Assange Lashes Out at Release of 'Unauthorized Autobiography' - New York Times (blog)

Last week, it was an eBay auction of WikiLeaks memorabilia inscribed by "Julian A."

Now comes the publication of an improbably titled "Julian Assange: The Unauthorised Autobiography," a portrait of the anti-secrecy group's heavily mediatized founder that has been disowned by its subject.

If the auction relied on celebrity to raise money for the group, Mr. Assange said the book was conceived for the same reason. But regardless of what is done with the proceeds, the publication of the book — with its glamor-shot cover and made-for-headlines controversy — is likely to have the same effect of furthering the reputation of WikiLeaks as a platform for Mr. Assange over its preferred image as a champion of transparency.

As the book was released in Britain on Thursday and expected in stores by Friday, Mr. Assange posted a lengthy statement online disowning the project and lashing out against the publisher, Canongate. He said he first learned that the publication had gone forward, and that the 70,000 word manuscript would be imminently appearing, while reading the Independent newspaper, which is publishing excerpts of the book.

He said that he had agreed to write the book as a way of raising money for WikiLeaks — which has been strapped for cash after the publication of 250,000 diplomatic cables led several major banks and payment services to stop working with the group — and he defended his co-author, Andrew O'Hagan.

"I am not 'the writer' of this book," Mr. Assange wrote. "It is a narrative and literary interpretation of a conversation between the writer and me. Although I admire Mr. O'Hagan's writing, this draft was a work in progress."

But he adds:

My ability to comment on the content of the book is limited. I am aware that there have been edits to the draft of 31 March 2011, but I do not know what they are. Andrew O'Hagan has not been shown the final edit. Tomorrow, I will have to buy 'my autobiography' in order to learn the extent of the errors and inaccuracies of the content of the book, but the damage is done.

The publication of Mr. Assange's work without his permission — a leak of sorts — appeared sublimely ironic to many observers, including John Perry Barlow, a co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who observed:

But, as the Independent reports, the book was not leaked, per se. Instead, it was surreptitiously published and shipped to thousands of stores in Britain over Mr. Assange's objections, which he lodged in March after reading a draft and declaring, "All memoir is prostitution."

The book begins with a note from the publisher explaining the reasons for pressing ahead with the unauthorized autobiography; the company also released the note in a press release and reproduced it on the the book's Amazon page:

We disagree with Julian's assessment of the book. We believe it explains both the man and his work, underlining his commitment to the truth. Julian always claimed the book was well written; we agree, and this also encouraged us to make the book available to readers.

And the contract? By the time Julian wanted to cancel the deal he had already used the advance money to settle his legal bills. So the contract still stands. We have decided to honour it – and to publish.

This book is the unauthorised first draft. It is passionate, provocative and opinionated – like its author. It fulfills the promise of the original proposal and we are proud to publish it.

Canongate Books, September 2011

Some journalists, including Tim Bradshaw of the Financial Times, obtained their copies of the book on Thursday and were sending out short bits via Twitter as they read it.

It was unclear whether the publication would result in any legal action by Mr. Assange, though he appeared to rule it out for financial reasons in his statement on Thursday. He said that a lack of funds prevented him from obtaining an injunction against the book's publication last week "because I as the claimant must give a cross undertaking for damages when applying for an injunction. This means that I would be required to demonstrate that I was in the financial position to undertake to pay damages to Canongate in the event that the injunction should not have been granted.

"I am not in a position to provide such an undertaking," he wrote.