gitman v. pearson ed. complaint

67
8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 1/67 UN ED ST ~sfLTRCVouRT S 6 2 6 SOUTHERN I ~ ~ OF NEW YORK LAWRENCE J GITMAN AND MICHAEL D JOEHNK, on behalf of 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

Upload: mark-h-jaffe

Post on 02-Jun-2018

220 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 2: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 3: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 4: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 4/67

Page 5: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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.

Page 6: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 7: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 8: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 9: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 10: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 11: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 12: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 13: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 14: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 15: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 16: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 17: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 18: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 19: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 20: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 21: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 22: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 23: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 24: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 25: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 26: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

[email protected]

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

[email protected]

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

[email protected]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

26

Page 27: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 27/67

EXHI IT

Page 28: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

 

Page 29: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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.

Page 30: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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 < - ~

~

Page 31: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 31/67

. 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

,

Page 32: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 32/67

Page 33: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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? ·

Page 34: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 34/67

Page 35: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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 ~ ~ ~ <

Page 36: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 37: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 38: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

.

Page 39: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 39/67

Page 40: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 41: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 41/67

Page 42: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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'

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 

·

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

........,

.........___

.  .

.

  ·

Page 43: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 44: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 45: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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 .

.

Page 46: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 46/67

IIKIII IT

Page 47: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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,.

Page 48: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 48/67

Page 49: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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 &lt 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 ' .. . .

.

Page 50: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 51: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 52: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 52/67

Page 53: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 54: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 55: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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.

Page 56: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

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

Page 57: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

8/10/2019 Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gitman-v-pearson-ed-complaint 57/67

EXHI IT

Page 58: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 59: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 60: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 61: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

,.

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

Page 62: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 63: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 64: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

.

. '\.

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

Page 65: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 66: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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

Page 67: Gitman v. Pearson Ed. Complaint

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