luvreading:
if the authors refused to sign this, what would the legal position be?
As others have said, it is not possible to give you a definitive answer on the legal position (or even to offer guidance on what the legal position would be) because we do not know the terms of the original contract that was signed with Damnation.
My very general comment therefore (which is not a substitute for individual authors seeking their own further legal advice) is exactly the same as it was for the same document that was posted to the Eternal Press thread:
Check what your contract said about the ability to assign and amend the terms.
It sounds to me that Damnation still exists as a company. If that is the case, then your contract remains with Damnation.
If the assignment clause in your original contract says that the contract cannot be amended or assigned without your consent, then it cannot be amended or assigned without your consent. Any attempt by Damnation to refuse to pay royalties would be an arguable breach of contract.
The amendment agreement is not binding unless and until it is signed.
Sugertime:
Hence the need for court, and a Judge to decide. But even then there are appeals...
For the love of God.
Go and speak to a lawyer. Yes legal opinions differ, but a qualified lawyer competent in the area of law you are asking about will be able to give you an answer and be able to prepare correspondence on your behalf.
Not everything ends in a court case. Not everything goes to appeal.
Sometimes a strongly worded letter from a good lawyer can get you the remedy you want.
The important thing though is to get the advice from a lawyer
competent and qualified in the relevant area of law.
It's not difficult. It's just that it might involve you spending some cash up front or doing the research to find a free legal centre willing to look at it for you. If you don't want to do either, then you'll have to put up and shut up.
pagerette:
Damnation is strictly nickel and dime stuff. Alex did the right thing. He didn't agonize over contracts, he simply published his book elsewhere. I hope it's a great success.
No Alex did not do the right thing.
A number of us have told you why it is not a good thing, but to reiterate - he is in breach of contract and therefore open to a claim for damages.
What part of that do you fail to understand?
You might not like it, but that is the position and stating otherwise just proves that you have absolutely no grasp of the potential legal problems that can exist for writers like Alex. His own lawyer told him that his original contract was legally binding.
Kensington:
But in the case of Damnation there seems to be so much confusion with a contract crossing international boundaries three times, etc.
Just because you seem to be confused by the very simple explanations given on this thread, does not mean that the legal position is confusing.
In fact to me (and subject to authors getting their own legal advice) the position seems remarkably simple - Damnation appears to still be in existence as a company, therefore that underlying contract remains valid and in place.
Kensington:
There's got to be a legal clinic or something where an author can simply email all the documents involved, without having to pay an arm and a leg for the advice.
Look in your local Yellow Pages or directory or check the local university.
Sugertime:
Let's try: Kim should be charged with attempted extortion.
Yeah. Good luck with that.
What part of "Alex's lawyer told him his contract was legally binding" are you failing to understand?
Kensington:
This is the contract Alex signed with Damnation Books. I have his okay to post it here. As you can see there is no termination fee clause:
, Alex has already taken legal advice on all this and been told his original contract is binding.
What do you hope to achieve by reposting the documents here? What do you think we will be able to say that's different to what Alex's own lawyer has told him?
Ravenwing:
She's just a greedy opportunist, who saw a chance to buy up contracts from the bankrupt Canadian publisher, and sell them back to the authors who wanted out.
Do you have evidence that the original publisher was bankrupt or is it just a guess? Because unless you have the evidence, you shouldn't be throwing out statements like that.
Every piece of documentation shared on these companies suggests that the original companies remain in existence.
If they were bankrupt, then they would be (presumably) wound up and cease to be in existence.
luvreading:
And even if they did, the court would be likely to take a dim view of the kill fee attempt, considering Alex's contract does not contain such a clause.
Bollocks.
See every single post telling you otherwise and explaining why.
luvreading:
But how would she explain the kill fee attempt -- 800 big ones -- with no contract clause to back it up? This was attempted extortion.
Bollocks.
See every single post telling you otherwise and explaining why.
veinglory:
You know I really am inclined to be sympathetic to authors, but the repeated crude personal insults and an unwillingness to acknowledge the reality of the law are starting to get tiresome.
Yes - this exactly.
I'm finding it really difficult to sympathise with people who are showing absolutely no willingness to deal with the reality of the situation and making up their own law as they go along to justify their outrage.
MM