Queried before reading the comments 11/11
Full request 11/12


Thank you for your recent submission, XXX, to Prospect Agency. I'd be pleased to consider your complete manuscript. Please send it via email as a PDF, with the original query pasted in the body of the email, and I will get back to you as soon as I can. Please be sure to include a number where I can reach you as well as a working email address. Should you receive another offer of representation, I would appreciate the opportunity to present my own response before you make a final decision. But in any case, I do ask to be informed right away should there be any change in the status of your submission.

Eek! Now what?!

I can add that Emily Sylvan Kim ("ESK") is a big red flag. Beware!

I was approached by a publisher to see if I was interested in a write-for-hire contract, which I ultimately chose not to do. The day after they approached me about it, ESK emailed me to say that her "friends" at the publishing house gave her a tip that I might be looking for representation and whether we could set up a call to see if we were a good fit. She seemed nice enough on the phone and we were in contact several times via email, but in the end it was very clear she was in it only for the easy 20%, even though I was the one who brought the work in. (Another agent had previously cautioned me that most agents will not take 20% if their author brings in the work.) What truly sealed the deal was that when we met in person at a conference, she spent our entire meeting telling me about the boroughs of NYC rather than talking about what we were meeting about (potential representation), and then cut the meeting short because she double booked and had to meet with another author. I definitely feel, especially in light of this lawsuit, that I dodged a bullet on this one.

Q 3/31/25

Adult Romance 84,000 words
Queried before reading the comments. Will let the query be and expect not to get a response given the very low rates.

Linked New Yorker article is behind a paywall. Archived (free) version can be found here

http://archive.today/sHeeq

There is a good article by the New Yorker that flushes out the current litigations. It's long but worth reading the entire thing. Don't skim read, do the work and fully read it. There's a lot of explanation for both sides throughout that should be considered. (There is a snippet below from another poster which is fair, but it's only 5% of the entire article, not fully contextual.)

Everyone involved weighs in and responds to some of the allegations. So, yes, there have been replies from the authors, agents, and editors involved. But also know that somethings probably can't be discussed publicly while this is still in court.

Also note, this is not a new suit, it was filed in 2022 but just got traction on social media via posts that are more click-bait fast-strike-witch-hunt opinions than well researched fact sharing. Do the research and decide what's best for you as a writer. (scroll down...)

If the claims are true, this is horrible and professionally unforgivable. If they are not true, this is a much bigger issue dealing with tropes, ideas, and genre similarities. Can someone sue for similar ideas? Either way, this is messy. No updates on the case yet, the court is still deciding.

Read entire article here: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/01/13/did-a-best-selling-romantasy-novelist-steal-another-writers-story