I had a blog called "Fugue State" for a while, even though there was already a webzine by that name (but no other blogs that I could find). I was increasingly paranoid that someone from the Fugue State zine would e-mail me and ask me to give up the name, so I finally just used my own name as the title.

I think Newton was probably in the clear ethically, but I can understand why she changed it.

However, what I can't find is a link to any comment from Theresa Nielsen Hayden explaining her discomfort, so I'm assuming she and Newton hashed this out in private communication--so I don't want to be critical of Nielsen Hayden without having seen her viewpoint.

Never mind the "private communication" comment. Maud Newton said she followed a referrer link and didn't actually get an e-mail from Nielsen Hayden. Still, I can't find Theresa's comment online anywhere, so just color me confused.

It's actually in Nielsen Hayden's sidebar featurette, and was recently squeezed off her main blog page--and Maud quoted her in her entirety. Hope this clarifies things!

Having been the one who suggested the name to Maud, I feel bad for having put her in harm's way. I can say, though that (a) I didn't know about Hayden's book, (b) I was punning on gambling and, most importantly (c) you can't copyright a title, so Hayden really should cool out. It's hardly the most original title ever cobbled up.

I agree with TEV. If Maud's listening: Keep the title. It's perfect for what you're doing and Nielsen-Hayden doesn't have dibs on it. She can still use it herself and no one will care.

When my yet-to-be-published memoir, A Hundred Years of Solitude comes out I hope I don't have to take any shit from you hard guys.

I applaud Ms. Maud's sensitivity: Forget the ethics.Forget the law. She was more concerned about relieving a writer in (rightly or not)distress. You gotta love her...

Where I come from that makes her a real mensch.

I can understand why she'd change it. While titles are by no means copyrighted, they're both literary bloggers in the same litblog community, and that does make it uncomfortable.

There we differ: I don't see "Making Light" as a literary blog--though it does have some literary posts, it also has a bunch of political commentary, making it more of a generalist "publication"--and I don't even consider them in the same "litblog" community since I don't see a significant overlap in the set of people who comment on TNH's blog and people who comment regularly on bookblogs I read regularly. Obviously, there's SOME overlap, since somebody had to have emailed TNH to let her know Maud was using "her" title, but I don't think it's as substantial as, say, the overlap between Maud's audience and TEV's.

Anyway, I too can understand Maud's reasons for changing the title and I appreciate her graciousness in doing so. I just wish that graciousness was more common among other bloggers. Maud is a mensch, which means she shows people consideration even when they're being huge pains.

Nonsense. I just felt wistful about it. I know perfectly well that there's no copyright on titles. I ought to; I'm an editor. Probably I should just have written to Maud Newton about it, but I was going through a spell of feeling shy and diffident.

I'm still feeling shy, so I'll quit now and post this.