Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Well, sure, exclusive publishing contracts are indeed normal, but it strikes me that only a fool would sign a contract granting such rights for the whole of the copyright term. Always, always get a contract checked by a lawyer specialising in intellectual property rights before signing, and make sure you know exactly what rights you're granting.
|
I tend to agree with you, Harry, though you are probably being a little harsh on virtually all traditionally published authors. Other clauses in these contracts provided mechanisms for the author to ask for reversion in certain circumstances, and I seem to recall something about the US providing an option to the author for reversion after something like 30 or 40 years. Those who used lawyers rather than agents may have done a little better, but for most authors this term was not negotiable. Lawyers would of course advise how unreasonable it was but had to concede that it was industry practice. An industry practice which developed when only few were chosen for publication and where the only alternative was the vanity presses. There was no practical alternative.
Unfortunately anecdotal evidence suggests nothing has changed with this term, and that publishers are engaging in a rights grab. Unfortunately there still seem to be many new authors who want to be traditionally published no matter the terms.