h t • nd II
·
tht (eo(, n.d to pl ocurc and
rc:gUIU
tJnit< d States c o p y r i ~ h 1 therein in the n m J lhe
IX::IUCII:xJ:X
XH'
AU'rnOR; ~ l s o rhc exclusive rights listed in P a r a ~ r ph K bclO\\', with exclusive .1ut rity t J dts
of
th
rights in
all
countries
and
in
3.11 l a n ~ cs.
2. Th PUBI.lSJIER
n g r ~ a
to publish th work, wh n the; manuscript of tl work '
ti
•
CClOt)' t t h ~ PVBLtsHE.R, at its own
cx,pea c
in such tylc ..t manner
a s
the PUDLL 1 , R
con
'd
best suited to its k, and to
p
)' to thf' AUTICOR :
(I)
on cs in til
l . J n j ~ c : d
Stares and iu depcnde
nri
nd .in
the actu l amour.t
QP .a l l copies sol d
(2)
export sales a royaJty o 10% o the actual mount recci\·ed
hy
the u .su
' R .
<
3. The
P l i B U S H ~ R
grccs. th a
.t
statements of a ccounr
will be r. .
red bv
n
Jil on Oc-r.ob,.r .
·1 .
and April I of c
ch
year for
the aix-mondl
period
ending the
p.rior
June
SO
nd December :11,
re-
spectively,
accompanied
by r c m i u a ~ c
for the
respcctiV<
a.mounl
thereof.
4. Paragraphs A throu
.
nd
ivc.
on
p n . g ~
2
throu h . o l l o v · • u ~ ·
rc pan
of ,
this a
cnt
as rhougb placed before the
si natura
. . . . . . . ~ . - - - ~ ~ ~ ~
~
1 .
< ; ~ - -
i ,
I o
J
\
,.•
..;:.. t
1Ji5 :32 Z :7? ·
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 34/67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 35/67
ROYALTY
STATEMENTS
ftqm
the
dispoSition o subsidiary rights
shall be
di•;ided
equally between
lh AUTHOR
nd the P
~ H E J t . ~ u c h o r i z a t i o n m.ay be
granted
by the
Pt: u s H ~ R
for
such usc
by otbm
wit au1
compensation,
i lm the
Judgment
of the PtJBUSHER such us('
ma
..
be beneficial
co
rhe sale
oft
e work. f the
rua
JLER
it&d( exercises ny
of
the sulxidiary righrs lu:ed at><we in this paragr. ph, the AtmiOR.
"'ill
be paid
5%
of the
cash r ~ c e i v c d from
the
said
U ~ c 1(
the ,. LtsHER itself shaU · c paperback edition of
tbis work, th.r AUTHOR will t paid a
roy
hy of Jo<7
0
of t h ~ cash receivetl . If
the
PUI lf2R
shall
decide"
that
h is
in
the
b ~ t intcrnt of lc
of the
work to
ell copi.a
of
it directly mail.
the roy;.lbic.s
frorn such sale shaU be subjec1
ro
furur a rcement between the AUTHOR. and Pt1BLISll£R.
l . After two yean followin th(' ori ·nal public: tion date regular r o ~ ty r a t c m c m ~ need
not
be:
issued
by
lhe
PU8USH R
until
tm •
fll
r
y
h
c : : ~ r n i o
from
all
$0urcc:-s
exceed
S 0 .00
unleu
pecificaJiy r ~ u c : s t e d b}· the At.rTHOk
.
houfd t At rTHO
receive an twerp:lymenc o( roy·ahy
on
copies reported aold but
s u b ~ u e n t l y
returned, h -r t r the Pt1DLJSH £R m:l' d ~ d u c t such ovcr-
p
yments from any
funher carni.n
of the= work.
The
r
L ~
may t"fi.«:onunl)c
publication
when
u decida
truu
the demand for rhc: wo-rk no lon r w o a continued publication. The PlTBLISil&a
sha.IJ notify the A.tlTliOA of its intent to discontinue publ.i ti n,
and tbc-
At.'"TUOR shall have
the
right
: to purchase,
at
cost. U copic.s o books, sheets_ plates r mctaJ l v a ~ c cost) on hand within 30
;.days or such notifi lion. If the
AUTHOk
~ a l l not C"rcisc- thi. right, the PUBLr:slaR may
d ~ t r o y or
;otherwise dispose
o
any or aU
boo-b,
plates. nd sheets
\o\ithout
Liability
to the:
AUTIIOJt .
M. Llpon chc pubtiation of 1hr work rht' PUBLISH k 1 I br h on iu books n
accoun:
to which sh
Jllx
credited all moun hereafter pa) ble to t h ~ A11THO
y
the P ~ L l S U R in :accordance:
with P r p 2 ruf K h ~ r e o C ~ o t w i t h s t a n d m g
D)"thln to the ont rMy
in this
A ~ e
mcnt,
the
Pt:IIUSH A shall p •
to
the AUTHOR
simuJrand>us.ly
with che
rendition
f a.ch
ocmi-annual sca
tcmcat
of
ccoum uch m o u n t . ~
h.1-ll
thm
l1("
credited
to h
i account ex
ept th. r in
nt, rvem
shall any
such p ymcnl x c : ~ r c l . in
any c a l ~ n d .
r ' r.
Th
exce
l-S
, if anv, of rhc tot 1
mounts credited
nd
n t then p a y n b l ~ in 3 C c o r c b n ~ with 1he
provi
ion
hereof,
shall be carried
over
co
the
ncu
CCOUIIIing
pn1od
and
shall
be
paid to
the-
.t\UTJIOR
in
thC"
manner
•
nd
Jmou_nt
herein provided .
· SEPARAT & . N. All royahics ccruing (rom ~ · \ k ~ other
than
those through rc., r Coli
Ikp
rtment
COMPILATION &cUing
channels. i l ~
noc be included
in
detarnining the s J i d i n ~ sa le for
r
y ty
p ~ } ' ~ l l n .
OF
ROYALTIES
< .
, :·;AlTERATION AND 0. Thli Agreement may not be ch:tns;Cd
unlas
tht parties agree to he
chan
c: in wricing.
' ASSIGNMENT
No
am nment of the AUTHOR's incerCSt$ or obligouions under this Agrc::emen( m v
de
wirhout
·
oF
the written
consent
of
chc PtraLtSKER.
exc pt
that
the A l J T , H ( , ) ~ may assign his
hts
to rceciv p a y ~
AGREEMENT menl l wilhout
consulting
the PUat.DH a .
WITHHELD
TAXES
\NTERPRE-
·
'TAllON,
REPRESENTA
liVES
BOUND
• P. St tC.. Federal,
and
Foreign t
es on the AVTHOR.'s royahic:s,
when i t h h d d paid
by
the PUBLIIHZR,
shall be
p r o ~ ~ c h ~ ~
ag 'n st Ihe: AUTltOR.'J earnings
under
chis Agre-emen(,,
',
Q. Rq .:dlca
the
pi
of iu
c:xc urion, th is A cement hall he
anterprctl"d
under
chc
laws of the S te o New York
3.nd sh
II be bindin
upon t
ecuton. adminiltraron
1
and assignS
of the AtrniOR the SU«cs30r'S d . igns
of
the
PU)LJ$1:(&R.
*Ri
der to
Paragraph
A. Ackno\\·1 dgm t of
acceptar:ce
o
sa t
i s
..
f
c tory
nusoript ; i l l b rep r d. d sign by t he
Edi tor- in-Chi
e f
of th Publisher and
ent
to the Author within
a r ble
t ime af t
r
hi, d l i v y of the ~ ~ ( J : ; # - P t ot the 'V:ork t:i factory
to
the .Publisher.
*•ltid to
j
·c;r ph D. uthor sh
11
del iver
to P u b l i ~ h e r at:
tho tim provid d for
del iv
ry
of uscript
in
Paragraph A, skeech
,
from which th
Publisher will
b
bl to
pr r f inished
artwork to
_
l l u s
·
··
a
···t. e
the ~ : o r k . Publisher
will
be r t he ~ x p e r ) S J pf '"lreparintl a11 ·· · ·... . ·
·a
rt\'l<?rk as
'de11
as any
penni
ss
ens
costs
Nfi..'t. o..;-.v.t.. i i ¥u.s-
••
,
• ·
•*•Rider to
Pa.r q r a p ~
I .
t i under
tood
And aqreed tha't · ·
should th
Author r ceive an
over . nt of roy l ty
aris ing
from
copies
ot any
edit ion
of the
Work
r
eport
d sold but su.bsec;uently r e ~ u r n e d , tr.
Publ isher , r a y
deduct
s u ~ h
OvcX P4Ytn t f r ~ .y sums cuE' t h il.uthor.
. . ·· fl. The Publisher agrees to
pay the Au
thor as a contribution
~ -
to
lard
the
expenses incurred
in the prcoaration
of
thP. manuscript t1n out-
r·ight
grant
of
five hundred doll rs
$500, i t b e i n ~ unders tood
that
oay-
ments wi
11
be made
to
the
Author
on n;
wr i t ten rCflUC::it u f tc r t la
s
lqn lnQ ..
or
thts
9 ~ e r n ~ ~ a n ~ u p ~ n
the
Puplisher•s
r-P.ceipt of
invoices. . · .. · •
wi •A
tA:
e ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ : :"::
:
: ;; ; : ~ t ~ o : u ~ ; : :
h; :::: 8:
= = ~ " : : R ~ ~ ~ <
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 36/67
Amend.ment - Pri
noiples
~ E N D M E N T
made
th i s 6th day
of
August,
1992
to
an
a g r e e m e n
~
dated
March
21, 1977, as
amended
(the
Agreement ),
between
Lawrence J .
Gitman,
of San Diego Sta te
Universi ty ,
5435
' Calumet Avenue, La 3ol la , California
92037
th Author )
.and
HarperCollins
College
Publishers,
a
divisioJ l ().f
Harp rco l l ins Educational
Publishers
succ sso1:s i n ,'
in te res t to
Harper
& Row,
Publishers,
I
nc. ,
of
10 E s t
53rd
s t ree t ,
New York, New York
10022
(the Publisher ) , with
r
sp c t to
a
work ent i t led
PRINCIPLES OF
M A N A ~ E R I A L
FIN
ANCE
Second Edition (the W o r k
W H E R E A
J>;l l:l':suant to
·
f:
he
Agreement between Author and
Publisher, Author h s granted Publisher
the
r igh t
to
oubl i sh
nd
se l l the Work
and
u
bl isher
has agreed to
pay
cert in
r o y ~ t i e s
t b , t e o n ~
WHEREAS
pursuant ~ Paragraph I . of the Agreeme-nt,
·Author
:
has gree,d to
prepare revisions . p f
~ h e
Work;
WHEREAS
PUblisher
intends
to
publish the seventh edi t ion
the
Work,
t en t t ive ly en t i t l ed P R I N C I ~ L E S OF MANAGERIAL
'FINANCE,
seventh Edit ion ( Seventh
Edi t ion ) , and Publisher
·
and Author wish to have
Author
p r e p ~ r ~
the necessary
revisions
for
the Seventh Edit ion;
NOW
THEREFORE
t i s
mutully
u n e r ~ t o o d o agreed
as
follows:
1.
Effec t i
v July 1·,
· t9§2, with
respect
to
the
Sixth Edit io
n
and a l l subsequent edit ions of
the
Work,
Par 9raph
2
.(1} of
•the
Aqreement i s
her by d
l e t
d
in i t s
ent i rety
and
the
f o l l o w i n g ~ W ' s t i t u t e d
therefor:
O(l)
on
sales in the United States and i t s
· ;
dependen
;c i e s and in
c nada a
royalty as
follows:
1s t
based 'the amounts received
by
PuplisheJ':
from such
s a l ~ ~ i "
2. (a) Effect ive Ju ly 1,
1992, with respect to the
Study
.
Guide to
accompany
th
sixth
Edit ion
of the
Work,
published
·
pursuant to
a
separate agreement dated
November
22, 1989 by
and
between
Thomas
M. Krueger,
D. J\nthony Plath
'
and the Publisher ,
Publisher
shall pay Author
a
royalty
override of 2\
based
on the amounts received by PublishPr on
c ~ l c o , les
~ t u r n s ,
o t Publisher 's edi t ions
of such
Study
Guide
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 37/67
(b)
Th
royalty
overr id spec i f i ed
in P r a g r ~ p h 2.(a}
of
th i s Amendment
sh ll l so
apply to sa les ,
l ass
r
turns , of
Publ isher s di t ions
of
the
Study
Guide
to accompany the
S e ' V ' e J " l ~ h
E d i t i o ~
~ n d a l l
S l l ~ s e q u e n t
edi t ions
of
t h ~
Work.
Effective J u l y 1 , 1992, with
respec t
to the Sixth
Edit io
n.
and a l l
su
.bsequent edi t ions of the Work, Paraqr
ph
J . of the
Agreement
is hereby del ted in i t s en t i re ty
and
th following
subst i tu ted
t h e r e t o r ~ '
3. The Publ.lst.ie:r agrees tha.t s ta tements of ccount
re n
dered
by
m
i l
;Qn Ju ly 1, October 1 ,
January
1, nd
A p r i l
l of each year f
O\t' the
t
hree-month per iod ending
the
.
prior March 31, June 30, September JO,
and
December 31,
r
spectively
, accompanied
by
remittance for
the
respect ive
~ . . . . . . . - mount thereof . "
,
l ~ 4. Publ isher
agrees
to
hold a .
developmental
launch lee ing -
~ ( : A .
, .
for
the Seventh Edit ion a t l eas t ~ ~ months
pr io r to
the
• delivery date speci f ied in Paragraph 5. of
t h i s
Amendment. In
ddi t ion,
Publ isher
shal l
provide Author
with computer ji
~ . ~ · disk(s) compatible with Publ isher ' s com u t e r ~ ~ e d sJ[st m ~ ~
~ v e r s i o n
of
con
a1n1 ng
ext f i l e s
of
the J
~ · Sixth Edition of the Wor .
With
resp c t to 11 subsequ n t
~ ~ ~ edi t ions o f the Work, Publisher aqre s to old a
\ t l + ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ s p ~ ~ ~ ~ : e ; ~ ~ ~ ~ t i ~ ~ ~ s s ~ ~ ~ p = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n m : ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~ t
dei1very
d • ~ ~ · ' ·
-
t4.
0
Author sha l l
de l ive r to Publisher
on
or
~ f o r e
;{:nu
_ ;
~
· 1993 one copy of the complete m nuscript for
the
sev
nth
1
~ G A ' d i t i o n ~ n d computer d i s k ( s ~ compatible with
Pub l i sher s _
i ;.1
1\ : n
1
computerl.zed system (3 . 5
11
d l s k ( s ) ,
. a M ~ v rs1.on of \ ' · ·
.,
K-kr
S U l a efOr a 0 l i j ) p ' r O x l . m a t c l y -
9 7 6
book D l r ~
r e r ~
I
· · pages
in ength
nd
sa t i sfac tory
to Publish
r
in content and
l form. The manuscript shal l cons is t o ta r sheet f r om the
s
ixth
edi t ion of the Work as well s new
l
nuscr ip t which
mus t be typ wri t ten and double-spaced.
Author
s h a l l r
e t a i n
a
copy of a l l
m t e r i a l s
submit ted -R ~ J ; i . s . h e r .
6.
(a}
In
consideration of the -
foregoing,
a grant , and
not
to
be
charged against Author 's royal ty
ccount
( Author 's
Account
11
,
Publisher
shal l
pay
to
any
party
Author
d e s i g n a t e ~
the
sum o f
up
to
$6,000
.
00
for exp
nscs incurred in
t he
p
urchase of
a co puter work sta t ion to aid in the pr
eparation
of t h ~ S;eventh ~ q i t i o n , payable upon Publ isher 's r 'ce ip t of
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 38/67
invoices
or o'th.er E E : t : ? J ? r J a ~ e clpcu ntat ion supporting such
expenses.
·(b)
As
an add i t iona l g·ran 't the co t
o hich
i s
not
to
be
charged against Author's Account, Publisher
has
delivered
to
Author o n ~ ~ c s i m i l e
machine,
receipt of which ~ s
hereby
acknowledged
. ·· ·
(c)
The
prOvisions
Gf . t 'h i s Paragraph 6 . sha
not pply
to subs quent revisions
Qf
the Work.
7 . (a)
Publish
- r shal l pay Xuthor
as an
advance ~ g a i n s t the
Author 's Account
establ ished for the Seventh Edition, the
su
of 5,000.00 upon Author' '-'JJ; itten requ s t te :r executio n
of
t h i s Amendment. ·
In the event
that
'
Author
del ivers
the
compl
te
and
l manuscript
fo r
the Seventh
Edition,
sa t i s f ctory to
1 ,
Publisher in content and form, and a l l other materi 1 to be
- - ~ ~ r o v i d e d y
Author
for the
Seventh
Edition on or before
~ ~ ~
1993,
the to ta l
advance of
5,000.00
payab
le
~ At 1 · Junder
Paragraph
7 . (a) of
th i s
Amendment shal l be conv r ted to
· • a grant ,
not
to
be
c ~ a r g e d
against
A u t h o ~ ' s
Account
.
(c) The provisions of t h i s Paragraph
sbal l apply
anew
to
e ach subsequent e y ~ s i o n
of
the Work.
·
a.
Pursuant
to
Paragraph R.
of the
Agreement, Author
has
:
granted Publisher the
r ight
to handle subsidiary r ight
s
in
t r a n s l a t i o n s
of
the
Work.
With
respec t
to
t rans la t io
n
rigbt
.. n the
Seventh
Edition
and
a l l
subsequent
edi t ions o the
Work,
such r igh ts sha l l be revocable by th
Author upon
wri t t en notice
to Publisher
with respect to each language or
··c· o.untry . ·f :o·· ··· r :
· · ··
w
hich
.
no
l ic e.nse or o·p t ion h a s been .
given
w i th in j
i f t en (15) months of ~ h e Publisher 's i n i t i a l publ icat
ion
of
any
s u e ~
edi t ions.
· ·
· .
9 .
Author
gr
·ees
to del iver to
Publish
r
the
sources for
obtaining permission from th
copyright
prop ietor of t ex t
and
any
i l l u s t r a t i o ~ h i n c l u d e d in
the
Seventh
Edition
that
are
·protected
y copyright
for
the
use of
such t ex t and
.i l lustra t ions in the exercise
of
r i g h t ~ to th Seventh
Edit ion granted to
Publish
r hcreund
r .
Publ isher shal l
obtain, a t
Publ isher 's
expense,
ny necessary permissions ,f or
.the u.se o f text i l lus t ra t ions in th Seventh Edi
,
t ion
.
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 39/67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 40/67
proposed revisions
to
provide th Publisher with writ ten
comments
nd cr i t i c i sm
with
respect to
the
proposed
revisions . I f the Publisher, a t i t s discr t ion ,
decides
no t
to
implement
the
Author s
written
comment
nd
cr t ic ism s
i n
the
proposed revisions, th Author m dem nd tnat
his
name
be
removed from
th credi ts for the
Work,
in which event the
Author
sh 11 rel inquish his
r ight
to r eiv royal t ies
and
any
other proceeds from the s le or l icensing of the revised
edit ion
of the work
from
which his
nam
has been removed,:.n
15 .
The
Publisher shal l riot,
during
the same educational
,
year
( run
ning
July
l
through June 30) in which t
e
Publisher
publishes a new edit ion of the Work, introduc a new textbook
, tha t competes direct ly with the Work. A new
t
xtbook wil l be
regarded as competing direct ly
with the
Work only i ( i)
the
textbook is
substant i l l y similar to
the
Work
in length ,
organization
,
level
of
presentation
and
pedagogy,
gng
( i i )
the textbook is to be sold to the
same
segment
of
the college
as the
w
o r ~
EXCEPT
To
THE EXTENT OF THE ,fOREGOING,
a l l
of the
t
rrns
and
condi t ions o,f the Aqre,el\lent ca re. hereby ra t i f ied and
continued
.
:IN
WIT
Ess
WHEREOF,
·tb e part ies hereto have s i gned th i s
a m e n d ~ e n t
to b e
e f
~ e c t
i v e
as o ~
the d te f i r s t wri t t en
bove.
AGREED
Author
\ Lawren.ce
, ,
HarperCcl l ins College
Publishers,
a divis ion
of
HarperCol l ins
Educat ional
Publ i s e r s Inc. :
or
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 41/67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 42/67
Octob er
.
da'i of ..
R M NT
between . . . . . 3 : ~ J
~ n ~ e
.J . .
Ci
0 ? ~ . 1 1 ,
_
P ~
- ~ ~
1
~ Y .
. and .Mi.chael D• . Jo.ehnk .
of
Te¥as
HARPER & ROW, PUBLJSIIERS. 1 '-.C'. (tile PUI:S ISIIFRI :
The
AUTHOR
nd
I'IIDUSHJ;R a ~ l ' C C
lhJt
1. Thl" At.'TI-IOR will
write for public.1tion work
rrnracivdy
tir.l<.'d
. . . .
,
.
. .
. .
E S S E l ~ ~ S Of. ~ N V E
M E N f S . .
..
. . . , , , . . .
refer
red
ro u the wor-k")
and
rhc
AIJTHOR
grants
and
an ign ), (
h
P L llt.f< rh. ~ x c l u s i \ · t
to print, pubHsh, and
sdl
lhc work in ;).U J a n ~ u . ~ r s on the terms
..
cr fonb,
uodt>
r its own name:" ·
under
other imprincs, (hroucthom the
o r l d
durinq
the:-
full term f cop · ,he
nd
U
~ n C
. b , ·
and to prO<"ur(' and
r r ~ r ~ r
l :nited tares r o p v r i ~ : l ; rhr-rciu H• rt, n m (•l rhcX.lhi.U&.x ·
Al.'TIIOR; lso thr c::xdu
iv
rig
hts
liMed
in
P n r a ~ r a p h K
bclav.,
-...ath cl '
ve
uth
>ri
tr to
Cl ~
righ
ts
in all
coum
and
in
111-ln
u 1 ·
2.
The
PC8L
1 R < l ~ C e s ro
puhlish
the work ,
v
.·hr n th e
m
au
ript
J
rhc work ~ J . t i s -
factory
to
l h ~ P U B L I S H E R , ~ us
own
x p c n in $uch tvle :tnd
mtlnn
cr a.1 he-
I' I'
I·
H.: . Ht:R con
t d c ~
best
suirrd
ro i sale' :1nd to
pa ·
to
rbe
..-.vrHOR;
ty J . fv low ·
Fi f teen percent ( l S ~ ) of the a t : ~ o u n t rc c
iv
c by the
u
b l i shc r on he f i r s t 10,000 copies old in
each
~ a
l e n d a r year , and e ish teen pe rceo
t
(1 8 %) o f the
a ~ o u n t r eceived by the Publ isher
on
~ 1 1 c opi s sold
t here .;t.f t e x , in each
ca l enda r
y e
(2)
t JO
c;xporr
roy
lty of 10 of rhe
il<:tu I amount
rl c ived
by
che
l'uu r
l f t :R,
3. The
Pl i8UJHER
agn·cs rtut
.t lCtnc:n W.
oun( will
fxo rrnder('d h ~ · mJtl
Jn
Orrohrr l
and ApriJ I e, ch r
for the
six-monrh period endin t h ~
prio
r June 30 and Ot·
s
· p
cc
tJ ··v·e I
·
Y·
accomp: anicd by rcminance
Cor rhe ctiV'
mounr rhrr('o(.
.J JJ
4 . P.:ara phs A through
X.
't inc
on
P• es 2 lhrough . t f o ~ ~
lhis a cmenc
as
t
o ~ h
P ~ C J : c ; c ( i
before 1he
si
n tar
Au1.hor's Citizenship &
Social
S«urity
umbo--
&
n1 - : : P , ~ ~ ~ h . c ;
. .
..
...
~
.
>r "'".)ft'K,
?:fl7 : . 3 . :: .. . ... . . ~ . l 7
JGJ .....
r .
(Thiw
( ) ~ t i o n is rtquU"ed Co
r
eopyri
ht
· I
a.ad
lax
p u ~
.Year oI .
c;
t a f i ) n .o f ~ h e Work
........,
.........___
. .
.
·
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 43/67
DE.UVIRY
OF
,
MANUSCRIPT
A. The .\umoR. agrees to deliver
man
pt. cont
ining
about. 2 25 • 0.0 . . . . o r d , ~
or about. . . . .
Qc:
tob.e r . l . .. . . . . .. 19? * s Rid c r
SUBMISSION OF B. The AtrnrOR agrea rhar the manu.teript of the work,
aru:1
any rcvwons thereof, will b.:
MANUSCR
IPT dcJivC1'ed io l written form (in the of nthol ·a nd
rcvilions,
in
ccc:?tably
t)-pewrit
cc:n
and
,PROOFS AND
,ALTERATIONS
IN PROOFS
IT£MS
FURNISHED
BY
AUTttOit
AUTHOR'S
GUARANTEE
" -
. .
• -
USE OF
COPYRIGHTED,
MATERJAL
CONFUCTtNG
.· P
UB l iCA
TlON
~ I 9 N
printed form), will be in propa form
or
as cop y
th
p r i n t t ~ r . and will be
s.atisbccory
in content
to the
PUBUS
R.
The
AtrrnOR
will submit two
copia
(r
r '
oing
a
third op y}.
C The: AUTHOR wU1 rend, rC \isc
1
c o r r e c t ~
and
rurn promptly all proof to the
Pli'"BLISK2
lt
nd
will
p y
a1J
charges
in e.xcas of 15%
of
he o r i ~ n
J
t of typesetting for l t ~ n t i o n s which
d
\e
·
A\lnCOR ~ a l l make in
the
proof
after
type
h
been set in conformity with
them
n u ~ i p r
D. The followin items wiU be cons.idC'f' port the work and will be (umuhcd
by
the
· AVTllo
: t ide p c; preface
or foreword
(if ny):
t
bl
of
co tents; index;
te:J.chcr's m nua.l,
key,.Ot ·
.such
other ids fo-r
the
instructor
(if requ-est-ed b ~ ·
the PUll tSR R ) ~
and
complete ~ n d final copy for
•Jl UJwtr; tio f . V » ~ »
·
fbX • · H 6 K . Y *
*
s R 1 d e r
_ ; _ ~ _ . _; - '•
/ • · The AUTicOP.giaa nt r.h 1 be
i i the
tc author of the w o r k ~ that the
work
is o r i g i n ~
and docs not infrin
e
upon any st tutory copyri ht
r
upon ny common law riqht, pri
..
acy right,
proprietary
ri ht,
or
ny
other r· ht
wh
U<)('\ Cr, or ny
~ 1 n d . 1 l o u l .
lit)("lous,
or
unl;&wfuJ
~ u c r ;
th
the u the
wl o w n ~ r
f
che
r i ~ h u her io nvcyed (
tke ru
uSHER •
md
th•u
he
has
full
power
to cnte.r into this A te'crocnt
and
to
make
thC' grant
her
in contained. The AllTHOR shall
indemnify
the
I'UllLtsHJ:R
for, nd
hold
it h3rrrJe: from un · l
or
expc:n
t
of <my
kind
a r i s i n ~
out
of any breach r a l l e q ~ br c.h of ny oJ tht
fore
oi
Jarant .. Th
q - u a r . ~ n t ~ e s nd indmmitia
sh3ll be de
med to includ y li
iJi1y
incurred
b • r. c
PU 1..lZII
1t s rcuh of ,alt" Of liccnst"
of
any subsidiuy
ri
nd s.h J rvive in
the:
ev
nt
this Agrccmenc
is r e r m i n ~ w : d
F.
[n
case
of ny
infri ern
nt or
the c o p y r i ~ h t
in th work, the:
rt:nttSIIY.A. m3)- . at
it$,
discretion
1
sue or employ such
rc
('di s
it
shall conside-r expedient: ter dt"ductioo of cJCpensf's
incurred by
the
MJD t
R
in
connection with such
suit or remedy, the:: o
proceeds of any reCO\'eT)'
s ~ h 3 l le divided ~ ~ u a J : : ; t 7 c e n
•::
t T B U : H ~ : ~ d : ~ ~ ~ C O R ~
1
u ~ ~ r ~ ~ i s k / ~ · P} Sr .
c
to r
th
r a
c
) ·
te •
t
for .. · ·c h .
r \ e
rJ
,-
?
b •
no or · he
us• . _ , · · · · ·
l .
H. The
Atn"'HOR
crrc
t iut while
this
Agreement
is in force, he will not
puhli.:
h or supply , /
an)' o t h ~ r
P
USJ;JE any
m lcri
J
that will compete with the lc of the work
.
/ ~
,1. The A KOR
a e
to
revise·
the
work
or 10 prep re
m a t e r i ~ for a
revt$ed edition if in .?
, ; ·
·
the judgment (
th PU8USJ-I
st such
rev·
edition
i
in
the
· t
intcrett
of
the: work. If
same shall
.
f J
not
be prep red to
the
s. ltisf
ction of
chc
PUBUIHER within nable time,
whether
because of
death or dis hiht of the AUTHOR, or for ny
orher
1 1 aso ,
the
P LISH£R may h ~ \ ' C d ~ C ' rcvi.s.ion prr
p.'lred nd charge
the
CO$l a (.
inst
the A I . I T ~
r yalti
and
m ·
y display
m
the r c v " i ~ o n , :md U$C
in
advert
in , the n
me of
IX
on,
r
pc::
oru. prep rin.:r
id
revi
ion . f che 11cw
t"dition
rcquird
the reseuin of mor duan o n ~ - h : U f f
the
work, the: ro a.hks p • bit: ro
the AVTIIOR .:1nd
m :my other
tontributor thereto will tc\ c.rt
to rif(inaJ St"alr
pt ci..fied
in Arricle 2( 1}. The
Pt DI.JSK&Jt may,
t
its dixretion, continue t·o U$C
rhe
n
me
:)od/ or
portr
it of
the A
UT
HOR
in
connection
with
the
pub-
lication,
J , r promotion
of :.nv ucd edition
or cdiuons.
It i
undentood
that in 1 h ~ ~ · c n c
noc.hcr
penon or pc N is
invoJved
io rhc
re · · o
of
the work nd
th:&t ~ n o n or
pcr&ans
paid
a
royah
on che id r e v ~ d edition, it
·
agreed
th
t the
AUTHOJt.'s
pani ip
· n
in rophi_ ;s on said r e v i ~
. .
~ ; ; : ~
~ ~ ~ l ) c i r •• sh r t. upon
· ~ · r • •
h A • , •• q ) · ' ~ ' ;/;
~ J > < nng
AUTHOR'S COR IES , J.
The
p
..
HER
. «S t •i c t h e ~ ~ o R 2 , 0 f r ~ e p i ~ f
book and
to
supply
the
FR
EE
COPIES
AUTHOR
with · fi
rchc:r
copies for pc
n.3.1
UK,
but ru:a
for
res
le, "''
3
d i ~ o u n t of
.
from the
& COPIES t
c:xc
Jist
prie
.
The P USHl:R further
e
to supply
c o p i c ~ for
re-.·1 w, nd 5u
h
O(hcr
purpuses as
S
OlD
AT
A the PU (. JmJt thinlu desirable. Nu royalty
sh
be (l 1d n copi d' trihurcd :1
,,buvc
provided, or
DISCOUNT
,on
copin
s_old
at
price
equal
to
1
()r
~ ? t . J o w .
the
cost
of
m
nufactt«" .
LtsJ a
&h ll have the
lc: ri ht
to h ndle th
e
f o U o w i n ~ ub
'diary rights in the
work: scriali
rion,
rccordin J
or mcc
anic
J
rcn
itio ; di a; abridgcmenu. elections and
n t h o l ~ i a :
boo club:
motion
picture", t ~ l c · ion . n r dio; microfilm
nd microprint
('ditlom;
I r a ~
tion ;
pr r mming; ovcr hc: d projection t r ~ p rrnci oral
or
visual tran.smi ions
;by
tape,
f'ilm,
television, r a d i ~
or any
oth('f'
mech nic l
me ; reproduclion
or
u l i l i . z a , ~ o n
by any
·dcctronic
or
mcch nical means. includin phococop
rdinc;, or in
anv 1nf rmauon s t o ~ g c
'And
retrieval system: srndiution: and ad pt tio
for · 1 use .
The d i v 1 ~ i o n of the net rccelpt.s
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 44/67
S0
8SI
DIA
RY
Jt
;
IGH
TS
from the disposition
of
subsidiary
ngh
£h U di 1d«< II between chc- A
lOR
and rhe
ruo-
lf R. l \ u t h o r ~ t i o n rruay be gr.Jnted rhe L
JC
, r s
ch
we
by
rhr- without compcns cion,
if in rhe jud mcnt
of the
P\JBU$H R s
uch
, y hendici 1
to the
salt of rhe work.
If
tht' PUBUSHER
:itself ~ c r r c i s e s ny
of
1Ubsidi:lry
ri.
h
I
ted ~ 0 0 \ ln this p ~ r . 1 g r : l
h,
the A UOR WiJI be p.1id
-
5% of
the Qsh received from the S3ld
I f ~ ~ CB R. itself haJJ is;suc ..t Jh
rlJ eX
«file
n Of
this work, the
AtrntOR
will
be
paid a ro ·
hy of
to<}(,
of
the cash r«civcd .
1
t e
Pll U:Stl£R
shall
· decide
th3t it
is in the bes t
intel C5t
of sale of the
work
to copia of ll
directly i
mail tl1e ro. l i e ~
·. ,Jrom
such sale shall
be
subjcc( t
fufure
agreement
between the
AUTI.OR
and
USH£8.
ROYALTY
STATE
ME
NT
S
,·
DEFERR
ED
PAYMEN
lS
M. Upon the publication uf th
ro
h i c h
sh nbe
credirr.d aU
amounts her
with P
ra T phs
2 and K hcrrof. Nc»cwit
p
t r o u ~ h r r ~ u l
r
Colle c- a r ~ t n e n t
c le r
royalty
P < ~ .
menu,
unl
rhc
p:u-tic:s agree fo 1hc:
chJ.nge in Tiling.
or o li tio uru:kr this A ~ r e e m r n t m.w be
made
withou t
cept
lh.at t c . liTH may..
ign
his r i ~ · h t ~ co
~ ~ i \ : e
pa) •
State;
Federal.
forci n taxes on the
AUTHO
's roy lLin,
when withheld and paid
by the PUBLISlWl, shall ~ r o p e r ch rgc:$
agaii ',$C
the
.a.UTIIOR
's e 1 m i n ~ s
undC r
rhis
A ~ e c m e n r .
INTERPRE- Q . Re ardleu or
the plaee
.
of
it.s exc:cuuon, this A r c c ~ m sha..U h intc:rprc.- t
t d
undC'r
1hr
TAllON, laws of th.e St.atc of New York and s.h3JI bindin upon th ccutors. a d m i n l n t o ~ and assigns
REPRESENT
A-
of
the
AtmiO and the succcsson nd
i
of rhc
P
USH
.R.
l\VE.S
~
*Rid
r
to
Paragraph
A: cknowl
ds
n t
of
acceptoncc
of
,s t f ctory manuscr ip t w11 be pr p red and s ign d by
th Edi t o r i n Ch i e f
of
th Publ ish r nd sen t to the Author
with in
r easonab le t
e
t r b i s d l
ivery
of
th manuscri
· o f
th Work s a t i s f ctory
to t
P u b l i h e r
•
t . P u b l i s h e r
s h a l l
pay
any
f
ees necessary
- O
rc
rmissions
·:
up
to the •mount . of $3,000 ; the balance s1
ll
be charged
OVER
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 45/67
..
ga ins Au t h o r s . r n L n
hereunde
r .
U.
Al l
monies
p ~ y a b l e to
the
Au tho r
he r eunde r
h
: l l l
b paid
f i f t y percen t (50 ) to L wrenc e J . G i t m ~ n
and f i f ty
p rcen t
(507.) to
Michael
D Joehnk.
V.
The
P u b l i s h e r a g r
ees
to pay
to th A u t h o r ,
s n
on
ccount
of the royal ty
and
other suos prOvided to
h r in , the ' suttt ·o f tw enty thous nd dol la r s ($20,00 0 )
t n
thousand
do l l ar s
($10,000)
to be paid upon the
u t hor
wri t ten r e q ~ e s t a f t e r
the
s i g n i ~ S of th i s
agreement ;
ten
~ t h o u s a n d do l l a r s ($10,000)
upon
the u tho r s wri t ten requ s t
~ cr cceptance by the Publ isher ~
the
complete o s t i s f c tor
J
i r s t ~ r a f t c l m a n u s s r i p ~ ~ ?
/l,r
b
f o r ~ 1 5 ~ 1979 ~ Q__ ·
-I
. ,t;
.f IS ~ Y .
-i1i : e. '-
- (l
. The ~ ~ l i ~ h e r agrees to pay to t Autnor, as a con r1bution
towar4
exp nses
i ncur r ed
in th p r p a ~ ~ t i o n of the
no ou t r igh t gran t o f
f iv thou and
d o l l ~ r
($5000).
understood
that
payments
wi l l
b
ade
to the
Author
~ r i t t
n
requ at ~ f t e r the s ign ing th i
Asr e c e n ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = - ~ ~
X. I f
th '
Pub l i she r
the d a t e
r i gh t
of
t
rminate
hereunder
m n u s c ~ i p t f ~ i
the
or
in
orm s t i s f ac to r y to the
h a l l not
b de l i ve r d ~ i t h i n
rwelvo (12) conths
a f t ~ ~
pee · f i e d in P rngraph A, the P u b l i s h r s h a l l have t he
l c c t ion
to
c n t inue th i
a rce
Q nt in e f f c or to
t
and
to
r e c e iv
bac
·
f roo
the uth o r
a l
l 1.onies
pa ic
pr io r
to
such
t ro ina t ion .
.
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 46/67
IIKIII IT
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 47/67
/ th-e s:ourc
es for
obtaining
""SEE RIDER.
t 85 _ __ ___ _ _
(b)
Wath
thr
m<.nu t.rapt . Auth
r
h
11 ·lav r . f r.) t1tlc P · ' > ~ •. .)bb· · : ~ · · n t
nt
. ) n ~ ' t -..il
f'lr..>blcm
(if any l,"" r.I,)S .uy,
a
b1bi1o ,r.trh . nd rrc•
1
ld l
r<·worJ
.wJ 5 dl t . : ~
th,,n .
wr
dw
·Work Auth'-'' h.11l Jrlavcr dlu H.lh n
n X t M X X ~ ~ ~ Q M ~ X i i < X O U < l l
: I · ~ w : . , b l lvr
rrt·p.umg dlu . tr.Jt)
""
whu..'h r u b . h ~ t w r ll f
I f'.Jr.
J. l , , r•·n.l•.
. . (d Author
h . a l b U t « J J C X X U X X X J c X : X ~ > I X K ·hv t.> l'ub
ti ht
JX:MKXX
)GX1U4<wfltt
npcrm1 ao
ntr
· ~ • ' P ' ' r i J : h t p r
pnth1r
1 lt.• tJndrlln·.rr-.1t .• n· •n l
,.Ht'
prOtl'CI
•d
b y ( O p v n ~ h t fnr u,,. 11t ~ u c h m.tt
rt.JI
f'
th
1."-..t'rrts(' u r11:h t"'
I(• I
t
<'
\ . •
(d)
Withan 1 r ~ . J Ondble
t lmt·
.1ft
..
r
:\uthur h.J'
J,•Jn••·r,·J t•• f'dol .h r
t
u
m < ~ t t ~ n . d ~ h.r th('
Work
dcscnb.:-d .above•
.at
a r \C rv
c .
I 'ubbnl 'r
'" '-
'1t t: n1
.11td ·r:n .
I
'u
Author ..1 wntctn
n
tJCP
l,f-'
crpt.ln(C'
1.) the
W
(4?)
If
Publi h r
r ~ : 4 U t ' S t •
,\utht r
ha.U
Jl:.••
, , · l · ~ · . . . r t" I·
bit
rc-.1 on.1 l>l: n: Ut." ~ g ~ l : X ~ X X X lypt·, . "' mt·r,t·r :- t • • ..1 1 ,n :rt
<t\•r"
m.lntJI
X U J C ~ » X J K M X ~ ~ ~ ~ ) ( K J a j C l G X ~
· J c J C X X ~ l O f
~ ~ ~ ~
n ,, , .
, t ' r
•· l
t ll I
,h)
~ · n .sll Vf\lt'S
)Uid
10
rh {.; s . H t rn t t • J : t ' ' ,\ I J > l ' ' - ~ ( ' io n · .,nJ
,
l
,
f I'
ao
t
tu
·r
whok• ~ I < ' olOd
rc::t
.d
. t ~ . · c - o u n t
, Ctf thtt
..110
Utl t r( '
<.•:\ l-J
bv f'ubl :'h(':" r r o ~ m •\ I I h
in any
calendar
year: lSS on the f irst
10,000
copies a ~ d
on
all
copies sold
thereafter;
ld r ~ c t l r
to <ndi-.·,JuJI
pur"h.l·-'-'r J r · ul
o ~ m ( } u n l
p.t1d
to P u b h : ~ o h l ' r
u th l·
purd·
.r,.
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 48/67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 49/67
(c) Publishtr m.1 t ( t ~ n d Aut hor's r
t-
pn' en t tton .
w . a r r
,Jn
p. Mil"'S f()Whtch Publh.h. -rgr.l ntt ;,ny
nsht
to th (' Wor k
.lnd
Author shJ II
r e p r e ~
c n t o l t i o n ~ .
wo1rr•nties .and tndt"mnih
C "> wen· m.1 de J ir ·
tl
,,,
r.a
h
rl t
t '
r r p r l ' ~ n t . l t i o n ~ .
w . r T . a n t t ~ ~
.and mdern.n
tit"
s
r C.sh:J hc.•r
10
h . 1 l l t h ~ t f'm• n
ta
n
o.(.a) If
P u b J i s h ~ r
subm1ts to
Author
pr.:>o £:.. vr :h ' • r k . Au1h \r :.h
ll
r ad, rr
r ~ t u r n uch proof to
Pubhs
hcr If Author J ,\(• nvt do u W1l h an " h tm"
Pubb
r m y r •' -t
Publishe-r may pubLsh
tht>
W rk
tn
the condJtJon
111 wha
h
t w.J :.
subrn tll ·d h .r\u th r.
Pubk,h
r h.tll
lu
.r
:
h.t AuthC\r'" royalty ; ~ c
ount
.ttl <h .. rgl' . m ,.,, ....
·
<
f
th\· J •lm,
rurn-d
b)· P1.1blrsh r becau)e
C'f .1ny < E
r.\llon ( tlwr th
an
h t· c
1n tht· rroof, r , . , \lr .1rtwork fur th•· W rl
b) Publi fu• ris not o b l i ~ o 1 t e o d
r o p u b h r.1rt
t' t the W r n: n. ,,..,.
.
,1 \"k1rh •n 11 Of'Hil l n ·
any l'
Opyrtght,
th<'
ord
r of
.my
('('urt . n
,sht \lf
p
nv ..ary
•ny oth l•r J I
i
n;·
r ~ n \ .
or wh '
lib lous
or
ob c O€ or 1 < ~ t h ( ' r w em contrJ
...
. n t ~
..
n • l..aw Aft r
n.
uh : 1
••n
w1 th th
nth
r. ub
l1
m.1y r t ' m o v ~ •ny uch m•tt nJI from rhc W r\c .
(c) Pub . hC" rm.lyed,ttht Workfortlw n r m o ~ l p n n t m n d . l r pril\
t
lflf,
. pr
vid t h t m ~
t h ~ Work
i
n t
atNiJlly . - . h ~ r t . t i
.1nd m.l)' nuk1• ch.lng an h . \ \ .M
I..
whi h
th •
f r mmJr,
pun ttt hon nd p<-lltng co
n<
· tf'nt
<tr
wh1
f'h
corr t ny
f
llual ' .. . .
.
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 50/67
Dayton Ob1o
14 rubl. t.
h
r mJy use Auth n.sml" , hk('Of':-S, . - n J ~ , r b, r phicJl
J
Work J.
nd '"
Publi h r' v e r t
i ~ n ~ ,snd , l r o m ~ . . , t i o n t r W
r
nd
whu:h
rubll)ftc:'l &1otnl lo
.my r . g h t ~ h thC'
\ V o d ~
19. Th1 Agre
m ~ n ; .
ont.t.n th<- tntrrc unde-r .l ,,nJsn)o\ -' t th • .His • h t ,1 .. u r
11
p ,•
'-'r.JI r
Wrtt t( 'n r e p r c ~ ~ n l a . l t '" <
.lS:n···mt:n l'> .JnJ n'\._l 'y' ndt b mo.XJ:(I( . 1 1 .r r r . unl
modJii .ttl n
i
in wrsrrnc .Jnd 1ar,neJ by Puhla ht'r . : ~ n . Au th,•r.
WI
NES,S WH(;,KEOr.
. l n u
·
h.tn· 't&rwJ
th,,.
A f ~ r r t • m H I ~
th ·
.
.
t< i
r
Author's
SOCJ.al
Secur;ty umbl r
and
diatt' of birth. (Th,s mform.llzon
s
r ~ u i r r d
for c
pyr-tght .and
tax
purpos
w. p
n Publisher
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 51/67
RIDER 0 THE AGREEMENT DATED JANUARY 5 985 BETWEE Ll\
• RENC
Gi
•
A 0
HARPER PUBL I
H E ~ ,
INC .
FOR ,.§ASIC M . ~
AGERI.O.L FI J A N C ~
23. Publisher , at Publisher s expens sh 1.1 h ve re pa r d
Test·
ct n ·
:.t
• ac ..o:npuny
ft
·./
c h ~ Work.
:24. Publ
ishet . agr
es to pay to Author, s a contributi o toward ex tn ses
incurred
Co t\0+
'
by
Author in
adapting
he problem
solving
routines d
isc
rw<:pc:r d
by Author · ·
..
PRINC PLES OF
AGERIAL FI CE to the o r k .
an outri ht g
ant of up
tc ssoo.
qo
.upon Author
1
s
.-witt
n r ques t af ter Publ1sher ' s cce t nc
of
uch disc fol·
·
the Work.
The provisions of thi s Par g aph h
1 not •pp ly to
revised e
ditions
of the
Work.
2S. Publisher 9 i e i ~ not to publish any
ot
e \< rk which
would
dire tly c o m p ~ t C
with sales of he Work for a period of two (2) years f lloy.:'ng Pubiish
e
r
fir· :. t
ou bl icaUon o the Work hereunder. The provisio s of t is P a r ~ g r u
::>h
11
no
t
.J ply
to
v i ·d dit iuns
o
t h ~ f lorY..
fy w2
• Pu l isher rees to publish the \-.·ork i a. -color for:m.:1t .
Q v ~ 2 7
] a
. 2 8
)(j
A9
.
inclu
to assign a developr. ntol editor
to
the \ o r ~
r agrees
to
publish a
stud
.y guide
to
ac.c.ootpan>· the \
ork .
s r agrees to have prepared a t P u b l i ~ h s expense
5 part of \ \ ' o r ~
car
r ppc ix
to
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 52/67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 53/67
the S t
t J
dy (;u.i.de
to
acebmpany
· the tou_
th
, Edition
an
d 11
subseqU
eft:t e d i t i o n ~
Q t ~ e
Effect ive Jul1 i ,
1992,
with
r e ipec t
to the Th d Ed it i on
a l l subsequent edi t ions of the Work,
Paragraph 6.
( ) of
the
Agreement
i s
hereby
deleted in
i t s
ent i re ty
and
the
ollo fi,ng subst i tu ted therefor:
"6.(a)
The
Publisher agre
s that s t a tements o f
account
will
be
rendered
by
mail on
July 1, October 1,
r_
> •,.-
,
3 a nuary 1,
and Apr i l
1
of each ye
r
for
the three-month
period
ending
the prior March 31, un c 30 ,
September
30 , and
December 31, respect ively, accomp n
ie
d by reml:.ttance
for
th .e
~ r e s p
c t v a m o ~ n t t1l.a:reof ..u ·
\ < ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ t ~ o ~
s t : r ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ h
~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ t i K ~
e ~ ~
M(:c J
, . ~ d e l ~ v e .
ry
date for the
manuscript
for the
Fourt
h Edit i
on,
s
uch
. ~
d ~ v e r y d te to b d t rmined
by
mutual
agre
ement (
th
e
. . "Delivery Daten .
In
ddit ion, Publisher sha l l
p r o v " d e ~ u t h o r
< ·
~ ~ ~ 1 ~ I ~ ; ~ : ~ ~ ~ i f : l ~ E : ~ ; ~ ~ ~ i ~ : ~ r : ~ : : i : : ~
i { ~ l
~ e t to a l l subsequent edi t ions of the Work, Publ i her
grees
to hold a deve lopmenta l launch mee
t ing
for each s uch \
,,4 i t
.
ion. C).t l eas t s a ~ ~ ~ ~ o n t h s prfor ·to
ea
ch
ed f t 1on '
r e s p e c t
V : e manuscr1.pt del1very date .
·s .
1\uthor
sh
a l l
de l
iver
to
Publisher
on
or
b
efore
th
,..Jlei1.very Date one copy of
the complete
manuscript fo r rhe
. Fourth Edition and computer disk(s) compatible with ~ ~ ~ ~ _
Publisher 's
computerized sys t
m (3 . 5" disk(s) , - 1 - B ~ ve rs i on -.; '}
of sui table
for
a
book of
approximate
ly ~
book pages
eng sa
1 s ac ory o Publisher Tn co
ntent
\
and
form.
The manuscript shall ons is t
of
a tearsheet rom
the
th i rd
edi t ion of the
Work as well
as
new
manuscrip
t h
ic
h
ust
be
typewrit ten
and
double-spaced.
Author
s ha l l r e t i n a
copy
o
a l l m a t ~ r i a l s
submitted to PUblisher .
6.
(a)
Publisher shal l
pay
Au
thor as an a d v a n ~ e
again
s t
th
e
Author's
Account
established for
the Fourth Edit ion,
t he su.m
of
$5,000.00
upo
n
A:utnp
r s
w ri
t
ten
request
a f t e r
t i o n
o f
th i s Amendm.ent .
(b)
In
the
ev
ent tha t Author delivers the complete nd
f inal ~ n u s c r i p t
fo r
,
the :F
ourth Edition,
s
a t i
s
fa
q
t o r y
t o
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 54/67
Ptlblisher in content: and
tortn
and a l l other mater ia ls to be
provided by Author for
the
Fourth Edition on
or
before
the
'
Delivery Date,
the
to ta l
advance
of 5,000.00 payable
under
Paraqraph
6.(a)
of t h i s Amendment
shal l
be
converted to
a
grant , not to be
h ~ r q e d against
Author's Account
/
(c)
The
provisions
of th is Paragraph 6 .
sb
a l l apply
anew
to eacl}
~ J } ? s e q u e n t revision of
the
Work
7.
Pursuant
to Paragraph 5. a) of t he Agreement, Author ha :
gr nted Publisher
the
r ight
to exercise or
dispose of th
foreign language
publication r ights to the Work. With
respect to t rans la t ion
r ights
in the Fourth
Edit ion
and
a l l
subsequent edi t ions
of
the Work, such r ight shal l
be
revoc ble
by
the
Author upon writ t n not ic to Publisher with
respect to each
language
or country or which no l icense or
option
has
be
n
given
within
f i f teen
(15)
months
of the
Publ i sher ' s t ; ~ ~ l ,
p u b l i c a t i c : > n
o ny ~ u h cd_itions.
8. Author
9 r
es to
del iver
to
Publish
r the sources for
o
bta ining permission from
the
copyright
propr ie tor
of
t ex t
and
any
i l l u s t r a t i o ~ i n c l u d e d in the Fourth Edition that are
protected by copyriqnt for
the
use of such t ex t and
i l lus t ra t ions in the
exercise of r ights to
th
Fourth
Edi t ion
.granted
to
Publisher hereunder. Publ isher sh 11 obtain,
at
PUblisher 's xpense,
any
necessary permissions for
the
use of
text
n a i l l \ ]s t ra t ions
in t}le Fourth Edit ion. ·
9 .
The
copyright
in
.
the
Fou.rth
Edition
and
a l l
subsequen
t
editions sha l l bE -r;e,gistered t,o Lawrence J . G itman .
10. The warrant ies arid indemnities
e>Cpressed
i n Paragraph a•
or
the
Agreement sha l l
be extended to
include
any new
material
added
by the Author to the Fourth Edit ion and a l l
subsequent edi t ions of wgrk.
11. Paragraph 9 . a )
Qf
tfieAqreem nf i s hereby
de
e ted i n
i t s
e n ~ i r e t y
and tpe l l o W i l } < ; J s u } : ~
tu ted therefor:
11
9. (a) Publisher shal l submit
to
Author proofs or
the
\-Jork
and
Author
shal l
read,
correct
and
return
such
proofs to Publisher
in a
t imely
manner consis tent with the
production s chedule established
for the Work
by
Publisher .
I f
Author does not re turn the corrected proofs to Publisher
in a t imely
manner, Pupl ish.
er
may publish the Work · the
3
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 55/67
condition in which t
was
sub. i t ted to Author. Provided
Author 's
al terat ions
are submitted to Publisher
i n a t imely
manner,
Publisher
shal l
incorpor
te
such
a l t e ra t ions in the
published
edi t ion
of the
Work.
Publisher
sh
11
charge
to
,
Author 's
royalty account a l l charges in
exces
s o
15
% of t he
.cost
of
composition
for
the
Work incurred y Pub l i sher
because of any al terat ions (other
than
the
corr
ction of
prin ter s
errors)
made by Author
on
the proofs f or text
or
a r twork for
t he
Work. Pub l i she r s h a l l keep f u l l and complete
·: ;
records
of a l l Author
al terat ions , including copies of
";,Author's requested
changes, the revised
text , nd t .
he
;
speci f ic charge
for the cost
of both the
composition or the
Work
and
Author's
a l te ra t ions ,
which
records
~ h a l l b m d
vai l ble to Author pr io r to any deduction from Author s
:royalty a c c o ~ n ~ .
12.
Paragraph
12.
(b)
of
the
Aqr
ement
sh
l l
e
amended
by
adding th
f ) l + q w ~ n < l
provisj..c>n to the end of
the
clause;
Notwithstanding the
foregoing,
i the Publisher
r ~ a n q e s for the preparat ion of
revised
edi t ion of th e Work
by
par t ies of
the Publisher 's select ion (nthe
Revisors
)
who
have not
been approved y the Author in adv nee, the
Publisher
sha l l
send
the
Author
the revisions prepared for
the Work y
t he
Revisors prior to the public
t ion
thereof .
~
h e
Author hal l
h ve 15 d
ys
rom
h i s
receipt
o f
such
~ r e p o s e d
revisions
to provide
the
Publisher with writ ten
comments and cr i t i c i sm with respect
to the propos
d
revisions. I the Publ i sher ,
a t
i t s discre t i on, decides not
to
implement
the Author's written comments and c r i t ic isms in
the
proposed
revisions, the
Author
may
demand
tha t
his
name
be
removed
from the credits for the Work, in
which event the
Author s h a l l rel inquish
his
r ight
to receive roy
l
t i e s and
any other proceeds
from
the s le or l icensing o
the
revised
edition
of
the W o ~ k
from
which his
name
has
bien rem
oved .
The
Publisher shall not, during
the
same educ t ional
year
(running
July
1
through
June 30)
in
•..thich the
Publ isher
publishes a new edi t ion of the Work, introduce new textbook
t ha t
competes
di rec t ly
with the Work.. A new textbook wi 11
be
regarded
as
competing di rec t ly
with th e Work only i f
( i ) th
textbook
i s
substant ia l ly similar
to
the Work
in length,
organiz t ion ,
level
of
presentat ion and
pcdoqogy, im i
(i i )
the textbook i s to be sold
to
the
same
segment
o the c
ollege
·
finance market as t b e Work.
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 56/67
E ;CEPT
TO THE EXTENT OF
l•HE fOREGOING, a l l of
th
t
rms
an
d
conditions of the Agreement are hereby
r a t i f i ed
and
confirmed.
,
IN
Wt f NESS
WHEREOF,
th
p r t i es hereto have ign d th i s
am
en.
ment to be effec t ive
as
of the date f i r s t wri t ten ab ove.
.5
MarperColl ins
College
Publishers a divis ion of
HarperCollins Educat io
nal
Publ i shers nc :
Publ i sh
r
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 57/67
EXHI IT
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 58/67
ADDI
PU
ON WESLEY LONGMAN
L
SH
NG AG
EEMENT
r December 3 0 ~ 1998. bet\\<
L
enre J.
Gitm:an
and J rr
1 dor
•
the thor. 3nd Addison We ley Lon
.
In ..
Publist1cr.
JJ Tho Author i o m e t i ~ refcrm.l 10 • ..you" and the PuuiJ her
Agreement Each of the Author nnd
P u ~ l i 1..kdJrCS
the desire t
Agreemenl
in
:u1 atmosphere of
muru
I respect coopcrJtion in ~ f
pro . ional stnndards.and commcrcinl succe., which each p:m:.-
d c s u · ~ .
v . ~ or
in
Cl under
L
UJ l : r ~ 1 T .
You agree
to
ere
te for
puhlicalion work
lcntatiYely
cmitl
lN TRO
D
UCTION TO
NCE
and you grant and assign exclusively to us
thi
work anu
all
right.s t t title,
p:at.S
and U
versions
and
revisions of
tho
woti:
lha.t are
n
w in ex en cre:su:d
herc:afto
(collectively hereinafter. "the work"). Included
in
tha gron1 and a. i g n ~ n t 3f'e all rights
of
copyright (:lnd to
cl
im. register, and obtain copyright) in the wol"k. in Jl counlries of the
w rld,
including
he exclusive right to prinr. publish. fld sell the work through
ul the
v.uid
dw'ing the fun terms
of
copyright. and all of the other rigbts set forth
in
P gJ':'phs 13, 14,
1S below. wilh the cxclusi\·e uthonly to exercise or to di$po e
of
all righu in all countries and
in illl
l::mgu;
ges.
You and
we agree th.at an publi sh( :d cop1 of th work shall bear
the
c o p y r i ~ ht nor ice
or
notices
required
by applicable l w m the
Publisher'
name
or
m ny other
It
me
or n ~ m e s we
elect. You agree that the terms ,
thiK
Par.1 h
II ply
to
nlJ n ~ ; i l l a r y
m a t ~ r i a b
prepJ.red hy
you that
r c l a r . ~ to
lhe work. To
p r o t c ~ t th
wurk
t c
rights ted
co
us,
we
may wish
to
obtain
from you
documenl' u n t i r m i n r , t h 1 ~ nt t
aruJ ~ u j 1
lc (
tiling with the Copyrighc Office. If
we
B Sk you to itn such documen • you gree t.o do
l t "\·c . ·•.uJ 1\c
c (llflnr •
; fnrr
a,(
• Jlf
You
grce
to
dcliver
to
u
of the work in o form
ready
for review according to a mutunlly
;tgrcc to deliver to us a fimd manuscript m n form ready f
Publisher's speciti
lions
mcluding
:lll front
and ~ n d
matter x
approximately 110 line drawings and
a p p r o x i ~ e l y
0 photo
complete
draft
mnnuscript
upon .chedule.
~ y u
production according to
lhc
t r the
index and includlng
b not laler
lh.
n
February
I,
2000. You
3gr
.: to retain
l
time11 b e ~ re
publicalJoo r
the
work
one complete co tyy
of the
· ~ J m N . : r i p t
are
1mp rtant
that
(
)'
ur
m a n ~ r i p l
is not :tcceptable to , or
if it
is n
specifi .
tiGns
arc
n O l J 1 l ~ l .
and lf
in
our opiruon n exte
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 59/67
al any time lhcrea ter and c our optt n give written
notice
lo
you
.at your I t
known
lhac
we
will not publish
the
wor Uno monies vc been paid to you under this Agreement it
will thereupon
Lcrm.inntc.
Yett ttt;tee t6 rei A) te tt: an) n t e n i e : ~ paid te ~ t t s under thi
a ~ g e e m e n t .
nith:ttt39daytaftca
reHi
..
tllS
etn netieo,
Atld
tni.•
,-.&n=cment
nill
tcnuinaHc ..
hen
m e n : i e s •e full) rereid. I ) ' ur final man
ript
was accepulble to w Oe.lhered
on
·:Sdtedulc
hut we determine
lh:u
there not . uf lcient demand f r the
wor to
en bJc u to
succe
fully publis-h :w1
sell il. we
may
1ennin:1tc this Acrcemcm
hy
written notice:
led
above.
bt2t
in lh"9C drctsm:nances ) eu
e,_ree
~ t(J Ml) tfhl.•
a n ~ ru"'nce :7 p ~ d
to )ccuuder tml
Asrcement en:l)
etU
e f ~ hr l ttnd til ~ m c n t t made lC .,\Ott 11hen Mid if)Ott • :ttac«SuH.n
ltCHins the nerk te
ane•thcr
puhlisher. Upon
cennin:nion
of
rhis
Agrt"ement under this.
> a r . : ~ g a p h : rights that you t e d to us
in
the work hall rc,·en u you
and
you c:an
{rt;t
blish the \Vork
l s t w h ~ r
'an d.
we
will not deem you
to
have
in{rin
ed on
3
'11}'
puhUsbin,.
ri.ghts
or
olher cop
y
rights
assigned to u
onder this
' a gr ement.
t
1
1 1Jilll Excepl as otherwise provided herein.
we
will pa you r y J
1i
" of Jt; % of rh' ' net
am(luor
~ c - c i . . - e d
by us from
~ . . u t S
(lc s ducounts and rclurn . ex ludtng sales
t a ~ c s
t.r
nsp
rttlUon
ctt es)
(the
"Net
Amount"),
of
all
copies
oi
t
Engh I nguage version of
t
he
w ric
and revisi Lh
of in
book fonn thai are ·old
in the
nired St
t e ~ anJ i
possessions
and in . lC in any twelve (12)
consecotiv
monah • ales t x c ~ e d 12.0 ()(}
copies,
then will
p you 18
royalti
s n U ub
equrnt
copi s
in
tbe
·
current
and
aU
sub quent
edition
. If the Autb cansi t of multiple parties,
they
will receiv the ~ p e c t i v e perc-e-n ges (''Splic ") oppo Jt chcir o:unes below. of each
:payment
f roy
ti
due under this
Para 3
and phs
J
4 and
I
S.
nod
charges or
credits II
I
o
be
m
to
tho e partie."' ccouncs in the
In tbe vent that You, th
atho
, nd th Publisher, a r e to publish
n Annotated
In
tractor s Edition ( lE uf tbe t.ex tbook, the initi
J
r oyalty
r
t ror
the Work
·
thm t.a.rt at IS inst d r 16% in the fint
editin:n
nly. c 12,000 copy · tor nd ob cqu t roya l ty rate will
rontioue
to
"PPIY n o t ~ d bo e-.
R :/}flr/ . J · ~ . ~ y ~ z t - T i l . \
We
agree to report
to
you
on
the ~ of the work s truannuaUy: on or
before Apnl 1. for
the
period ending the prec.eding Dec mber ·'
1,
and on or bef October
fOr
the period ending the preceding June 30. Wilh ca;h_rqx>n of sale ,
we
will m e p ymc..nl for
any balnnce due.
the form
in
which
;
:
·
o:
i Httll
:.r\.
'
:
You :tgftc
10
include th following. wilh the fin
.
I m nus ripr : title
·page, prer 6cc or Coreword (if any); table
ef eeruent:t:
exerci c. (if any); end-
f-ch.:xpler
materi
Is:
f i ~ r c legends; r;Je tllt 1 fif an)),
bibliogrRphy (if
a n y )
ttn3
•
cr9 te
e X t : l t U ~ fif 11'
and
any
:1dditior.nlkru1\i
rtg nid that
we
agree with you re nece ary: and
II
ph()
l
og
ph-. illu
cratio
us,
2
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 60/67
7
r
1
.1/ .·\
·
You agree
t
r
...
td.
orrcct.
31ld
promptly return
to
be rc.spons1ble for
the
comp lc.tene and
ac\.-uracy of
your
of
correction nnd ahcrnti th
l
you mAke to
the 1ext
or
an or
both in rroof form ex ee:d I
of he
combined
co
ts
of
rui ·nal
p ge
makeup r composition
f
te:\1
and y nmdmng of nn rendered
by
. you will the cxces . Such charges
will not
in lu<k
printer' .
om l O r s ,
illu
ror' crro
ut
Jl include
all text clunges you
lllilke after you
b
ved the fin.1l e ~ i J r c d text m:m
pt.
and all llfustrntions changes you
make
ilfter you
ba"
mittcd
rhe fmJJ
illusrr tion m
:muscript
and
approved
the
first
illustration
proof.
IF
oa f f:ti
n
te ddreet ~ ' f e N
in the p:oo
Fin& 'Utl C rc
,
ndt:J in
a ptsblt1hed
· · k "r&l J. t),creh.:
l i m i t i ~ e ~ a l e
6l lhc (J't'tentiel
:tDk
b;,eqttt
nt J Mntin:; "ill be clago..i
s. c .; t _ ~ h
.
\ 1 f( rtn.l l:f you incorporate into y
c-
on nd
p:l)
for permi ions
fees up
'frill
tb
n
be d e d u ~ t c - d
from lire, Anthor
·9 . A th r ·s l,f trr nfi ·., You wnrrnnt t
l
you c
the
ol wner of thi
.
work d
bil.VC
full power
to enter inlo and petfonn chis Agroement :md
muc
the grant and ignm nt t forth herein,
nnd
h ve not previously gn.nred
,
assigned, or eocum any of
the
rights
led
and
hereu
=-;
that
aU
material con t
ained
in
the work
3nd :til
anciltruy
maccrinl fu
:
mi.mcd by
you
aud
II
subsequent revisions of
nny
thereof
(except previously publi hed m teri 1 for hich
permi
·ons arc obtained ss
required
bovc) is and W
ill
be o r i ~ i n a (except for m
t ri
I V
.
induded in olber Addison Wesley L o n ~ : ~ n a n Iitle You h.
••
u l h o r e ~ : : j
onpubli ·hed by You in
titJe
s tb=-t
directly
con1pet with th '
Wor )
9 Z " ' ~ t l )
lh"
A t ~ e i l ef
an app'ica'ion
for
cgpyrjgbr
regictri) jot_
apd
t the
w rk nll •
:mcill:1ry
m;ucrials furnished by
you
and
all
substqnent r e v i s i o n ~ of :my tho f will cont 'n
no
·, ... · ·
matter truu
is
libelous or otherwise unlswful and no instruct
1om
or errors lh
t
may u
e lmm
El
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 61/67
r
injury,
and
will not infringe, \rlO dny
c o p y r i g h
right of privacy, or othcJ
ptopricmry
or
persoanl
ri hl. JJ w
l
lut ry
or
on 1
tutory.
You
agree
·
O
indemnify
the Publi
·her.
its
aMignees, licensee ax
rchaft . nd lheoffi of all them c o l l e c t i v ~ l y ,
'"the
indemnified
parti ),
II
sonable norneys' fees), losses, II bilitics.
d a m : J ~ . ·smg out of. o for lhe purpose of r ~ s o l v i n g
o avoidin ,
c1
'm, suic, proceeding. or dem:md ( cl · ' m
or
brought agaima ny of
lhe indem.nificd p:lrti which. if sustrined, would constitute h of
ny
of
your warranties.
In the c-."Cnt of
chum
we IDllY withhold payments
due y
u
oder
or under
o.ny other
agreement bet n you :md us in
an
an1ounc
re on
bly rrl to the iz.c of the
poccntilll
losses. either party who obt ·ns l"Jlow edge of a cl3im hall p mpc notice of it to the
other, :tlong with all infonna1ion bout
ir
then known. Th
Pubr
her shall have the right to
defend
itself and the Author. The Author agrees to coope e fully with lhc Publisher
<lnd
its
insu.ren in the defense
of y
cl:lim,
and may
elect
an
j te counsel
3t
the Author's
expense. The
warranties
and agreements contained '
lh.
P
nph
9
shall survive tht
tennino.Lion of thi
Agreement
,.
I
t
: '
w•.
i f
· d e
It t
:
.
.
When your complete iin:JI m n
cnpt
h:u
been
3CCCp4Cd
.
and
appro ed for proUuction by us. we
may: (I)
copyedit the work
t
the ri tll;ll printin
and
t any'
reprinting or revision. provided that such editing or allcration ball n t m cerially ~ g e the
meaning
of
the work; (2) assess lho manufncruring
c o s L ~
f
r
tl w
rk nd t
size of its
m
kct.,
3lld decide
the number of
C()pics
thal rna)' be printed;
0
publish the
work in
one
or SC\'Cr.al
volume , and in such lyle nd
uruJcr
such titles and imprinls as we deem propritUC as long
as
you, the Author,
appron. Authors'
pproval shall not he unreason bly
'
witbheJd; (4) e s a ~ b l i s h
the
prices nt which the work sh
II be
sold: (5) del rrninc the
«tc.ot
and
mcao of
m3J'keriog
the work (including
the
right to usc and permit oth y ur name,
likeness and biographical information on a nd m connection with the w o r t ~ rights th rein
we deem :sppropriate), the number
and
desunnlion of copies. anJ
II th
r publishing
detnils,lncluding
lhe
use
of plate. .
rypc, film. or other pr tJ«ss, the
date or
publi
hin
, fonn.
style,
ize.
type, paper to he used, and liked truls: nod (6) 1.kcide how long rlrue
1
type, or film
·h:lll
be preserved. when
lhey
'h·
Jbed
aoycd,
:u1d
if
nod
when
reprints
sh.ll be made.
II.
A•
1 :
··
s
<
npi"
We
agree
to
provide e h
pe
n n herein
as
pan of
lhe
Author with
t-1-Q) twenty (20) copies of
the finis.hetl
w rk wlttn it is
published .
You m3y purchase
diti n Jcopies
ala
twenty percent
...0%)
d aunt
from
oor published or i
nt
ernal
li t
price for
lh wo
1 ...
4
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 62/67
' . • • r •
1
'
• you :mled
t
us
mcludc
but
nrc not limited to
the
foUowin
usivc righ
in
to
w
rk. whicb we
mny c x e r c i s ~ ; ; ,
license, asstgn or
olhcrwi e
dispose
o to
the
utent din
such
~ n r
d
styles a we deem
appropmtc,
in
n
I oguag • forms,
ia,
and
me
f dif i
uti
n now
in
existence m
he
reafter
mventcd
.
throughout the war d. be Publbher 1'
to
notify the
.Authors
.in the
e'Ve.nt
that
n '
or
tbe
,
llowing
rights n e.x rc:i
ed.
l. To prep.;-re, p blish, reproduce, II
nd
distribute
the
I
derivnti
..
c worb based
on
r.he
woO.,
including but nol limited to nudiovi 'ual It motion pictures and
v i d e o t a ~ ~ ..
S04Jld ~ o r d i n g s . microfilms,
microfiches.
mi
oforms filmstrips. laSer disks,
compaet
di
ks, computer programs, multimedi
work
ny
other
forms of
elcctro•t c
media
(including
but not
limited 10 magnetic
ond
optical); Md
All performance. displ
y
and
broadcast rights.
and
all right for u e in
infonnation
sto
proce ing..
uunsmission.
snd
reuieval
sys t
em
,
including Internet all
other electronic
p u J > l i ~ rights: and
:3. To
scri
lize., syn<lkatc, and ada lc and use
excerpc.s
inducting
illust:ratioo )
from he w rk;
induding using the entire
WC Irk
or parts of it in other
works
that .,. cu om igned
for
i
ns
tructorslinl.titutiorLS
and
lh3t
rn
y
in
ludc::
ther wor •
nson
mae
f
rc
om
works
.
.
I I ~ l l _ \ 1 I
IIIII
l l f l f f(lf f l l .
• I
p.osses
i.ons.
n
the
original F . . n ~ d i h
I.
nguage version
Unit S t : l l c ~ . its po-.sc > io . :\Od
Can:
int vcrs1ons or
3d puu.ions
the
Umced SLates and
iu
2.
You
will rceei e roy hyoffive percent (S ) of then t ounr
n:ceived
by us on the
first
l 0,000 copies sold y ilnd
seven
and one-lwf percent (7· Jn . )o the
net
amount
rocei
vcd
by
us
on II copi ~ o l d by u thereafter, of foreign 1 editions of the work or
revisions ~ i n book form that we develop Glone or jointly with ochers.
3. You w i l l s ~ equally with
us any net
amouol
we
receive
from
the rights to
~ e l o p
a
foreign language
edition of the work
fom1.
l , You will r e c c i v ~ r o y ~ t i e s
of
t,
en
perc,ent
(J 0%' ene ftelf
tM re) : ~ h
Mle spceif1od
if\
Patao,raph 9, nbewe,
of tbe Nee
Amount received by u. :
a) On
overstock
copies $old by us at
a reduced price, except tb
l on re.mainderang
s tes ·
mode
at
or below manufacturing
cosr.
no royalties
will
be paid: d
h) On ales by us o
. ~ n y
English language 3da.ptation
of
the work. r revisions lhcreo.( in
book
fom1 prepared by us as an
elementary or
secondary scllool edition
of
lhe work
.
:2•.
You
will receive a royalty rate of five percent (5 ) of the Net
Am
um received by us ott
sales
us
of the origin
Enslish l:mgua,;e
version of
lhC'
wor r revi ions thereof
in book
ft >rm. din.-ctly to the consumer hy
any
means. in ludin l eph . l n t ~ r n c t or other
elcctronli. lncilnS.
rndio.
television, mlil order.
or coupon
·cru ·
3
H we sell copies
of
the original English language version
of
the work or rcvi
i(ln
thereof in
book form as
pan of a package
th
at
includ other products,
}
ou
will ivc
r o y a h i e . ~ equal
lO. llC following
roy3.lty rates
ti
mes the p o r t
i ~ J n a l Pan oi
the Net Am
unt received by
us
5
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 63/67
from ales of the cntJro package. The royalty rare will
be
(a) th
t Sl.ltcd
in Paragraph 3,
above, or (b) t n percent (1 0 o)
if
the · old ou ide the
United States, its posse ioos, and nada.
The Proponional Part
is
n fraction equ
to
our
ublishc:d
or
intern:U
I
r
price
of
th
work
or
s i o n when sold scpanuely, di\idcd by
lbe
oro
of the
published or intern
I 1i
r pri
of
aU o the productS
cont.runed ia
th . induding the work,
wh<:n
che products me ·
( ; ~ . e l y . (Our
internal
list
prices
u
pubr hcd but arc.
as dn:
our published bsr
pri
rice from wh.icb we
uJ l
y di oun purch s of copi (work$.)
4 lfwo , U ~ p i of
tom works dd'rned in
P ph 13(3)
in
book fom1 thAt include
:1ll
or pnrt of
the origin En
lish angun e
venioo f ll
e
work or revisions thereof,
you
will
receive ro)i
ti equ
to tho foJiowin roy ty rn . ttmes
the
Custom Sh.vc of the Net
A
mount r ned by
us
from
Jes
of the custom work. Tile roy
lty
rate will be
one·half of
lhc rate wed
in
P graph 3 above.
The Custom Share is cqunl to the published or internnl
li
st pri..:-c of the custom work.
ti
mes
a.fraction equal
[o the "total page
price''
or the wor-k whi b i
the ubject
of this A e n t
divided hy the sum
of
all totru page
price$ calculated
for lhe cust
.., ork. The
total page
price for each work. nil
or
part
of
which
is
mcluJed m the CtUtO
w
r
k.
1 calcul led
by
muJtiplymg
the
number
of
lhat
work' pages
that
:lfc
included
in
the cu
tom
work tim
ge price . equal
lo
the number
of th.11
w o r k ' ~ own page - ilivi<b..l by th
t
w own
publi hed
or internal
list price.
S You
will share equally
with
us any
net
:unount
we
rccei.,·e from ;my
di
print rights co serialize.. syndicate. quota or
use
excerpts
from
the work.
ition to ot
-6. Tf we exereisc (alone o with others) or dispose of a particulnr right
for which
(
othc::r compensation
to you
is
nos olherwi e prmidtrl
in
l h l ~ Agrecmcm or
WlY
~ i e n d l u m
or
e n d ~ n t 10 it, you will receive co pensation
e.qu
1w our
good
faith
deli
nnin tion of the
fllir
m ket value to lhe Author of any h cxerci of nghts
by
u (alone r
with
the ),
or
cur •ood f tb d \::nni tion
of
the- uthor' fair m. - t ·
lf...l.fe
vf any net m unt we recci
ti n to ot.bcN .
I ;, ~ ~ ·
·· t rt
All C<lmpensation
de:llt
with u
raph..,; 14 .nJ 15 sh:t.ll be
excluded
in computins the roynltics
payable
uodu P' &1f:l
ph 3.
and amounts
due you
under
P n r a ~ p h s
14
IS sh
II
be
computed
od
shO\ n
tc
.
ly
from royalties due
onder
.
Parngnph
3. You furt:bet'
gree that nny
o v ~ y m n t of
r ynlcy due Ia
rerum
of stock from
cuslomers,
3nd
mounts
of llD)' n
ure
t h3 t you m y
we
u .
whtthtt
under
this
Agreement
only
Ot'-fl'&t,
s I
be
uri.ned
for
our
own
account
from the
royalties otherwise
due you
f
rom
thjs or
Mt)
& t t k . ~ greem nt only. between
~ e t t Mid
tt er M } ef eur $ t t h s i d i C & t i ~ csr
e f f i H ~
Ll •
h) tt .
Notwithsunding
anything else
in
this ement.
no
royaltie
or
other
compens
tion will be paid on c mplimentary
copi:co furni.
o y
u:
nn c o p r ~ " u ~ ~ fCtf
•dvertising. review, or :de promotional p u r p o s e ~ : n odiuon or d .
riv:.tlivc
w u r k ~
that
are
infendc rl for u ~ c by hnndicappe.d person (such as Bi.lille eJiuon n ncill. ry m a t c n c l l ~
chat
are
not
i n t ~ n d e d
for
l e ~
or on the u'c
by
u
or
\\
rith our p nni ion
of w
rk
irom
rhe work, in
other works
of
the Publisher
or its affili01tes lh31 we
detcnnine
in
ood faith
dt:. not compete
with the
work.
-
R< fmal \ " t l f ~ : (
pcion
You agree
that
without our pnor written con
nt yo
u wifl not
prepare
or a
ist in
the preparation of
any
other
work
that might
int.erlcre
with r
injure
the we of the
worlt;
or
lc
.
$en iu
\'aluc. The
pubHcadon
in
scholarly
JOUinal. \
of ruticl
by
you on
the
subject
of the work
~ h . l l
not be Cl':Uidcred breach of this P a r l ~ p h
17
. ¥&u t;rtml
1e
tt'
ri
.tht ef
fir-tt r d t ~ t s l eb t e " t b e ~ k nt;tten h) ) tlB .
D o r i n ~ the
two years
of
:init1al
pubU<:
.
ation
of tlle first
edition
of th e work,
Publisher will not ptd:t li.sh
a,n
introduction
to
nn
nc
( uney·approoc:b)
textbook
t
ha
t
p ~ t e s
directly
with Ulis work. A
textbook wllJ be
considered competi
ng
~ c U y
with thi s work only i nid
t.extbook is
6
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 64/67
ub rant1ally imiJ r in
length.
ora ni tio • level of
prc.- IICR tat fob.,
~ e d a ~ o g y , od
aid
(t'J:lbook · sold
to
tbe me egmcrll or rhe
coU
ea
e
...
~ f a ~ n ; . ; : ; : a ~ n ~ c . ; : . e ~ m ; . ; ; a ~ r ~ k : . : : . ; . : : I · . . . _ ~ H o w c : v e r
the provi ions of thi pa gr
ph
~ h l l
not
a.p pl y
if,
(A) the PublbliilA cquir s publishing right 10 n introduction to fina nce·
(
u r v ~ y - a p p
ch) as
p
rt
of an acquisition
of
or
a
merger with
all
or
substantially aU
or
tbe assets or or i l ~ e r with nother
textbook
p u b l i s h
and publisher therefor el
ects
to puhli b such
text:
or }
Author
f Us t o
;metl lh m u t u a l l y · a . : r e ~ d upon ub m i li. ion date ror fin I production-rc dy
m uscript, as specified in Par:.cmplt 20, or • ny other d upon delivery
dale for the
work.
vera] oblig lions r those persons.
person
. taced
belo
a$S.11ln
this Agreement and
he
i g o ~ n t
.
. '\.
r·
w <'/
: r
I
we
tify
you in
v.Tiun g .hat we
h
v ·
ed
the w
rk
C•Ut-(lf-print
in
rhe United
)taleS.
you
may request the rerum ro you
of our-
r
ining
rights to
those ponions
of tl1c work furnished
by you.
When
we
receive your rcqu · ~ t
y. will
o
fer 10
return tho e rights
to you on our
lheo-
umdard tenns for uch
returns
and subJeCt t tJ ny prior grants of ri hts
we
have
,authorized and
our
continuing
r i ~ t
t retain
our .
h o
any
f u l u ~ procccd1i from
rhose grnnts, and (b) our continuing royally-free rishtl use and nn•t lhc u ~ in other works
o a y illusuations or other artwork
used
in the v.ark. whi h illustr:ui n or
·ortc
were
uth or rendered
in
p a r ~
by us or nether party recuncd by u .
u. Publf ht.r ball p
y
Author
i ing
or tbi
cootrnct
d
ball p
y
R o y ~ • l t y A ~ C ; Q U D l
th
um of 50,000
S20,0UO upon si Ding or 'th
is
contr c:t;
$10,000
upon
P u b l i s h e r
a e c ~
p l a n c . e
of
a
un dabte f:tr nl of 10,000 upO'n
:an
advanc('
o ~ : ~ i n t Author
(olio\'.:
10,000
upon Publishe r' acceptance or fi
t
dr n
manuscript;
10,000
upon Publisher's acceptance of final. production·rc dy
mannscl ipt. U
tbe Aulb
o meet a mutu. lly· re d upon submission
d for final production-
ready
manuscript, tb n tb'
10,00
6 w·ill revert
to
a
~ r . nt
payment. not to
be
charged again t
uthor
Roy11 lty
.Ac:count.
J:>ttblisher haJJ pay
Author
a $1 0,0{)0 . d, ·ancc t th la unch
of
c;acb
r ~ v i s i o n of the l n t ro 1 new edition. One h, If (112.} of th · adva nce
( ~ , 0 0 0 ) will revert to a grant p ym nt if Author d U\'r revised
manuscrip
t to Publish r
by
Jnnuary l or
the
• r prior to the
copyrit:bt
y r given
t
hat
n development
ond
I unch m
cling occur
s
prior . t.o Ju ne 30 ot' t.be
pr
.i.or
ye-ar.
7
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 65/67
- • strued
ml
rpreled according to rhe laws of he
hall
e bi.ndin
upon the parties hereto their heirs
d ref nces
to
you and us hnll include the
igns.
and
pcnon3l rep n ·
es
of
each
pany
subject
to
the
re::atriction
on ignmcn
ted in
Paragrnph
18.
For purposes of computing royaltie1 under
or p u ~ u n t to this Agreement. 11J1 publication· :md saJe y •ny
f
our 1uhsidilries sball be
rleemc:d to
be
p u b l i ~ a t i o n s nnd snlc.s by us.
lnd
11
:sale
. o· er n
lC'tions
belween
us
a00
our
ub
idiaries
and all
ignments by
us of
this
Agrecme l
hole ~ n d
any lran.sfer
of
i n v ~ : ; n t o r y co the igoce in connection t h e ~ ' ' i l h , hnll
he
< ll rc dcd.
_40_ _ _
SpHt
8
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 66/67
JS44C/SDNY
REV. 4/2014
PLAINTIFFS
:t
fJ{\ilS
CIVIL COlfRIEET £
J \ I U ~ cover sheet
and
the information c o n t l ~
nher
re \J .
. r
upplement go l
pleadings
or
other papers as required by law, except as provide y local rules
of
court. This form, apprqved
~ t ~
'
Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for use of the Clerk of Court for the purpos
initiating the civil docket sheet.
DEFENDANTS
Lawrence J. Gitman and Michael D. Joehnk
Pearson Education, Inc., Pearson PLC and Pearson, Inc.
ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)
Robert Lax, Lax LLP, 380 Lexington Avenue, 31st Floor, New York, NY
10168; Sanford P. Dumain and leigh Smith, One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th
Floor, New York, NY 10119; and Daniel E. Sobelsohn, The Sobelsohn Law
Firm.
1801
Centura Park East. 24th Floor.
los
Anaeles. CA 90067
CAUSE OF ACTION
(CITE THE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WHICH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE)
(DO NOT CITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY)
Breach
of
Contract, Breach of the Implied Duty
of
Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Intentional Interference with Contract
Has this action, case, or proceeding, or one essentially the same been previously filed
in
SONY at any time?
Ncfates0Judge
Previously Assigned
If yes, was this case Vol.
lnvol.
0
Dismissed. No
0
Yes
If yes, give
date &
Case
No .
IS THIS AN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION eASEl No [ ]
Yes
0
(PLACEAN
{x]
IN
ONE BOX ONLY)
NATURE OF SUIT
CONTRACT
[ ]110
[ ]120
[ ]130
[ ]140
]150
[ ]151
[
]152
[
]153
[
]160
K)
190
[ ] 195
INSURANCE
MARINE
MILLER
ACT
NEGOTIABLE
INSTRUMENT
RECOVERY OF
OVERPAYMENT &
ENFORCEMENT
OF JUDGMENT
MEDICARE ACT
RECOVERY OF
DEFAULTED
STUDENT LOANS
(EXCL VETERANS)
RECOVERY OF
OVERPAYMENT
OF VETERAN'S
BENEFITS
STOCKHOLDERS
SUITS
OTHER
CONTRACT
CONTRACT
PRODUCT
LIABILITY
[
]196
FRANCHISE
REAL PROPERTY
I
]210
LAND
CONDEMNATION
I ]220 FORECLOSURE
[
]230
RENT LEASE &
EJECTMENT
[ ] 240 TORTS TO LAND
[ ] 245 TORT PRODUCT
LIABILITY
I ]
290 ALL
OTHER
REAL PROPERTY
TORTS
PERSONAL INJURY
[
]310
AIRPLANE
[ J315 AIRPLANE PRODUCT
LIABILITY
[ ] 320 ASSAULT, LIBEL &
SLANDER
[
]330
FEDERAL
EMPLOYERS'
LIABILITY
[ I 340 MARINE
[ I
345 MARINE PRODUCT
LIABILITY
[ J 350 MOTOR VEHICLE
[ I 355 MOTOR VEHICLE
PRODUCT LIABILITY
[ ] 360 OTHER PERSONAL
INJURY
[ ] 362 PERSONAL INJURY -
MED MALPRACTICE
AtnONS
UNDER STATUTES
CIVIL RIGHTS
PERSONAL
INJURY
FORFEITURE/PENALTY
[ I 367 HEALTHCARE/
PHARMACEUTICAL PERSONAL 1 I625 DRUG RELATED
INJURY/PRODUCT LIABILITY SEIZURE OF PROPERTY
[ I
365 PERSONAL INJURY
21
USC
881
PRODUCT LIABILITY
[ ] 368 ASBESTOS PERSONAL [ 1
690
OTHER
INJURY PRODUCT
LIABILITY
PERSONAL
PROPERTY
[ ] 370 OTHER FRAUD
[ I 371
TRUTH IN LENDING
[
]380
OTHER PERSONAL
PROPERTY DAMAGE
[ I
385 PROPERTY DAMAGE
PRODUCT LIABILITY
PRISONER PETinONS
[ ] 463 ALIEN DETAINEE
[ ] 510 MOTIONS TO
VACATE SENTENCE
28
usc
2255
LABOR
[ I
710 FAIR LABOR
STANDARDS ACT
[ I 720 LABOR/MGMT
RELATIONS
[ ] 740 RAILWAY LABOR ACT
[ I 751 FAMILY MEDICAL
LEAVE ACT (FMLA)
[
]530
HABEAS CORPUS [
]790
OTHER LABOR
[ ] 535 DEATH PENAL TY LITIGATION
[ ] 440 OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ( ] 540 MANDAMUS & OTHER [ ]791 EMPL RET INC
(Non-Prisoner) SECURITY ACT
[ J
441 VOTING
IMMIGRATION
[ ]442 EMPLOYMENT
PRISONER CIVIL
RIGHTS
[ ] 443 HOUSING/ [ ] 462 NATURALIZATION
ACCOMMODATIONS [ ]550 CIVIL RIGHTS APPLICATION
[ ] 445 AMERICANS WITH [
]555
PRISON CONDITION [
]465
OTHER IMMIGRATION
DISABILITIES- [ ]560 CIVIL DETAINEE ACTIONS
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT
[
]446
AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES -OTHER
[
]448.
EDUCATION
Check i demanded in complaint
ACTIONS UNDER STATUTES
BANKRUPTCY
[ 14 22 APPEAL
28
usc
158
[ I
423 WITHDRAWAL
28
usc
157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
[ J
820 COPYRIGHTS
[
]830
PATENT
[ I 840 TRADEMARK
SOCIAL SECURITY
[ I 861 HIA (1395ff)
[
]862
BLACK LUNG (923)
[ ] 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
[ ]864 SSID TITLE XVI
[ I 865 RSI (405(g))
FEDERAL TAX SUITS
[ J 870 TAXES (U.S. Plaintiff or
Defendant)
[ I
871
IRS-THIRD PARTY
26
usc
7609
OTHER STATUTES
l
]
75 FALSE CLAIMS
}400 STATE
REAPPORTIONME
[ I 410 ANTITRUST
[ I 430 BANKS & BANKING
[ I 450 COMMERCE
[ 1460 DEPORTATION
[ 1470 RACKETEER INFLU
ENCED CORRU
ORGANIZATION
A
(RICO)
[ ] 480 CONSUMER CRED
[ ]490 CABLE/SATELLIT
[ I 850 SECURITIES/
COMMODITIES/
EXCHANGE
[ 1890 OTHER STATUTOR
ACTIONS
[ ] 891 AGRICULTURAL AC
[ I 893 ENVIRONMENTAL
MATIERS
[ I 895 FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION AC
[ ] 896 ARBITRATION
[ 899ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURE ACT/REV
APPEAL OF AGENCY D
[ ] 950 CONSTITUTIONA
STATE STATUTES
1 ;1 CHECK IF THIS
IS
A
CLASS ACTION
~ U N E R
F.R.C.P.
23.
f ( P s b ~ M T A ~ ~
THIS CASE IS RELATED TO A CIVIL CASE NOW PENDING
IN
S.D.N.Y.
DEMAND
_________
OTHER
_________ JUDGE ______________________
DOCKETNUMBER.
_________
Check Y S only i demanded in
CO ]plaint
JURY DEMAND: [ ]YES
LNO
NOTE: You must also submit at the time
of
filing the Statement
of
Relatedness form (Form
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 67/67
PLACE
AN
IN
ONE BOX
ONLY)
{ ] 1 Original
Proceeding
D 2
Removed from
D 3
State Court
D
a all parties represented
D b. At least one
party
is
pro sa.
Remanded
from
Appellate
Court
ORIGIN
D 4 Reinstated or
Reopened
D 5 Transferred from
(Specify District)
6 Multidistrict
Litigation
D
7
Appeal to Dis
Judge from
Magistrate Ju
Judgment
PLACE AN IN ONE
BOX
ONLY)
0
1
U.S. PLAINTIFF
0
2
U.S. DEFENDANT
BASIS OF JURISDICTION
3
FEDERAL QUESTION
(U.S. NOT A PARTY)
{ ]4
DIVERSITY
IF DIVERSITY, INDICATE
QTIZENSHIP
BELOW.
CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (FOR DIVERSITY CASES ONLY)
(Place an
[X)
in one box for Plaintiff and one box for Defendant)
PTF DEF
CITIZEN OF THIS STATE
PTF DEF
[ ] 1 [ ] 1 CITIZEN OR SUBJECT
OF
A
FOREIGN COUNTRY
PTF DEF
] 3
]
3
INCORPORATED and PRINCIPAL PLACE [ ] 5 [ ]
CITIZEN
OF
ANOTHER STATE [x]2 [ ] 2
INCORPORATED or PRINCIPAL PLACE [ ] 4 [
14
OF BUSINESS IN THIS STATE
PLAINTIFF{S) ADDRESS{ES)
AND
COUNTY(IES)
7560 Hillside Drive, La Jolla, CA 92037 (San Diego County)
3481 Griffiths Spring, Flagstaff,
AZ
86005 (Coconino County)
DEFENDANT{S) ADDRESS(ES)
AND
COUNTY{IES)
OF BUSINESS IN ANOTHER STATE
FOREIGN NATION
Pearson, PLC, 1330 Avenue
of
the Americas, New York, NY 10019 (New York County)
Pearson, Inc., 1330 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10019 (New York County)
] 6
]
6
Pearson Education, Inc., One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458 (Bergen County)
DEFENDANT{S) ADDRESS
UNKNOWN
REPRESENTATION IS HEREBY MADE THAT, AT THIS TIME, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE, WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE, TO ASCERTAIN
RESiaENCE ADDRESSES OF THE FOLLOWING DEFENDANTS:
Check one: THIS ACTION SHOULD BE ASSIGNED TO:
0
WHITE PLAINS [ ] MANHATTAN
(DO NOT check either box
if
this a PRISONER PETITION/PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS
COMPLAINT.)
DATE
10/29/14
SIGNATURE
O ~ T T O R N E
ADMITTED TO PRACTICE
IN
THIS DISTRICT