Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
Very true. The traditional publishing industry is not unique in using "agents". But literary agents are largely unregulated, and, unlike most other agents, are usually dependant on a relatively small number of publishers with whom they have close relationships. It is generally not in their interests to aggressively pursue their clients' interests, which is one reason why such terrible contract provisions have lasted for so long. They became an industry standard and what literary agent was going to contest an industry standard. Similar with sports agents who are "accredited" by the bodies they negotiate with.
Thanks for this. I only had a vague recollection of it. Better than nothing, of course, but not particularly helpful.
|
In the US, most literary agents belong to an organization ( Association of Authors' Representatives
http://aaronline.org/) so like many such groups - lawyers, union plumbers, electricians and the like, there is a level of self regulation. You can at least file a complaint and they have a code of ethics.
Like sports agents, if you are a super star, you can get all sorts of things put in your contract. If you aren't, then you have a lot less leverage. My understanding is that most publishing houses have a standard contract, and you start negotiation from there. Based on what I read, and I am certainly no expert, it sounds like reversion of rights is one of those things that most publishing houses are willing to grant, but you have to ask and you have to be willing to give up something to get something.