"But Mr. Shirley and his lawyer contend that Mr. Perlstein paraphrased original research without properly giving credit. 'The rephrasing of words without proper attribution is still plagiarism,' Mr. Shirley said in an interview."
Sam Tanenhaus about to slam in an Atlantic review (update, they just posted), but he 's a conservative who also hit, in the NYT Book Review, my otherwise very well-received book on the Nixon-Douglas Senate race.
Most of the claims of plagiarism actually relate to re-used "facts," which as Perlstein's lawyers point out are far from "copyrightable." But I have to say, Perlstein asked for trouble by putting all of his footnotes/endnotes online. When he asked his Facebook friends what we thought of it, I replied that it was foolish--selling hardbacks but expecting people to pop out their iPads or phones to find a citation. He later admitted that vast majority agreed with me, at least in that posting.
UPDATE An email to me from Perlstein this morning, includes letters back and forth from lawyers and this:
Meanwhile I want to call to your attention the true evil absurdity of the charge, which its authors admit to be ideologically motivated. Review the attached letters. It's scandalous that the New York Times decided to elevate this to the level of he said/she said "controversy." Craig Shirley, by the way, is also Ann Coulter's and Dinesh D'Souza's publicist.