Works are considered published when . . .

latourdumoine · Dec 27, 2011

Hope this is the right thread and please be patient. What I've learned from AW - and please correct me if I'm wrong - if you publish a short story on your blog and that blog is open to anyone but you, no matter how many / few readers, it's considered published. Am I right in understanding that if you published a story in a magazine you were asked to develop for an organization, this still counts as a published work and - this is the part I'm getting at - "only a handful of people has read it, and there are only 2,000 copies" is not a valid excuse, even if you were the editor-in-chief.

And what about when a story is published on a website, something along the lines of "My Testimonials" as a contribution and it is not in your own name as you and the owner of that website decided to protect people in the story by changing your name? You have retained all the rights in this case, but if you then chose to place both these stories into your novel, how would agents react to this (assuming you'd have to tell them) and what steps (if any) do you have to undertake (my first guess would be in the second case stating where it was published and under which name).

Any and all advice very welcome. Thanks in advance for your time.

James D. Macdonald · Dec 27, 2011

"To publish" means "to make public." So those stories were indeed published.

Don't worry about the hair-splitting of what agents would/would not think: Story trumps everything. I'm certain that you've seen lines on the copyright pages: "Portions of this novel were previously published in [Name of publication]." There's a solution.

Write the best novel you can. Nothing else matters.

job · Dec 27, 2011

latourdumoine said:
correct me if I'm wrong - if you publish a short story on your blog and that blog is open to anyone but you, no matter how many / few readers, it's considered published.

In the final analysis, a work is considered 'published' if the publisher's legal department tells the editor they won't buy First North American Rights. That's kinda the only definition of it.

Is the group that's seen it limited? If your 30 best friends have seen the manuscript, but none of them has or will release the story beyond that group, you have not published.

It doesn't matter whether these folks saw the story in a closed area on the net, through an exchange of emails, or because you xeroxed the story 30 times and passed it out at a meeting -- if the story stays within the small group and is not available for distribution, it's not published.

latourdumoine said:
if you published a story in a magazine . . . this still counts as a published work

Yes. It's published. It's been released into the wild.

It doesn't matter that only a handful of people actually read it. Doesn't matter there are only 2,000 copies. Doesn't matter who was the editor-in-chief.

In terms of republishing, however, it does matter who holds copyright to the magazine. Unless otherwise specified, the organization that owns and prints the magazine probably holds copyright to material printed in it, especially if this was work for hire.
(Get somebody from the organization to write a letter saying the story is copyright to the author.)

latourdumoine said:
when a story is published on a website,

Doesn't matter what title or pseudonym was used. It's on the web. It's been released into the wild. It's published.

If this is your website, you'll own copyright.

latourdumoine said:
but if you then chose to place both these stories into your novel, how would agents react to this (assuming you'd have to tell them)

You do tell your agent. Basically, you tell your agent anything she might possibly need to know. Always.

But this is not a big thingum. All you're doing is using previously published material in a new work of fiction. Happens all the time.

The editor will acquire the new work of fiction, knowing that parts of it have appeared elsewhere. You'd be selling him First American Rights to the new work as a whole. You are free to do so if you hold copyright to all material.

Generally when a new work contains old material you see a little notice on the copyright page or thereabouts saying something like,
"Pages 45 to 76 of Springtime With My Aunt were previously published as Giraffes Among the Ferns in Collected Tales of the Moravians, Crown and Gingivitis, New York, New York, 1987."

latourdumoine · Dec 27, 2011

Thanks, Job! That was just the advice I was going for.

job said:
Is the group that's seen it limited? If your 30 best friends have seen the manuscript, but none of them has or will release the story beyond that group, you have not published.

It doesn't matter whether these folks saw the story in a closed area on the net, through an exchange of emails, or because you xeroxed the story 30 times and passed it out at a meeting -- if the story stays within the small group and is not available for distribution, it's not published.

That actually brings up a very interesting point. I never thought about the private email part (though I've been warned on occasion about sending out snippets of stories unless I really trust that person).

In terms of republishing, however, it does matter who holds copyright to the magazine. Unless otherwise specified, the organization that owns and prints the magazine probably holds copyright to material printed in it, especially if this was work for hire.
(Get somebody from the organization to write a letter saying the story is copyright to the author.)

When we started the project, the deal was that I own the copy right to the short story. Guess I'd better dig out that email in case they decide not to write back (long story but they're very iffy and vague, which is why I quit working for them, no contracts were signed, it was more of an experiment. The story really fit the theme, so I decided to put it in there.

Doesn't matter what title or pseudonym was used. It's on the web. It's been released into the wild. It's published.

If this is your website, you'll own copyright.

Not my own website. It's run by someone who engages in self-help and the story was supposed to be non-fiction based on a real event. But getting a statement shouldn't be a problem in this case (they're too separate places where two stories were published).

You do tell your agent. Basically, you tell your agent anything she might possibly need to know. Always.

Yeah, I worded it wrong in the question. Any relationship should be as honest as possible, more so when the person needs to know things (agents, lawyers . . .).

But this is not a big thingum. All you're doing is using previously published material in a new work of fiction. Happens all the time.

The editor will acquire the new work of fiction, knowing that parts of it have appeared elsewhere. You'd be selling him First American Rights to the new work as a whole. You are free to do so if you hold copyright to all material.

Generally when a new work contains old material you see a little notice on the copyright page or thereabouts saying something like,
"Pages 45 to 76 of Springtime With My Aunt were previously published as Giraffes Among the Ferns in Collected Tales of the Moravians, Crown and Gingivitis, New York, New York, 1987."

Yeah, that's what I was thinking of, too. I guess I should also have added that both the magazine and the website are based in two different European countries, so not America. That should make things easier.

Thanks again. I really appreciate it.

dangerousbill · Dec 27, 2011

latourdumoine said:
Hope this is the right thread and please be patient. What I've learned from AW - and please correct me if I'm wrong - if you publish a short story on your blog and that blog is open to anyone but you, no matter how many / few readers, it's considered published.

When a piece is made available to the general public, either for money or not, it's technically published. It doesn't matter who's listed as author, or who holds the copyright.

Incorporating a story into a novel is a different matter. Normally, it would be considered a new work, especially if the story is integrated into the novel structure (changed around to fit into the larger story). Something like this is often explained in an author's note or foreword to the novel, as JDM explained above. Whether this is considered 'already published' would be up to the publisher/agent's judgment.

If you've signed over the copyright to a short-story publisher, so that you don't own the copyright any longer, and you incorporate the literal words of the story into a novel, you could in fact be infringing on the copyright that was once yours, so be careful. It's like selling a gold coin to someone and then stealing it back.

latourdumoine · Dec 27, 2011

dangerousbill said:
When a piece is made available to the general public, either for money or not, it's technically published. It doesn't matter who's listed as author, or who holds the copyright.

Thanks. That was my understanding as well, so it's good to see I was on the right track there (available to the general public = published. It was the second part you mentioned that was murky).

Incorporating a story into a novel is a different matter. Normally, it would be considered a new work, especially if the story is integrated into the novel structure (changed around to fit into the larger story). Something like this is often explained in an author's note or foreword to the novel, as JDM explained above. Whether this is considered 'already published' would be up to the publisher/agent's judgment.

Never considered the author's note (it's still young the WIP), that's a good point though.

If you've signed over the copyright to a short-story publisher, so that you don't own the copyright any longer, and you incorporate the literal words of the story into a novel, you could in fact be infringing on the copyright that was once yours, so be careful. It's like selling a gold coin to someone and then stealing it back.

Apparently the copyright stays with me, is what I was told before I submitted it in both cases(I have it in an email as well, for whatever that's worth). The other thing that occurred to me as I'm writing this is, there will probably be enough changes to those two stories so that they might actually stand on their own merit (or lack thereof). Part of me is already formulating the question of when the old story becomes a new story . . .

Jamesaritchie · Dec 28, 2011

"Published" means very little. I don't think there's ever a good reason to put a story you might want to sell on a blog, or any other public venue. You gain nothing, and can lose much.

But if an editor loves a short story, and believes his readers will love it, "previously published" in the technical sense goes out the window.

IDGS · Dec 28, 2011

James D. Macdonald said:
"To publish" means "to make public." So those stories were indeed published.

Don't worry about the hair-splitting of what agents would/would not think: Story trumps everything. I'm certain that you've seen lines on the copyright pages: "Portions of this novel were previously published in [Name of publication]." There's a solution.

Write the best novel you can. Nothing else matters.

I was going to weigh in, but the heavyweight himself already nailed it.

I honestly have no idea why I feel the need to post now.

*excuses himself silently*

blacbird · Dec 28, 2011

James D. Macdonald said:
"To publish" means "to make public." So those stories were indeed published.

Yes, but they also won't count as publication credits.

caw

latourdumoine · Dec 29, 2011

IDGS said:
I honestly have no idea why I feel the need to post now.

*excuses himself silently*

Oh I'm the same. Nice to see that I'm not alone

latourdumoine · Feb 11, 2012

Bumping this because I realized that I forgot to answer some things I'd been meaning to answer all along

James D. Macdonald said:
"To publish" means "to make public." So those stories were indeed published.

Don't worry about the hair-splitting of what agents would/would not think: Story trumps everything. I'm certain that you've seen lines on the copyright pages: "Portions of this novel were previously published in [Name of publication]." There's a solution.

Write the best novel you can. Nothing else matters.

Thank you so much for those kind, encouraging words. I was actually banking on those lines you quoted from the copyright pages, so good to know that "Story trumps everything," which is what I believed in all along, but sometimes, you just need to hear it from a trusted source.

This may be hair-splitting again (so feel free to ignore). Say you want to compile a portfolio of printed articles on your blog, and you want to use some of the ones you did in the magazine above to which you hold all the rights. The blog is public. The magazine has since folded (because you left). Do you still have to mention the name, or can you just write something like "this article has been published before"? I'd sort of like to erase that memory, so if there's any way around not having to mention it by name while still remaining professional, that would be great.

The only articles I want to transfer to the blog are the ones I've written. There are photos in one article that could be left out since copyright for them was obtained by someone else for that magazine.

If this gets too complicated, I can just not use the old articles and start on a clean slate so to speak. Either way, it was one of those things that I've been mulling around for some time.

areteus · Feb 12, 2012

I'd credit the magazine, even if it is folded... bear in mind, if it was still being published when you reprinted you'd mention it. If it folded after that point the reference would still be there, naming the magazine. The mag folding makes little difference.

IceCreamEmpress · Feb 12, 2012

I have worked for lots of magazines that have folded, and it would never even occur to me not to credit them if I chose to reprint the material in my own blog, website, or portfolio. I can't see what the advantage in it would be, simply from a pragmatic standpoint, let alone the ethical issues.

If you don't want to use the publication's name, I would suggest not including the article in your portfolio. Or drawing on your research to write an entirely new article on the same topic to replace it, whichever seems best.

If someone comes across the article and remembers having read it in the publication in question, and notices that no information to that effect is given, their first thought is going to be that you have plagiarized, not that you're having second thoughts about the wisdom of being published in that venue. I wouldn't risk it.

latourdumoine · Feb 12, 2012

Thing is, if it was nothing to do with me, if my only contribution was that I supplied the story (and one or two articles), I'd absolutely credit the magazine, whether it folded or not. It just seemed to me that I'd be basically crediting myself (since I was the one responsible for the magazine, editor-in-chief, responsible for content. In fact the only thing I didn't do was the layout and pay the printer). It was an experiment, and one that was worth doing but not something I'd want to pursue further), and that seemed worse than not mentioning it at all, like mentioning a book you got out with a vanity publisher, which, from what I've read on some threads is not considered published.

That question has since become a moot point for reasons unrelated to the discussion here as the blog is going in another direction altogether, and the old articles wouldn't reflect that.

I also realized based on some of the comments here, that due to my wording, there have been some misunderstandings. Apologies about that, but since I'm still recovering from the flu, I'm honestly in no shape to try and come up with the proper wording at this moment. I do want to thank everyone for taking the time to weigh in though.

Works are considered published when . . .

latourdumoine

Where nightmares continously breed

James D. Macdonald

Your Genial Uncle

job

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

latourdumoine

Where nightmares continously breed

dangerousbill

Retired Illuminatus

latourdumoine

Where nightmares continously breed

Jamesaritchie

IDGS

@LeaveItToIan

blacbird

latourdumoine

Where nightmares continously breed

latourdumoine

Where nightmares continously breed

areteus

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago

latourdumoine

Where nightmares continously breed