View Single Post
Old 11-10-2009, 06:01 PM   #9
phenomshel
ZCD BombShel
phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phenomshel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
phenomshel's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,793
Karma: 8293322
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Frozen North (aka Illinois, USA)
Device: iPad, STB Kindle Oasis
Quote:
Originally Posted by jament View Post
I respect those opinions but still disagree. If your theories are true, why wouldn't King publicly denounce the decision? What motive would he have to grin and bear it?

Anyway, even if publishers rule with an iron fist, it seems like it won't be for much longer. As Mark Coker wrote:

"The power center in publishing will shift from publisher to author, and the traditional line between the two will continue to blur. Authors will become their own publishers. Commercial publishers will become service providers.

Commercially successful authors will have greater leverage to negotiate higher royalties and advances. They may also demand to retain digital rights, since the means of ebook distribution are now available to any author at no cost.

Some commercially successful authors will go indie. It's only a matter of time before New York Times best-selling authors, including those on the level of Stephen King, Dan Brown, James Patterson, and J.K. Rowling, realize they can self-publish their next book. Such a prospect should chill the spine of any publisher whose business is based on big hits."

I don't believe that The Publisher would risk alienating King over an issue like this. Not when authors may start decoupling digital rights from written works. Coker said in an interview:

"A few weeks ago I spoke with one successful author who was considering selling print rights for his next book to a large publisher, because the publisher can get him great placement at the front of bookstores. However, he’s considering retaining digital rights for himself since he can distribute through Smashwords and retain 85 percent of the net for himself. Whether publishers will allow such a decoupling remains to be seen."
You have some very good points. However, I submit these thoughts: While Stephen King is big-name enough to go anywhere he wants with his book rights (depending on his contract length), he may have other reasons for not denouncing this boneheaded (in my opinion) decision from his publishing house.

Also, the decoupling of ebook rights from other rights is already receiving a setback from some publishers. I talked to Beth Groundwater about this very issue, and was informed that (in her agent's opinion) it isn't a smart idea, because some publishers want "the whole enchilada" with rights (ebook, audio, large print, etc.) and will not pick up an author if part of those rights already belongs to someone else or if the author wants to retain them. Beth isn't a big name, though, so the rules may be different for authors who are.
phenomshel is offline   Reply With Quote