View Single Post
Old 08-06-2008, 12:11 PM   #110
DMcCunney
New York Editor
DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DMcCunney's Avatar
 
Posts: 6,384
Karma: 16540415
Join Date: Aug 2007
Device: PalmTX, Pocket eDGe, Alcatel Fierce 4, RCA Viking Pro 10, Nexus 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by LazyScot View Post
Note that with the rise of Print on Demand the concept of a title going out of print has become somewhat redundant.

(I'm sure there will be some interesting debates on what the copyright date on a print-on-demand book is; for instance some places claim a copyright date based on when a webpage is served, and not when it was written.)
No, it hasn't. Current publishing contracts tend to specify minimum sales levels for ebook and POD editions for a title to be considered "in print". Just because it is technically available, doesn't mean the publisher is making any active efforts to sell it.

Sales below the specified level are considered evidence that the publisher is no longer actively trying to sell the title, and the rights should revert.
______
Dennis
DMcCunney is offline   Reply With Quote