Tag Archives: rights

Endangered Species Vs Cultural Tradition

Our world is in trouble in a lot of ways and anyone, whether an individual or a government, who denies this is practicing the head in the sand technique. Overfishing has caused the closing of fisheries in numerous countries, caribou herds are threatened, whales are on the endangered list , rhinos and tigers and other large land mammals are in danger of extinction. The list of endangered or near extinct fauna is extensive. Not all are hunted by humans for food or trophyism but the ones that are hunted/farmed/fished for food run into more conflict.

There are the people who make their livelihoods/their jobs from hunting a particular land or marine animal. When they are told they can’t do this anymore they are rightfully upset, scared of a future that is uncertain at best. Then there are native peoples of the lands, whether they’re Native Americans/First Nations, Danes, Laplanders, or Fiji Islanders (to name a few), they all have centuries of traditions and customs.

In many pre-industrial societies, food was a focus of stability. Towns and cities were often built on fertile land near water sources. Herds of animals were domesticated or hunted near villages. Customs, rituals and spiritual rites took place around food and the creatures that sustained the life of a people. These were so ingrained that you cannot separate an animal from the ritual. Initiatory rites as well as rituals for sustenance and good hunting were common.

But time is time, and everything changes through time. The land shifts, erodes and buckles. Species ebb and flow with the changing seasons and shift in climates, and from natural disasters. Although a species can hunt another to extinction, especially if it’s transplanted from its natural habitat, it’s not common. Only homo sapiens have been so resilient, adaptive and creative to live anywhere and hunt what they need. In most ecosystems if the predator overhunts the prey, the predators flourish but then there is not enough prey and the predators die back, maintaining a natural balance.

Only the human species has been able to circumvent this natural balance, bringing technology to bear on the environment to the point of detriment for every living thing including people. And so we have species all over the world that are endangered, protected or becoming extinct and yes, there are many species becoming memories only. Then we have traditional cultures saying, “We have always done this. It’s part of our traditions. It’s you people who disturbed the balance, not us.”

Governments are trying to protect dwindling resources so there will be something to hunt in the future and have placed restrictions and moratoria on different species. Sometimes only a certain quota is allowed to be taken and then there is more conflict. As in the missing salmon this year on the Pacific coast. There was nothing to fish. If anyone, Native or other fisherman wanted to take the fish because it was their right, if would diminish a chance for that species to survive. And now we have Innu hunters shooting caribou in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The thing is, it is their right to do so and have some protection based on ancestral tradition. That’s fine, but conservation officials say that a particular type of caribou, the Red Wine, have moved in amongst the other more prolific herd. There is supposed to be less than 100 of the Red Wine caribou left and they’re protected. The interesting thing is that five years ago Grand Chief Penashue  said about hunters in the protected preserver, “The hunt in the Red Wine caribou range was not just an illegal protest, it was completely inconsistent with Innu values. … Putting a threatened caribou herd at further risk can never be justified on the basis of aboriginal rights.”

Yet today this same chief is supporting the hunting of the caribou because statistically fewer would be hit compared to the George River herd. Seems those ancestral Innu values have changed. So it’s only good to assert traditional rights when it suits you and because the ministry or the government aren’t working with you, it’s now all right to hunt endangered species?

What is not right is asserting traditional and cultural rights over species that are endangered. To do so is pure stupidity because there will be nothing to fight over or use in traditional ways in a very near future. This is the biggest problem when various cultures try to assert their rights because it’s always been done this way. And where do we draw the timeline if someone says, we’ve done it this way for a hundred years, a thousand years, or whatever. Just because one’s ancestors did it doesn’t mean we can continue to do it, whatever it may be. The world has changed and denying that does no good.

I support the right of people to keep their traditions (that’s all those unique cultures all over the world) but not at the expense of losing endangered species or in subjugating other people. Our ancestors did all sorts of things, including using outhouses, killing and beating people and eating foods we wouldn’t touch. They lived without central heating, they sewed everything by hand and only the richest (or the military) might have gone more than a hundred miles from their local village. Life was constant hard work. We cannot always say, because my people once did it I have the right to do it now. We have to be reasonable and holding a species as hostage to get your way is the same as saying well you won’t listen to me so I’ll just beat this kid until I get my way. They’re both innocent (caribou or child) and some healthy reasoning should come in to play as opposed to punishing/speeding the extinction of the species. In this case the Innu should be ashamed of themselves because even killing one more of an endangered herd lessens its chance for viability and recovery.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/labrador-innu-break-hunting-ban-kill-64-caribou/article1370834/

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under Culture, environment, food, history, life, nature, news, people, spirituality

Google Book Settlement

The Google book settlement hits its deadline on May 5, 2009. Before this date, if you have ever written anything that was published in the US (or possibly distributed into the US) you will want to read the long and convoluted double speak of the settlement issues. You must choose to opt out, stay in and/or write and comment by this date. If you are an author, publisher or otherwise know someone in the business, then I encourage you to immediately go here and read all about this before you lose rights you didn’t know you were losing: http://www.googlebooksettlement.com/r/home

I first discovered some of my short stories, published in an anthology being displayed on the internet through Google. When I searched I could get all but one page of my story. If I searched from a different computer I could get the missing pages. I was shocked at the wholesale copying, with no authorization or signing of rights having been given for electronic rights. At that time I contacted the editor of the anthology and she told me that she was just as shocked.

As time rippled along, authors and publishers banded together and approached Google. The Book Settlement resulted. Now, if we back up a bit many of us will remember a time before Google but after DOS. The internet had search engines like Lycos and Yahoo and a few others. Then Google came along, big, better, the giant fish that swallowed the smaller fellows. Then Google did this cool thing, taking satellite images of the whole planet and Google Earth was born. You could zoom in on any part of the planet and look at it as it is. Then Google started driving up and down every street in every city, scanning in houses, street signs, corners, you name it. And people started getting a bit worried when they did a Google search and could see themselves in their yards or living rooms, or wherever.

And Google of course said, oh we blur the faces but people said they could identify people. And Google said, well if you let us know, we’ll remove the image.Google did the same with numerous books, scanning them in, popping them up on the internet even though people had not sold or authorized digital rights. My vanity search today shows that those titles in which my stories were almost completely visible are no longer up (while the settlement is being settled at least). The settlement is long, full of legalese and double takes to the point that I think only a copyright lawyer might follow it completely. In the long run, Google argues, this will be a good thing for authors where they will get 63% (of sales from these visible scans), that no more than 20% of a book will be visible, that libraries can have digitized copies, etc. And probably it will be a good thing.

However, within all that mire that I’m still wading through and trying to figure out before I write my letter of comment, there are provisions for Google to have more rights to your work should it not be in print. Even when a person’s book is no longer in print, that person still holds the copyright on their work but Google somehow thinks they will then have the right to digitize it. There are other such caveats that already have my head spinning.

Strangely this gives Google the right (in their minds) to scan, copy and digitize anything anyone sees and only if you complain or notice will they remove it. Can anyone say, Big Brother is Watching? We have a right to some privacy whether we’re doing anything bad or not, but because Google shoots first and ask questions later (or does as they please and waits to see if a lawsuit ensues) they’re getting far more by just taking. I find this hugely disturbing with ramifications that people haven’t seen yet. The biggest problem is devil or the deep blue sea of the settlement: if you opt out, you can sue Google or complain about the books they’re scanning in but they may still do it anyway. If you opt in, you can’t sue Google and they will scan your books. There are areas where you can ask them not to display your book (or your story in an anthology) should they scan it but there are so many exceptions I’m not sure it doesn’t mean they can do what they want no matter what.

Actually a problem even bigger than this is : why does Google get this settlement worked out that gives them a whole helluva lot of rights over written works? Why only Google? Why doesn’t the settlement mention other possible publishers, authors and digitizers of media? Because people were suing Google. But…this now sets up a precedent of exclusivity and I worry that in the future should I want to digitize my own book that I may need Google’s permission. Or that any out of print and public domain book (think Shakespeare, Hans Christian Andersen, Greek myths, fairy tales, etc.) will now only be exclusively digitized by Google. This large Chthulhian entity with many limbs of legality and money in its maw could swallow everything including our rights, our privacy and our ability to differentiation. And when it gets right down to it, I smell monopoly and that worries me a lot.

On the SF Canada writers list we discussed this quite a bit. Cory Doctorow, http://craphound.com/writer and co-editor of Boing Boing http://boingboing.net/ was very involved in the discussion. Someone finally asked him what he thought about the Google Book Settlement. He and I are pretty much on the same page. As Cory is more knowledgeable of the intricacies in the settlement and Google I asked if I could put his response here:

I think it missed the real point, which is competition. The risk to writers is that Google might end up having a disproportionate control over the distribution channel. The risk arises from Google ending up with exclusive rights to material, and from the cost of entry to its competitors.

The publishers had leverage to fix both of these, by saying:

* We will offer a feed of all our books in digital form to every search company or tool that wants to index them (much like the machine-readable digital feeds coming out of change.gov and the Obama administration)

* However, NO company may have this feed, UNLESS they agree that any public domain works they scan will be freely downloadable by their competitors. Right now, Google’s arrangement with the libraries and collections they’re scanning involves exclusive access to the public domain works in their collection (many of these are very rare). This means that GOOG might end up the sole holder of a collection encompassing millions of PD works, which enshrines a permanent advantage to Google through contract terms restricting otherwise free media, which will prevent their competitors from having a level playing field.

Contrast this with the existing settlement, which basically says:

1. Google can go on treating the public domain as private property

2. Anyone who wants to compete with Google should be prepared to spend millions in legal action with the publishers, so only the richest, least lawsuit-adverse competitors need apply

Google was able to completely change the Internet’s ecosystem and destroy several extremely well-capitalized competitors from a standing start — literally two guys in a garage — because the cost of entry was low and because there was nothing about the web that Altavista, Yahoo, etc. could index that Google couldn’t index as well.

The competitive market for search produced an amazing, world-changing array of services and tools that have given us all a better life.

Now, Google is trying to enshrine its victory by changing the search landscape, creating a web of contracts and legal settlements that will permanently prevent competitors from competing with it head on. They tried it (and failed) with Google Video. They tried it (and succeeded) with YouTube, through their settlements and exclusive content deals with video companies. They tried it (and succeeded) with their Google Print settlement.

Writers’ best future comes from having a fractured, competitive market for search, distribution, publication, discovery — all the services that comprise the channel through which our audiences discover, consume and publicize our material.

The best way to get that is to *reduce* the cost of entry for competitors, which means that the cost of entry *cannot* include 20 million dollars in legal fees and twenty billion dollars in potential liability.

If the price of admission is a staff of high-powered attorneys and the capital to face massive liability, expect a future characterized by a few gigantic media oligarchs to whom we must go, hat in hand, to beg for crumbs.

Cory

***

THE SETTLEMENT NOTICE I RECEIVED:

You are receiving this notice because our records indicate you are an author or author’s heir or successor, and your legal rights in the United States may therefore be affected by the settlement of a class action lawsuit in the United States regarding Google’s scanning of books and other writings.

 A summary of the Google Book Search settlement appears at the end of this email.

 Detailed information about the settlement is available at http://www.googlebooksettlement.com.  Please read the full Notice, which has detailed information about the settlement, important terms, the claims process, and key dates.  It is available at http://www.googlebooksettlement.com/notice.html. These documents and assistance with the claims process are also available from the Settlement Administrator by email (booksettlement_en@rustconsulting.com) or telephone.

 If you have questions about the settlement, please visit http://www.googlebooksettlement.com or email the Settlement Administrator at booksettlement_en@rustconsulting.com.  If you have questions about distributing the Notice or about the ongoing program to notify class members worldwide about this settlement, please contact the Notice Provider at GoogleSettlement@kinsella-novak.com.

 Sincerely,
Google Book Search Settlement Administrator
booksettlement_en@rustconsulting.com

Legal Notice

Persons Outside the United States: This settlement may affect you because it covers U.S. copyright interests in books published outside the United States. If you hold such an interest in a book or other material in a book, this settlement will bind you unless you timely opt out.
——————————————————————————–

If You Are a Book Author, Book Publisher or Other Person Who Owns a Copyright in a Book or Other Writing, Your rights may be affected by a class action settlement regarding Google’s scanning and use of Books and other writings.

Authors and publishers filed a class action lawsuit, claiming Google violated the copyrights of authors, publishers and other copyright holders (“Rightsholders”) by scanning in-copyright Books and Inserts, and displaying excerpts, without permission. Google denies the claims. The parties have agreed to a settlement. This summary provides basic information about the settlement. “Books” and “Inserts” are described below.

What Does the Settlement Provide?

The settlement, if Court-approved, will authorize Google to scan in-copyright Books and Inserts in the United States, and maintain an electronic database of Books. For out-of-print Books and, if permitted by Rightsholders of in-print Books, Google will be able to sell access to individual Books and institutional subscriptions to the database, place advertisements on any page dedicated to a Book, and make other commercial uses of Books. At any time, Rightsholders can change instructions to Google regarding any of those uses. Through a Book Rights Registry (“Registry”) established by the settlement, Google will pay Rightsholders 63% of all revenues from these uses.

Google also will pay $34.5 million to establish and fund the initial operations of the Registry and for notice and settlement administration costs, and at least $45 million for cash payments to Rightsholders of Books and Inserts that Google scans prior to the deadline for opting out of the settlement.

Who Is Included?

The settlement class includes all persons worldwide who own a U.S. copyright interest in any Book or Insert. The meaning of “U.S. copyright interest” is broad. Wherever you are located, please read the full Notice to determine whether you are included in the settlement.

There are two Sub-Classes:

The “Author Sub-Class” (authors of Books and other writings, and their heirs, successors and assigns), and
The “Publisher Sub-Class” (publishers of Books and periodicals, and their successors and assigns).
What Material Is Covered?

“Books” include in-copyright written works, such as novels, textbooks, dissertations, and other writings, that were published or distributed in hard copy format on or before January 5, 2009. U.S. works must be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office to be included in the settlement. “Books” do not include periodicals, personal papers, sheet music, and public domain or government works.

“Inserts” include any text and other material, such as forewords, essays, poems, quotations, letters, song lyrics, children’s Book illustrations, sheet music, charts, and graphs, if independently protected by U.S. copyright, contained in a Book, a government work or a public domain book published on or before January 5, 2009 and, if U.S. works, registered (alone or as part of another work) with the U.S. Copyright Office. Inserts do not include pictorial content (except for children’s Book illustrations), or any public domain or government works.

The Notice contains a more detailed description of these terms and other essential information about the settlement.

What Should I do?

Please read the full Notice, which is available at http://www.googlebooksettlement.com. Decide whether you should:

  • Remain in the settlement. If you do so, you will be bound by the Court’s rulings, including a release of your claims against Google.
  • Object to or comment on the settlement. You must object/comment in writing by May 5, 2009.
  • Opt out of the settlement and keep your right to sue Google individually. You must opt out in writing by May 5, 2009.
  • File a claim for a cash payment (if you are eligible to do so). You must file your claim by January 5, 2010.


The Court has appointed Class Counsel to represent the two Sub-Classes. If the settlement is approved, Class Counsel for the Author Sub-Class will request attorneys’ fees and expenses that Google has agreed to pay. You can also hire your own attorney at your own cost.

The Court will determine whether to approve the settlement at a Fairness Hearing on June 11, 2009 at 1:00 p.m.

Get Complete Information, Including the Full Notice:

Visit: http://www.googlebooksettlement.com
Call: Toll-Free 1.888.356.0248
Write: Google Book Search Settlement Administrator, c/o Rust Consulting
P.O. Box 9364, Minneapolis, MN 55440-9364 United States of America

 This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential or otherwise privileged information and is intended only for the individual(s) to which it is addressed. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secured or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message or that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version from the sender.
Rust Consulting, Inc.
www.rustconsulting.com

(Note that since I was the intended addressee I seem to be able to disseminate this and there is no reason to hide it.)

2 Comments

Filed under art, consumer affairs, Culture, entertainment, erotica, fairy tales, fantasy, horror, internet, news, people, poetry, Publishing, science fiction, security, Writing

Writing: Bitter Writer?

Back in September I wrote the blog Writing: Things to Watch Out For https://colleenanderson.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=445 On my other blog I received a letter titled “Bitter Writer Syndrome” a while back but didn’t get time to comment until now. Well, I pissed off Mr. Hobbes, and he was correct in that I presumed he was the head of Hobbes End Publishing, but at the time when I did research through the internet I didn’t find that information. Hobbes End website now mentions that Jairus Reddy is the publisher. http://hobbesendpublishing.com/index.html

So let’s look at Mr. Hobbes’ comments. (I have posted his full letter at the end so I can’t be accused of unfavorable editing.) “Being paid for one’s writing (rare in the industry) is not prostitution, but professionalism.” It is a matter of perspective and really we can all say we prostitute ourselves whenever we sell something for money, whether our services or our art. Of course what I meant was, selling oneself too cheaply. And yes, new writers do need to start somewhere and $100 is decent for 1,500 words but not for 30,000. Being paid for one’s writing is not rare in the industry. Book publishers, respectable book publishers, do it all the time. Just ask Random House, Bantam, Tor, Baen or any of the big name speculative publishers (or mainstream too).

Then he says: “The reason publishers ask for all rights is something that might be above your understanding.” It’s very well within my understanding and what Mr. Hobbes does not know is that in fact respectable publishers, as the ones named above do not take all rights. In fact, you can look at many smaller publishers such as Edge Publishing, Bundoran Press, Nightshade Books, etc. and none of them take all rights. I think it is he who is under the veil of misunderstanding.

Next he comments that the anthology he is editing “will also be highly publicized and promoted, which I can say most publishers don’t do. Many thousands of dollars will be spent doing so. Also, since you have not read our contract, you wouldn’t know what offers we are making towards secondary rights.” Any publisher who wants to stay in business promotes. But let’s look at Mr. Hobbes’ (along with authors Benoit and Palmer) first book Exiles in Time: The Contrived Senator. I did a google search of his name and the two titles for the book. I found the publisher’s website and of course the book listed on various online bookselling sites, such as Amazon. Granted that advertising also means ads in magazines, other print formats and local areas, I can’t know how much the publisher has put into this book. But of the four reviews on Amazon for the book, two were by the Reddys, owners of Hobbes End. I could find no review anywhere else and certainly not on any of the normal SF review sites. So uh, highly publicized? I also have to wonder what could possibly be their “secondary rights” after they’ve taken all of the rights. That’s a mystery that Mr. Hobbes didn’t elucidate.

“You mention, over and over again, magazines. However, this is not a magazine. This is for a novel.” That’s even sadder, taking all rights on a 30,000 word story as opposed to a 200 word article, not that one is better than the other. And I did, in my post, talk about publishers of magazines and books, who really don’t take all rights except for a few exceptions. He also says: “The financial risk is to the publisher—the opportunity is to the writer. Unlike a magazine, which is taken off the shelves monthly, this one will stay in publication indefinitely.” Except the writer also has a financial risk in trying to sell their work and get paid what they’re worth. And Mr. Hobbes is wrong. Books in chain stores also get taken off the shelves monthly or even after two weeks. Places like Chapters will keep a small smattering of some titles. Privately owned bookstores will keep books longer on the shelves and likewise for magazines that may not be monthly; some of them will keep these till they sell them all. It varies. The only guarantee is to have your book on Amazon, listed with thousands of others, whether self-published, small press published or major book published.

Mr. Hobbes added: “However, I have seven more [books] coming out next year, three of which are through major publishers.” I did a search and have found nothing listed but I no longer get the sneak previews into the upcoming  lists as I did when I was a book buyer. However, nothing is listed except the co-authored books on the Hobbes End site. I’ve found no other info. I have no idea what the quality of the writing is in these books or where else he’ll be published. Eventually, I’m sure we’ll see the lists and it’s up to each person what they think of a story. That is very prolific and Mr. Hobbes should be congratulated on completing three books plus the co-authoring of the others (which he didn’t mention they were co-authored).

He ends with a good thrust: “It sounds as if you suffer from ‘Bitter Writer Syndrome’. It happens to the best of writers who don’t seem to understand the risks publishers take to make it in the industry. Blaming publishers for not paying them ‘what they are worth’ is curable. If you want to ‘make it’ in this industry, I suggest you research before you post such nonsense.”

 Bitter writer? Nah. I’ve published enough and work on my novel. I’m about where my energies have taken me. And I’m afraid I understand the industry much better than Mr. Hobbes does and I know that buying all rights is not the norm nor fair. Buying all rights in perpetuity for a hundred bucks is not something I would ever do, even if I was selling my first piece. And over the years of selling pieces I have been careful not to sell to such rights. It’s one reason I pulled my poem from Sotto Voce, because I could not agree to their selection of rights.

As I said before, each person must make their own decision on what to give away and what to sell, and for how much. I do apologize to Mr. Hobbes for saying he owned the company but I would also suggest that perhaps he was just a bit bitter himself about my comments. And in reality, it all boils down to taking all rights which I caution writers to think more than twice about before they do it. But I don’t think I’ll be submitting to Hobbes End, not that they’d buy anything from me now anyways. 🙂

Bitter Writer Syndrome?

In response to your blog, “Things to Watch out for”—

You begin by stating that $100.00 is not a fair price. Everyone who has submitted thus far has had no issue with making money for their writing. Few writers do, and the intent with this project is to help out first time authors. Being paid for one’s writing (rare in the industry) is not prostitution, but professionalism.

The ad is clear and any writer who has a problem with ‘all rights’ is welcome to not submit. The reason publishers ask for all rights is something that might be above your understanding. The financial burden taken on by publishers is insane. Editors, printing, distribution and promotions add up. A writer is always welcome to self-publish if he or she worries about such things.

Each of our writers for this anthology will receive credit for their work. They will also be highly publicized and promoted, which I can say most publishers don’t do. Many thousands of dollars will be spent doing so. Also, since you have not read our contract, you wouldn’t know what offers we are making towards secondary rights.

Hobbes End Publishing is not a new publishing company. And your comment about ‘pros not submitting’ is uncalled for, since the point of this project is not for the pros, but for new writers.

You mention, over and over again, magazines. However, this is not a magazine. This is for a novel. It will receive major distribution and advertising. This will not only give authors opportunity to break into the industry, but give them the chance that other publishers, and magazines, don’t allow. The financial risk is to the publisher—the opportunity is to the writer. Unlike a magazine, which is taken off the shelves monthly, this one will stay in publication indefinitely.

What you should be complaining about are the publishers who make writer’s pay for their work to be published.

I have had one novel published by Hobbes End Publishing, you are correct. However, I have seven more coming out next year, three of which are through major publishers.

Also, make sure to check your facts. I have no ties to Hobbes End Publishing, with the exception of writing for them. I am not an owner and in no way control their agreements amongst writers. Please check your facts before stating what you do not know about. The company was simply named after a story I wrote.

It sounds as if you suffer from ‘Bitter Writer Syndrome’. It happens to the best of writers who don’t seem to understand the risks publishers take to make it in the industry. Blaming publishers for not paying them ‘what they are worth’ is curable.

If you want to ‘make it’ in this industry, I suggest you research before you post such nonsense.

Sincerely,
Vincent Hobbes

7 Comments

Filed under art, Culture, entertainment, fantasy, horror, life, people, Publishing, science fiction, Writing

Writing: Rights & Contracts

I decided to withdraw my poem from being published in the online magazine Sotto Voce. Often one is paid little to have a poem published. I’ve received everything from $5-$100 for poetry. Of course, I would like to get more rather than less but I’ll sell a poem for $10 if the magazine looks respectable. What I won’t do though, is give my poem away for free.

Likewise, I do read contracts and do take them seriously. Sotto Voce stated they had exclusive rights to put the poem on their website for 120 days. Okay, not a big problem and fairly standard. They also said that at the end of that period all rights revert to the author, but then went on to say they took the nonexclusive right to keep the poem in their archives, as well as using it in a print, audio or other format, should they so choose.

Keeping something in a magazine’s archive is becoming more standard and some magazines will take it down should you resell the piece. Others may not. I could live with that but the nonexclusive rights on print, audio and other were bothersome. Most publishers may ask for the nonexclusive right, which often means first refusal on a print anthology (or whatever they specify) but they will at that time negotiate to pay for that right. Some magazines may say, we take print and anthology rights.

Their use of having an open-ended nonexclusive right in which they informed me that they would not pay additionally bothered me. It also meant that should I try to sell the poem to a print magazine I could jeopardize that sale because it might have been printed already. Given the vagueness of their all-encompassing, nonexclusive rights, I wasn’t sure that I would be notified if they used it elsewise.

Normally, each right is a separate thing: world rights, first North American rights, electronic rights, audio rights, print rights, etc. It’s a hodgepodge and can be very confusing and many publishers will try to lump it all together to get as much as they can for the price of one. I usually ask if I’m not clear, and contracts are often weird legalese. Since I neither needed the modest pay nor the publishing credit (though it’s always nice to have more) and because I was uncomfortable with this contract and didn’t like the exclusive nonexclusive rights they seemed to be taking, I said no after consulting with other writers (just in case I was getting overly picky).

Often contracts can be adjusted. When I receive a written contract I will sometimes write in or cross off something. So far no one has said no to those changes. There is leeway in most cases. Sotto Voce didn’t seem to want to do this and their contract was online with places just to fill out. Not much room for adjusting it. If they had paid more I might have gone with selling the poem to them. But not for peanuts.

Harlequin also had a fairly specific contract that asks for all rights (print, online, audio, ads, etc.) for a period of time. However, they are paying a whole lot more and the contract has a clause that should they go to other formats or languages, reprint, digital, etc. that those fees will be negotiated. I asked the editor about some parts of that contract but decided to go with it, although Harlequin doesn’t specify how long they keep those rights before releasing them. That bothers me and in retrospect I maybe should have put a limit. It might not be too late.

Contracts really do take experts and the wording is often vague or misleading. There are lawyers that specialize in such but we little writers don’t tend to go that route for small sales. There are agents who also specialize in understanding contracts and if you’re selling a book, they can help with the nuances of the rights. As well, many small publishers don’t always realize what they’re asking for and sometimes need educating. In the past I’ve had to mention this to a few new publishers. In the end, it’s up to each person as to what they’re comfortable with selling or giving away. And to me, it’s not about the money so much, but about respecting the writer and the writing.

3 Comments

Filed under Culture, erotica, fantasy, horror, people, poetry, Publishing, science fiction, Writing