Comments on: William Styron and Droit de Seigneur

By: Laurel L. Russwurm

Laurel L. Russwurm — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 23:38:12 +0000

Wow. Hearing about the Styron legal battle was the deciding factor in my decision to not even consider mainstream publishing my debut novel. This article was interesting but the opinions and information dripping from the comments tell me clearly that I’ve made the right choice.

I especially liked:

“Perhaps the rise of ebooks will take enough profitability out of publishing that the business of fiction can die and the art of fiction return.” ~ Candida Ellis

By: How not to to negotiate for digital rights - BLOGOS

How not to to negotiate for digital rights - BLOGOS — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:35:40 +0000

[...] William Styron and Droit de Seigneur (booksquare.com) [...]

By: Moriah Jovan

Moriah Jovan — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 01:00:59 +0000

Pricing e-books at the same cost as a first edition hardback is prohibitive and it works against the publisher.

It’s my opinion that prohibitively pricing e-books is a misguided attempt to kill the market.

By: J. M. Cornwell

J. M. Cornwell — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:23:52 +0000

As long as the book is changed, and in this case means formatted for the e-book market, that constitutes a change. The rights belong to the copyright owner and since, in this case with Styron, the rights did not include digital rights, RH does not have a legal or ethical leg to stand on.

Pricing e-books at the same cost as a first edition hardback is prohibitive and it works against the publisher. Someone interested in trying an author’s work will either go to a library or borrow a book from someone else because they are not going to shell out hardcover price for something as transient as an e-book. You are right. Publishers aren’t looking at the digital market with clear eyes. They need to remove the blinders and embrace the future.

By: Karl Lamb

Karl Lamb — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:54:59 +0000

Very helpful discussion. Thanks to all concerned.

By: KatG

KatG — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:15:32 +0000

I greatly respect Galassi and he’s a truly nice man. And his point that publishers don’t just distribute but do try to help authors and bring works to the world is one worth making. But that’s their jobs. That’s how they make money. Which has got nothing to do with licensing rights under contract.

More to the point, it is the decision of the publisher what to do and not to do on a book. Many books, especially with small presses but even these days in big houses, receive little to no editing, virtually no publicity support and the absolutely minimal marketing (it’s in the catalog and if booksellers order it, they’ll ship it to them.) And the author can do nothing about this, nor about the mistakes a publisher may make on marketing, cover art, etc. Did Random House’s efforts help Styron or actually hinder him from gaining more sales? Who in the world can determine this nearly fifty years after the fact when publishing has changed so much?

But nobody really cares, because right now publishers (Random House particularly) and authors/agents are locked in a battle royal over whether those electronic rights traditionally granted to publishers in book contracts back in the Stone Age do or do not include e-publishing rights. Publishers are looking at the fearful prospect that they are going to have to compete in auction for e-rights, not only with each other, but with numerous new companies, some of whom have tech behemoth money behind them, for a market that they fear will wipe out their print market before they can make adjustments. But if they can hold on to all the rights for their backlist, then they have a shot at survival. So they are fighting with authors instead of working with them.

Hopefully, it’s temporary, as the new rules get worked out. But let’s hope some of the smart ones stop whining about how much authors owe them and start making better deals.

By: Gail Kump

Gail Kump — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:47:51 +0000

Kassia,
I love this debate about ebooks and have been reading your blog for about one year. Having not read the contract between Random House and W. Styron we cannot be sure who exactly owns the ebook rights. It may come down to the ‘intent’ of the contract as there may be no direct association with todays technologies and yesteryears format definitions .
If you are an author you want the rights to go to whomever will be the most passionate, forward thinking and creative “publisher” for your work. Ms Friedman seems to be the clear winner here as she continues to articulate her vision for Open Road IM. Thank you for your blog.

By: Laura Dawson and Kassia Krozser respond to Jonathan Galassi’s stand on ebooks | TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home

Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:51:44 +0000

[...] comes Kassia Krozser of Booksquare: … I am of the mindset that the position advocated by Galassi will lead to deeper questions [...]

By: Maryann Miller

Maryann Miller — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:17:42 +0000

Wonderful article and comments. It is amazing to me that so many folks get caught up in the rhetoric and forget that this issue boils down to what is in the contract. Every contract that I ever received had the licensing rights spelled out definitively.

By: Yudel

Yudel — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:17:36 +0000

Back in 1951, copyright required registration — so the copyright to Styron’s work applied to the edited version. Also back in 1951, copyright lasted for 56 years — so we would be able to download the book from Project Gutenberg by now.

Under present copyright law, the legal status of an edited manuscript is a mess and the publisher may well own the copyright to certain sentences of the final product. Does my my contractual promise as publisher to copyright the final book in the author’s name has the effect of transferring copyright for the changes back to the author?