-
Guest please check The Index before starting a thread.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2006
- Messages
- 3,348
- Reaction score
- 854
- Age
- 64
- Location
- Ontario, Canader
- Website
- www.chumpletwrites.blogspot.com
I'll vouch for that. Not only is Uwe loyal to his current client list, he is representing a book by an author that passed away some time ago. Why? Because he loved that writer and believes in the story. Now, I know of agents who represent famous estates, but I haven't heard of an agent who actively submits the manuscript of a first-time deceased author. There was a very nice article written about this a while back. In addition, he only put our sales to Rain on his site out of courtesy. All other sales are his and described with his personal 'deal' news. He gave us fair warning about this publisher. The reason we took the deal was because we thought the good out-weighed the bad. It wasn't a snap decision.
I will say, that out of 35 authors, Jim was the only one to go in there and hammer tooth and nail with this publisher to change the production format, the ARCs policy, and a revamp of internet marketing. He won on all cases. They no longer solicite for poetry and short stories, as well. Me, I got in a fisty-cuffs with the publisher and ended up in a stand-off.
Now, nothing on this thread distresses me, since I know what AW is all about--it goes around and comes around, and no publisher is exclusive from the great magnifying eye. As a result of this group's efforts several publishers have stopped screwing with authors and changed their policies. Some have even folded, and we know who they are--they had no business hanging out a shingle in the first place. I hope Rain sees this discussion because it can only help in making them stop and think of how they've worded their contract. Especially the "grant" and "transfer" terminololgy. After three years all rights return to the author. I seriously doubt this publisher or any small press is going to exploit these rights and make a huge money grab in that period. Is it possible? Sure, Jk Rowling was possible. Still, none of us like rights grabs.
The strange submission format they are currently requesting boggles my mind too. This is a new addition as of three weeks ago, as was not in either of our contracts or on the site when we signed. I have no idea what is going on here. Is that like a straight to PDF deal? Frankly, I've never seen such a strange format request.
Kind reminder: We love all our authors in this group.
Peace,
Chris
I will say, that out of 35 authors, Jim was the only one to go in there and hammer tooth and nail with this publisher to change the production format, the ARCs policy, and a revamp of internet marketing. He won on all cases. They no longer solicite for poetry and short stories, as well. Me, I got in a fisty-cuffs with the publisher and ended up in a stand-off.
Now, nothing on this thread distresses me, since I know what AW is all about--it goes around and comes around, and no publisher is exclusive from the great magnifying eye. As a result of this group's efforts several publishers have stopped screwing with authors and changed their policies. Some have even folded, and we know who they are--they had no business hanging out a shingle in the first place. I hope Rain sees this discussion because it can only help in making them stop and think of how they've worded their contract. Especially the "grant" and "transfer" terminololgy. After three years all rights return to the author. I seriously doubt this publisher or any small press is going to exploit these rights and make a huge money grab in that period. Is it possible? Sure, Jk Rowling was possible. Still, none of us like rights grabs.
The strange submission format they are currently requesting boggles my mind too. This is a new addition as of three weeks ago, as was not in either of our contracts or on the site when we signed. I have no idea what is going on here. Is that like a straight to PDF deal? Frankly, I've never seen such a strange format request.
Kind reminder: We love all our authors in this group.
Peace,
Chris
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,461
- Reaction score
- 163
I'm wondering if the 'strange submission format' is just to give them an immediate page count?
that's the only reason I can see for it.
One CAN simply switch the formatting with a few key strokes, after all.
Regards,
Scott
that's the only reason I can see for it.
One CAN simply switch the formatting with a few key strokes, after all.
Regards,
Scott
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2006
- Messages
- 3,348
- Reaction score
- 854
- Age
- 64
- Location
- Ontario, Canader
- Website
- www.chumpletwrites.blogspot.com
That's one of the things that is holding me back from submitting. The contract red flag is another. I'd like to support Canadian publishers, since I'm Canadian. I want to give them a chance, but I'm not experienced enough to wade into such strange waters.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,704
- Reaction score
- 1,315
- Location
- Far from the madding crowd
- Website
- www.victoriastrauss.com
I recently had a chance to review Rain's Letter of Intent and publishing contract. Here's the response I sent to the individual who provided it to me.
------------------------------
Letter of Intent
The Letter of Intent immediately suggests a lack of professionalism.
- There are a number of errors, both of grammar and terminology (for instance, "advances" are called "advantages").
- Many of the terms mentioned, such as the royalty percentage (12% of "gross margin") and the copyright transfer, are nonstandard.
- Other terms are unclear. For instance, what does "The AUTHOR assigns RPI full creative, strategic and business rights" actually mean?
The LOI seems to be intended to be a contract negotiation vehicle. It's stated that once it's executed, no further changes will be allowed. But how can an author negotiate a contract she hasn't read in its entirety? Essentially, you're being asked to commit yourself to a contract sight unseen on the basis of an abbreviated, confusing document.
Most concerning: the LOI is misleading. For instance, it states that "All rights revert to the AUTHOR upon expiry of the three year term." But the contract has an automatic renewal clause, with no provision for the author to terminate (see below). So in fact, rights don't revert until the publisher says so.
Contract
- Clause 1, Publishing Rights, is worth quoting in its entirety:
After having apparently claimed copyright and then contradicted that by stating that there's no grant of subsidiary rights, the contract contradicts itself yet again by actually enumerating and including a number of subsidiary rights: book club rights, audio rights, serialization, and film/dramatic rights. It then contradicts itself a final time by stating that "PUBLISHER may not offer for license or reproduce any portion of AUTHOR’s WORK(S)." If the publisher can neither license nor reproduce the author's work, how will it manage to publish it?
I think that Rain may not understand the difference between rights and copyright. To put it mildly, this is not an encouraging sign.
- Clause 1.A. mentions movie rights ("]n the occurrence that a third party shows interest in acquiring movie and/or screenplay rights, the PUBLISHER will notify the AUTHOR and commence negotiations.". There are three issues here. First, movie rights are subsidiary rights, and as noted above, the contract seems to exclude, or to intend to exclude, subsidiary rights. (On the other hand, if indeed authors are transferring copyright, all this is moot--movie rights would be included and wouldn't need a separate mention.)
Second, the publisher has not shown it can sell movie rights. Small publishers shouldn't demand rights they can't market.
Third, this contract states that the publisher will pay royalties ("Upon conclusion of the grant of said rights, PUBLISHER will establish a new royalty rate with the author based solely on the grating [sic] of the movie and/or screenplay rights." This isn't appropriate for movie rights sales--if a publisher sells your movie rights, it pays you a percentage of what it is paid--say, 50%.
- Clause 2, Term--The term of the contract is three years. This isn't a bad term, but there's an automatic monthly renewal clause,. EPIC (an organization of digitally published writers) warns against automatic renewal clauses. Often, automatic renewal clauses will contain a procedure by which the author can terminate the contract if s/he chooses to--but this one doesn't have such a procedure. In essence, this contract will continue for as long as the publisher chooses, and the author has no recourse.
Also, if the contract has a term limit, why does the publisher need to demand a transfer of copyright?
- Clause 4.B. gives the publisher "first option privileges" on the author's next book. What the heck are first option privileges? First right of refusal? (I.e., the publisher gets the first look at the manuscript and has the first chance to offer a deal--this is pretty standard, although you really want to see a timeframe for the publisher to give an answer once the option manuscript is submitted.) First right of publication? (I.e., the publisher has the automatic right to publish the manuscript if it chooses--much less advantageous for the author, since you may not be able to refuse.) There's no way to tell.
- Clause 4.D. reads: "The AUTHOR assigns the PUBLISHER full creative, strategic and business rights to the WORK(S) upon execution of contract." Again, what the heck does this mean? It needs to be spelled out in detail. You don't want to sign a contract where the wording is so vague you don't know exactly what you're actually granting. Also, if you've transferred copyright to the publisher, you don't need language like this--all of those creative, etc. rights would go with the copyright.
- Clause 7, Royalties. Royalties are "12% of Net Sales." This would be a poor royalty, even if it only meant the publisher's net receipts (the book's retail price less wholesalers' or distributors' discounts, which can be anywhere from 40-55%). But the wording of Rain's royalty clause seems to suggest it means the publisher's net profits, which is MUCH less advantageous. Here's the exact wording: "Net sales are defined as the Total Dollar amount that is actually received by the PUBLISHER from the wholesale or retail sale of the WORK(S) minus the Total Dollar amount of any Returns of the WORK(S) and all costs associated with the sale." Since exactly what these costs are isn't specified, you have no idea how much they might reduce the amount on which royalties are paid.
- Clause 9, Editing. "The PUBLISHER will try to notify the AUTHOR prior to any and all substantial changes. PUBLISHER may make corrections without AUTHOR's consent." In other words, the publisher can do as it wishes and not tell you about it. You may get an unpleasant surprise when you finally receive your printed book.
The language of this clause, as well as language in the LOI ("[FONT="]The “AUTHOR” agrees to have the final manuscript “WORKS” fully edited and ready for production")[/FONT], suggests that Rain does not edit its books.
- Clause 16, Author Purchased Copies. No author discount is provided by Rain; this is highly nonstandard. This clause also requires the author to report to Rain about any copies he or she re-sells. Where publishers allow authors to resell their books (and not all do), they don't require them to account for those sales.
- Clause 23, Release Date. "Every reasonable attempted [sic] will be made to release the WORK(S) for approximately [date redacted--I don't want to identify the person who shared information with me]." "Every reasonable attempt" is much too vague. A publishing contract should bind the publisher to either a stated time period (say, 18 months), or a specific date by which the publisher must publish, or else return rights.
In summary, this is a horrible, confused, contradictory contract. I couldn't advise any author to sign it as it currently is.
- Victoria
------------------------------
Letter of Intent
The Letter of Intent immediately suggests a lack of professionalism.
- There are a number of errors, both of grammar and terminology (for instance, "advances" are called "advantages").
- Many of the terms mentioned, such as the royalty percentage (12% of "gross margin") and the copyright transfer, are nonstandard.
- Other terms are unclear. For instance, what does "The AUTHOR assigns RPI full creative, strategic and business rights" actually mean?
The LOI seems to be intended to be a contract negotiation vehicle. It's stated that once it's executed, no further changes will be allowed. But how can an author negotiate a contract she hasn't read in its entirety? Essentially, you're being asked to commit yourself to a contract sight unseen on the basis of an abbreviated, confusing document.
Most concerning: the LOI is misleading. For instance, it states that "All rights revert to the AUTHOR upon expiry of the three year term." But the contract has an automatic renewal clause, with no provision for the author to terminate (see below). So in fact, rights don't revert until the publisher says so.
Contract
- Clause 1, Publishing Rights, is worth quoting in its entirety:
This is horribly unclear. It starts out by stating that the author must transfer "copyrights" to the publisher. However, when you transfer copyright in your book, you transfer ownership of the book, including subsidiary rights. But this contract states that there's "no grant of subsidiary rights," which is impossible if a copyright is transferred.
After having apparently claimed copyright and then contradicted that by stating that there's no grant of subsidiary rights, the contract contradicts itself yet again by actually enumerating and including a number of subsidiary rights: book club rights, audio rights, serialization, and film/dramatic rights. It then contradicts itself a final time by stating that "PUBLISHER may not offer for license or reproduce any portion of AUTHOR’s WORK(S)." If the publisher can neither license nor reproduce the author's work, how will it manage to publish it?
I think that Rain may not understand the difference between rights and copyright. To put it mildly, this is not an encouraging sign.
- Clause 1.A. mentions movie rights ("]n the occurrence that a third party shows interest in acquiring movie and/or screenplay rights, the PUBLISHER will notify the AUTHOR and commence negotiations.". There are three issues here. First, movie rights are subsidiary rights, and as noted above, the contract seems to exclude, or to intend to exclude, subsidiary rights. (On the other hand, if indeed authors are transferring copyright, all this is moot--movie rights would be included and wouldn't need a separate mention.)
Second, the publisher has not shown it can sell movie rights. Small publishers shouldn't demand rights they can't market.
Third, this contract states that the publisher will pay royalties ("Upon conclusion of the grant of said rights, PUBLISHER will establish a new royalty rate with the author based solely on the grating [sic] of the movie and/or screenplay rights." This isn't appropriate for movie rights sales--if a publisher sells your movie rights, it pays you a percentage of what it is paid--say, 50%.
- Clause 2, Term--The term of the contract is three years. This isn't a bad term, but there's an automatic monthly renewal clause,. EPIC (an organization of digitally published writers) warns against automatic renewal clauses. Often, automatic renewal clauses will contain a procedure by which the author can terminate the contract if s/he chooses to--but this one doesn't have such a procedure. In essence, this contract will continue for as long as the publisher chooses, and the author has no recourse.
Also, if the contract has a term limit, why does the publisher need to demand a transfer of copyright?
- Clause 4.B. gives the publisher "first option privileges" on the author's next book. What the heck are first option privileges? First right of refusal? (I.e., the publisher gets the first look at the manuscript and has the first chance to offer a deal--this is pretty standard, although you really want to see a timeframe for the publisher to give an answer once the option manuscript is submitted.) First right of publication? (I.e., the publisher has the automatic right to publish the manuscript if it chooses--much less advantageous for the author, since you may not be able to refuse.) There's no way to tell.
- Clause 4.D. reads: "The AUTHOR assigns the PUBLISHER full creative, strategic and business rights to the WORK(S) upon execution of contract." Again, what the heck does this mean? It needs to be spelled out in detail. You don't want to sign a contract where the wording is so vague you don't know exactly what you're actually granting. Also, if you've transferred copyright to the publisher, you don't need language like this--all of those creative, etc. rights would go with the copyright.
- Clause 7, Royalties. Royalties are "12% of Net Sales." This would be a poor royalty, even if it only meant the publisher's net receipts (the book's retail price less wholesalers' or distributors' discounts, which can be anywhere from 40-55%). But the wording of Rain's royalty clause seems to suggest it means the publisher's net profits, which is MUCH less advantageous. Here's the exact wording: "Net sales are defined as the Total Dollar amount that is actually received by the PUBLISHER from the wholesale or retail sale of the WORK(S) minus the Total Dollar amount of any Returns of the WORK(S) and all costs associated with the sale." Since exactly what these costs are isn't specified, you have no idea how much they might reduce the amount on which royalties are paid.
- Clause 9, Editing. "The PUBLISHER will try to notify the AUTHOR prior to any and all substantial changes. PUBLISHER may make corrections without AUTHOR's consent." In other words, the publisher can do as it wishes and not tell you about it. You may get an unpleasant surprise when you finally receive your printed book.
The language of this clause, as well as language in the LOI ("[FONT="]The “AUTHOR” agrees to have the final manuscript “WORKS” fully edited and ready for production")[/FONT], suggests that Rain does not edit its books.
- Clause 16, Author Purchased Copies. No author discount is provided by Rain; this is highly nonstandard. This clause also requires the author to report to Rain about any copies he or she re-sells. Where publishers allow authors to resell their books (and not all do), they don't require them to account for those sales.
- Clause 23, Release Date. "Every reasonable attempted [sic] will be made to release the WORK(S) for approximately [date redacted--I don't want to identify the person who shared information with me]." "Every reasonable attempt" is much too vague. A publishing contract should bind the publisher to either a stated time period (say, 18 months), or a specific date by which the publisher must publish, or else return rights.
In summary, this is a horrible, confused, contradictory contract. I couldn't advise any author to sign it as it currently is.
- Victoria
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 25,582
- Reaction score
- 3,785
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Website
- madhousemanor.wordpress.com
There are a number of other hints that these folks may not be terribly competent--for example, confusing the terms "hard copy" and "hard cover."
More so than ever, this publisher looks like one to which the author should say "Thank you for your interest," then seek publication elsewhere.
Remember: A book that's publishable by one is publishable by many. Choose the best.
More so than ever, this publisher looks like one to which the author should say "Thank you for your interest," then seek publication elsewhere.
Remember: A book that's publishable by one is publishable by many. Choose the best.
It'd be nice if Jaws would stop by and give us what he thinks. I'm no lawyer, but I'd find it hard to understand how it would hold up in court if challenged. I say this mainly because of the contradictions -- the contract excluding subsidiary rights after enumerating some subsidiary rights in the list of what the transfered copyright covers.
But I don't know how courts work on this sort of stuff. Would they strike out portions of a contract? Perhaps striking out anywhere that grants subsidiary rights since the contract says in no uncertain terms that subsidiary rights aren't granted, or would they strike out the whole issue of copyright transfer because of the confused wording?
The wording of the paragraph on copyright transfer also gets me wondering. If the exception proves the rule (i.e. 'no parking except sundays' means that you absolutely cannot park on mon-sat for any reason) then when the inclusion limit the rule (i.e. would 'copyright is transfered for north american print rights' mean that they could only act as the copyright holder for north american rights and the author remains copyright holder for all other rights?)
Note: my example wasn't the same as the contracts -- it seems to enumerate most of the rights granted by copyright (though not all) and I wanted to make it more simple.
Anyway, maybe we can wake Jaws up. If my memory isn't mistaken he has mucho experience with this stuff and even if canadian law is different he could prob navigate the language better.
But I don't know how courts work on this sort of stuff. Would they strike out portions of a contract? Perhaps striking out anywhere that grants subsidiary rights since the contract says in no uncertain terms that subsidiary rights aren't granted, or would they strike out the whole issue of copyright transfer because of the confused wording?
The wording of the paragraph on copyright transfer also gets me wondering. If the exception proves the rule (i.e. 'no parking except sundays' means that you absolutely cannot park on mon-sat for any reason) then when the inclusion limit the rule (i.e. would 'copyright is transfered for north american print rights' mean that they could only act as the copyright holder for north american rights and the author remains copyright holder for all other rights?)
Note: my example wasn't the same as the contracts -- it seems to enumerate most of the rights granted by copyright (though not all) and I wanted to make it more simple.
Anyway, maybe we can wake Jaws up. If my memory isn't mistaken he has mucho experience with this stuff and even if canadian law is different he could prob navigate the language better.
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 180
- Reaction score
- 29
- Location
- Deep, deep inside my mind
- Website
- www.thistlewoodpubllishing.com
Hello everyone 
I would like to share my recent experience with Rain Publishing.
I used to belong to another writer's community. That is where I first heard about Rain. Seeing that the writer was satisfied with Rain and highly recommended them, I sent my ms submission to Rain.
I was delighted when I heard that 5 members of their staff read my ms in its entirety and they "absolutely loved it!" Because Rain was not set up to publish such a long novel, they asked me to break it up into two books. I told them that I was working on a series involving the main characters and I was currently writing the next book in the series. At that time they offered me a verbal offer to publish 6 books, no more than 300 pages each. One book would be published monthly for six months. If the series did well, they wanted more.
I received the LOI by e-mail and red flags went up. I recently retired from a career where I worked with contracts daily. There were quite a few things that made me nervous in the LOI.
I didn't sign the LOI, and sent it back to them with questions and comments: (Please note that all items in red are MY comments and/or questions).
1. What do you mean this is the only time changes of terms are up for discussion? I would really like to see the contract instead of this Letter of Intent. How can you ask me or anyone else to waive our right to negotiate on a legally binding contract that we haven’t seen???? That’s just crazy and sounds very unethical to me.
2. I will not agree to unknown ‘costs associated with a sale’. What costs???
3. I don’t believe I am willing to transfer full copyrights to RPI or anyone else. If I did, RPI would ‘own’ my works totally. I will grant the right to publish, of course, but not total and legal ownership. The three year term limit should suffice to protect RPI’s interests
4. (This comment pertained to movie rights). I would want to be involved in the negotiations.....AND, I want the percentages paid to author and RPI spelled out clearly. I can't agree to negotiate my percentage after the fact. That is just far too questionable for my liking. If you negotiated and I was forced to accept the percentage you threw to me, I would have no recourse.
5. (Regarding first option privileges). What????? Does ‘first option privileges’ mean that you have the first right of refusal? Both the author and RPI have the right to refuse the proposal? What proposal? I agree with first right of refusal, but terms on new works would have to be totally negotiated again as if it was a whole new entity. I would grant RPI the first opportunity to look at and negotiate on any new works. I would also be willing to grant a time period of say 30 days in which RPI would have time to decide if they are interested and want to open negotiations with me. After this time, author is free to take future works elsewhere.
6. (Regarding editing and release dates). RPI will, at RPI’s expense, have its own editors review the works for typographical errors and grammar corrections. Author will make all corrections. If the books are NOT published within 30 days of tentative release dates, RPI must contact author with an explanation and advise author of new release date. Author reserves the right to reclaim the works if timely release dates are not met.
7. What is the author discount? I see no mention of it anywhere in this document.
8. I would like to see a detailed explanation of how and where RPI markets its books. The list in your website is very small. I would like to be convinced that your books are available in book stores as well as online venues.
9. (Regarding their clause to sign and return LOI within 5 days or offer is withdrawn). 5 days? Why the rush? That time frame hardly gives anyone the time to consult with an attorney.
Not one of my questions was answered. The intent to publish was withdrawn by Tilly. I mailed again, explaining that I deserved the right to be comfortable with the decision I made regarding my publishing house. I said that I wouldn't buy a pair of shoes while blindfolded and would certainly not agree to terms that were not spelled out 100%.
I did receive a very nice parting offer though. Rain promised to send my comments to many other publishing houses and literary agents both in the U.S. and Canada. They hoped that I would be picked up by another publisher. How perfectly generous and helpful
Tika
I would like to share my recent experience with Rain Publishing.I used to belong to another writer's community. That is where I first heard about Rain. Seeing that the writer was satisfied with Rain and highly recommended them, I sent my ms submission to Rain.
I was delighted when I heard that 5 members of their staff read my ms in its entirety and they "absolutely loved it!" Because Rain was not set up to publish such a long novel, they asked me to break it up into two books. I told them that I was working on a series involving the main characters and I was currently writing the next book in the series. At that time they offered me a verbal offer to publish 6 books, no more than 300 pages each. One book would be published monthly for six months. If the series did well, they wanted more.
I received the LOI by e-mail and red flags went up. I recently retired from a career where I worked with contracts daily. There were quite a few things that made me nervous in the LOI.
I didn't sign the LOI, and sent it back to them with questions and comments: (Please note that all items in red are MY comments and/or questions).
1. What do you mean this is the only time changes of terms are up for discussion? I would really like to see the contract instead of this Letter of Intent. How can you ask me or anyone else to waive our right to negotiate on a legally binding contract that we haven’t seen???? That’s just crazy and sounds very unethical to me.
2. I will not agree to unknown ‘costs associated with a sale’. What costs???
3. I don’t believe I am willing to transfer full copyrights to RPI or anyone else. If I did, RPI would ‘own’ my works totally. I will grant the right to publish, of course, but not total and legal ownership. The three year term limit should suffice to protect RPI’s interests
4. (This comment pertained to movie rights). I would want to be involved in the negotiations.....AND, I want the percentages paid to author and RPI spelled out clearly. I can't agree to negotiate my percentage after the fact. That is just far too questionable for my liking. If you negotiated and I was forced to accept the percentage you threw to me, I would have no recourse.
5. (Regarding first option privileges). What????? Does ‘first option privileges’ mean that you have the first right of refusal? Both the author and RPI have the right to refuse the proposal? What proposal? I agree with first right of refusal, but terms on new works would have to be totally negotiated again as if it was a whole new entity. I would grant RPI the first opportunity to look at and negotiate on any new works. I would also be willing to grant a time period of say 30 days in which RPI would have time to decide if they are interested and want to open negotiations with me. After this time, author is free to take future works elsewhere.
6. (Regarding editing and release dates). RPI will, at RPI’s expense, have its own editors review the works for typographical errors and grammar corrections. Author will make all corrections. If the books are NOT published within 30 days of tentative release dates, RPI must contact author with an explanation and advise author of new release date. Author reserves the right to reclaim the works if timely release dates are not met.
7. What is the author discount? I see no mention of it anywhere in this document.
8. I would like to see a detailed explanation of how and where RPI markets its books. The list in your website is very small. I would like to be convinced that your books are available in book stores as well as online venues.
9. (Regarding their clause to sign and return LOI within 5 days or offer is withdrawn). 5 days? Why the rush? That time frame hardly gives anyone the time to consult with an attorney.
Not one of my questions was answered. The intent to publish was withdrawn by Tilly. I mailed again, explaining that I deserved the right to be comfortable with the decision I made regarding my publishing house. I said that I wouldn't buy a pair of shoes while blindfolded and would certainly not agree to terms that were not spelled out 100%.
I did receive a very nice parting offer though. Rain promised to send my comments to many other publishing houses and literary agents both in the U.S. and Canada. They hoped that I would be picked up by another publisher. How perfectly generous and helpful
Tika
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2006
- Messages
- 311
- Reaction score
- 59
- Location
- New England
- Website
- maureenmccarrie.blogspot.com
Good lord. Eventually somebody somewhere is going to "get" that threatening people from a position of power completely undermines and destroys any power imagined or actual.
In other words, if you have to threaten someone who appears weaker than you, you're hiding something... and not very well.
In other words, if you have to threaten someone who appears weaker than you, you're hiding something... and not very well.
priceless1
Banned
What fluff. This type of thing doesn't happen. This is simply an empty threat that has no teeth. The only time gossip is slung around is when editor and agent friends get together for dinner. And at that, it's invariably about other agents and editors, not authors.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 25,582
- Reaction score
- 3,785
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Website
- madhousemanor.wordpress.com
The ever-popular "You'll be blacklisted in the industry! No one will ever publish you!" threat.
There is no such "blacklist." Nor would these people have the power to invoke it if there were.
They've just recategorized themselves from "clueless" to "stupid."
There is no such "blacklist." Nor would these people have the power to invoke it if there were.
They've just recategorized themselves from "clueless" to "stupid."
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2007
- Messages
- 720
- Reaction score
- 71
- Location
- Maryland USA
- Website
- www.tol.myfastforum.org
I got tired of reading this thread on page six, so has anyone mentioned this? Copyright only covers plot, not characters or titles or anything else. Unless someone obtains registered trademarks, the characters are up for grabs. At least, that's how I understood it.
Otherwise, I'm completely in agreement with Job's statement. I won't give up my copyright. I'll die an unpublished author before I do that. I really, really hope it doesn't come to that, but ... there it is.
I sincerely hope that all the authors who have signed with Rain do well.
Err, no.
If that were true, you could write a sequel (with your own plot) to someone else's novel simply because the author didn't register the characters as a registered trademark !
Characters are not 'up for grabs'.
Mac
(PS: A thought occurs to me, however - in this particular example you might have some protection.
1. You create the characters and have a copyrighted manuscript containing them called 'Draft A'
2. You create a derivative work called 'Draft B' from it, and assign the copyright of 'Draft B' to RPI.
3. You write another novel with the same characters. Is that novel a derivative work of 'Draft A' (which you still own) or 'Draft B' (that you don't)?
It might be a possibility if the 'Draft A' was published separately as a short story, for example, before the longer work was created.
I'm sure a well written contract would cover this.
IANAL - I'm just theorising)
Last edited:
Any work that uses the setting or characters of a copyrighted work is considered a derivative of that copyrighted work. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know all the ins and outs of it, but you can basically consider that derivitive work to be under the control of the copyright holder of what it was based on.
So, no, the characters are not up for grabs.
As for Rain's contract, it is my understanding that the copyright is transferred for a limited time and there are some restriction on what Rain can do with it.
So, no, the characters are not up for grabs.
As for Rain's contract, it is my understanding that the copyright is transferred for a limited time and there are some restriction on what Rain can do with it.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2007
- Messages
- 720
- Reaction score
- 71
- Location
- Maryland USA
- Website
- www.tol.myfastforum.org
Oops. I stand corrected:
US Copyright Office said:
It doesn't mention characters at all, which makes sense really - since there is no plot without them. But the way I had originally understood it was that without trademarks anyone could use your characters to write a different story, although it would still be understood that you created those characters originally and that your story came first. I was comfortable with that, but I must admit I'm glad it isn't so.
Sorry about the mix-up.
Rain
Hi Everyone:
First, let me say that this is my first post and I am very happy to be here. I wish I knew about this “place” before – sounds like a great place for inspiration, chewing the fat and so on, with creative and analytical types (as writers often are).
Anyway, about Rain Publishing: I am sure in the early stages, there were mistakes or conflicts with authors as any new venture and business takes some time to iron out the wrinkles. I can only speak for the years 2006 to now, as I write this November 11, 2007… that Rain has taken one of my manuscripts and said “no thanks” to two others.
That being said, they are new, and though not a big publisher known by all booksellers yet, or etched in gold with the biggies always, they are in fact, known enough to publish and sell books.
I will not go into my own personal financial details, but I can tell you that the contract was valid and I did not sign away my copyright. I also have been compensated, and did not have to put out a penny.
Someone made a comment about the manuscript submission; I actually found it to be easier than other publishers I’ve worked with. I’ve worked with four publishers, and Rain was the only one that I “only” had to do a basic manuscript. I had one publisher that had me lay out the book and photos! Ouch! But hey, they do this to get a feel for the writers vision since it is the writers art so to say.
That being said, I do think it depends upon the publisher – they are ALL so different I’ve found, and my friends who are published have the same stories.
Anyway, I do feel Rain got a hard shake when Tilly came onto this site – well-meaning but totally trashed because…it seemed to good to believe? Not sure. Her post, though not in AP or MLA style (should it have been?) was well meaning, and though flowery to some, it was her personal style of communication. She really was just showing a passion and I guess that rubbed some folks the wrong way.
Now, is it good to be wary? Yes. But nothing in the post or her site was illegal or scamming. The only thing that was mildly illegal or scamming was people’s fabricated responses, which really, were typical “board/forum sour eggs” stuff. It’s on every board. I read through and found some of the comments (not all) to be not only distasteful but filled with slander. I also found it odd that her carriage and style were said to be too flowery - yet, it was a post, and a post meant to market - and isn't most marketing flowery or not traditional? please.
Is Rain right for every author? No. No one publisher is right for every author.
However, Rain has been one of the best publishers I’ve ever worked with and I am including in this my toiling away at newspapers and such. Her organization emails often, and the writers are treated like a group of friends or peers; the company encourages ideas and networking and I am honored to be in the ground floor of such an environment.
I really encourage anyone, even those who before were not thrilled with her carriage here; to check out the site and them. She is a very neat lady who does not only great work, and yes, writes erotica, but also does so much volunteerism.
A great group and again, I’m honored to be a part of it.
I’m also honored to be here. I hope my words did not offend anyone, and I’m hoping to be a part of this community –
Thanks much-
legalwriterPR!
Hi Everyone:
First, let me say that this is my first post and I am very happy to be here. I wish I knew about this “place” before – sounds like a great place for inspiration, chewing the fat and so on, with creative and analytical types (as writers often are).
Anyway, about Rain Publishing: I am sure in the early stages, there were mistakes or conflicts with authors as any new venture and business takes some time to iron out the wrinkles. I can only speak for the years 2006 to now, as I write this November 11, 2007… that Rain has taken one of my manuscripts and said “no thanks” to two others.
That being said, they are new, and though not a big publisher known by all booksellers yet, or etched in gold with the biggies always, they are in fact, known enough to publish and sell books.
I will not go into my own personal financial details, but I can tell you that the contract was valid and I did not sign away my copyright. I also have been compensated, and did not have to put out a penny.
Someone made a comment about the manuscript submission; I actually found it to be easier than other publishers I’ve worked with. I’ve worked with four publishers, and Rain was the only one that I “only” had to do a basic manuscript. I had one publisher that had me lay out the book and photos! Ouch! But hey, they do this to get a feel for the writers vision since it is the writers art so to say.
That being said, I do think it depends upon the publisher – they are ALL so different I’ve found, and my friends who are published have the same stories.
Anyway, I do feel Rain got a hard shake when Tilly came onto this site – well-meaning but totally trashed because…it seemed to good to believe? Not sure. Her post, though not in AP or MLA style (should it have been?) was well meaning, and though flowery to some, it was her personal style of communication. She really was just showing a passion and I guess that rubbed some folks the wrong way.
Now, is it good to be wary? Yes. But nothing in the post or her site was illegal or scamming. The only thing that was mildly illegal or scamming was people’s fabricated responses, which really, were typical “board/forum sour eggs” stuff. It’s on every board. I read through and found some of the comments (not all) to be not only distasteful but filled with slander. I also found it odd that her carriage and style were said to be too flowery - yet, it was a post, and a post meant to market - and isn't most marketing flowery or not traditional? please.
Is Rain right for every author? No. No one publisher is right for every author.
However, Rain has been one of the best publishers I’ve ever worked with and I am including in this my toiling away at newspapers and such. Her organization emails often, and the writers are treated like a group of friends or peers; the company encourages ideas and networking and I am honored to be in the ground floor of such an environment.
I really encourage anyone, even those who before were not thrilled with her carriage here; to check out the site and them. She is a very neat lady who does not only great work, and yes, writes erotica, but also does so much volunteerism.
A great group and again, I’m honored to be a part of it.
I’m also honored to be here. I hope my words did not offend anyone, and I’m hoping to be a part of this community –
Thanks much-
legalwriterPR!
Sorry, I've been away for awhile, and without reading through the entire thread, I'm fairly sure that "illegal or scamming" weren't used as descriptives for Rain. "Clueless", I think it was. Clueless, like in making statements that show a lack of knowledge of the publishing industry, having a contract that mentioned rights they were taking when they weren't, that sort of thing. Not as clueless as making posts under assumed names supporting the company under discussion as if an unrelated third-party. I'm sure they wouldn't stoop to that level.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,704
- Reaction score
- 1,315
- Location
- Far from the madding crowd
- Website
- www.victoriastrauss.com
Unless Rain has substantially changed its incoherent contract and acquired distribution, I'm not optimistic.
- Victoria
- Victoria
Hi, legalwriterPR and welcome to AW. I hope you stick around.
Well they've been around for almost 3 years now (if you take Tilly's post at the start of this thread as the set up date). That means they should be established enough to start getting books distributed in bookstores. What disturbs me though is that when you check out their list of booksellers here they only list approx 33 venues as selling their book in Canada and California. That's not a great market penetration for 3 years work. Maybe one of the Canadians can say what some of those stores are (e.g. I don't know whether Canex is a chain or a franchise and whether it's main business is as a book store) but my view of the list is that most of those bookstores are independents who've made their own arrangements with the publisher and whilst that's nice, it's not going to shift many books. And I'd definitely be worried that my publisher is proud to have its books stocked in 2 pharmacies.
I'd be further worried by this page on their website which states that:
I'm a big fan of independent bookstores (they offer better choice, the staff usually know their subject and there's just a better atmosphere in them), but you can't open a newspaper these days without hearing about how the chain stores (B&N, Borders, Waterstones etc) are putting them out of business because they're the ones who make the most sales. The fact that there's no mention on the Rain site that they can put their books in the chain stores suggests to me that they're not going to make that many sales.
I understand that you don't want to go into details, but can you at least give us a ballpark figure for advance? I mean, was it in the hundreds or the thousands? I ask because this was one of the red flags raised earlier on in this discussion thread as the LOI being offered suggested that Rain authors were not being paid an advance and only got 5 copies of their book as recompense for signing up.
Additionally, you say that you don't have to pay to be published, can I ask whether Rain has told you about any deal re buying copies of your own book? Are you given an author discount at all (and if so, how much)? Do Rain ship free copies of your book to booksignings or do you (or the store) have to buy them in advance?
Are you able to name those publishers, because it sounds to me that you've been caught up by inexperienced publishers. My father writes reference books, which involve obtaining photos etc, but it's the publisher who decides the layout and organises the same - not him. I'd be surprised if any publisher asked you to do otherwise (and "writers' art" is not an acceptable explanation).
Actually, I would suggest it's because she spammed the board with an overly and poorly written puff piece about her own company that made little sense. Far from being "to good to believe" it raised the usual red flags that indicate clueless or alternatively, scam publishers. Tilly then failed to revisit the board to answer questions, even though she could have v. easily put peoples' minds at rest by doing so.
With respect, I think you need to go back through the previous pages of the Thread because at least 2 Rain authors posted here to set out their experience with the company (both the good and the bad). In addition, the reference to "sour eggs" is a pointless one - many of the people who post here are either experienced in the industry from the publishing/editing side of it or because they've already had books published that are available in the shops.
I agree. However, one of my personal concerns on reading Rain's website is that they seem to want to offer publishing to almost every genre. If you take a look at their site , you see that the only genres they don't accept are:
and yet, if you take a look at what they have slated for release up to October of next year on the page here, you see that they're offering for sale poetry books and childrens' chapter books.
Personally, I'd have more faith in them if they stuck to one or two genres and concentrated on building up links with distributors etc within that field, rather than trying to be everything to everyone.
Again, with respect the 4 publishers you went with in the past don't seem to have been particularly reputable, so almost anything sounds like it would be a step up.
Ultimately, it's not whether Rain is being nice to you and sending regular emails that should count. What matters is whether:
- they can get their books into bricks and mortar stores on a wide enough basis to generate sales;
- they're paying a fair advance; and
- they're paying fair royalties.
So far, I haven't see much evidence of this either on this Thread or on their own website.
I'm not sure what that has to do with selling books, which is what her job should be.
MM
Well they've been around for almost 3 years now (if you take Tilly's post at the start of this thread as the set up date). That means they should be established enough to start getting books distributed in bookstores. What disturbs me though is that when you check out their list of booksellers here they only list approx 33 venues as selling their book in Canada and California. That's not a great market penetration for 3 years work. Maybe one of the Canadians can say what some of those stores are (e.g. I don't know whether Canex is a chain or a franchise and whether it's main business is as a book store) but my view of the list is that most of those bookstores are independents who've made their own arrangements with the publisher and whilst that's nice, it's not going to shift many books. And I'd definitely be worried that my publisher is proud to have its books stocked in 2 pharmacies.
I'd be further worried by this page on their website which states that:
I'm a big fan of independent bookstores (they offer better choice, the staff usually know their subject and there's just a better atmosphere in them), but you can't open a newspaper these days without hearing about how the chain stores (B&N, Borders, Waterstones etc) are putting them out of business because they're the ones who make the most sales. The fact that there's no mention on the Rain site that they can put their books in the chain stores suggests to me that they're not going to make that many sales.
I understand that you don't want to go into details, but can you at least give us a ballpark figure for advance? I mean, was it in the hundreds or the thousands? I ask because this was one of the red flags raised earlier on in this discussion thread as the LOI being offered suggested that Rain authors were not being paid an advance and only got 5 copies of their book as recompense for signing up.
Additionally, you say that you don't have to pay to be published, can I ask whether Rain has told you about any deal re buying copies of your own book? Are you given an author discount at all (and if so, how much)? Do Rain ship free copies of your book to booksignings or do you (or the store) have to buy them in advance?
Are you able to name those publishers, because it sounds to me that you've been caught up by inexperienced publishers. My father writes reference books, which involve obtaining photos etc, but it's the publisher who decides the layout and organises the same - not him. I'd be surprised if any publisher asked you to do otherwise (and "writers' art" is not an acceptable explanation).
Actually, I would suggest it's because she spammed the board with an overly and poorly written puff piece about her own company that made little sense. Far from being "to good to believe" it raised the usual red flags that indicate clueless or alternatively, scam publishers. Tilly then failed to revisit the board to answer questions, even though she could have v. easily put peoples' minds at rest by doing so.
With respect, I think you need to go back through the previous pages of the Thread because at least 2 Rain authors posted here to set out their experience with the company (both the good and the bad). In addition, the reference to "sour eggs" is a pointless one - many of the people who post here are either experienced in the industry from the publishing/editing side of it or because they've already had books published that are available in the shops.
I agree. However, one of my personal concerns on reading Rain's website is that they seem to want to offer publishing to almost every genre. If you take a look at their site , you see that the only genres they don't accept are:
and yet, if you take a look at what they have slated for release up to October of next year on the page here, you see that they're offering for sale poetry books and childrens' chapter books.
Personally, I'd have more faith in them if they stuck to one or two genres and concentrated on building up links with distributors etc within that field, rather than trying to be everything to everyone.
Again, with respect the 4 publishers you went with in the past don't seem to have been particularly reputable, so almost anything sounds like it would be a step up.
Ultimately, it's not whether Rain is being nice to you and sending regular emails that should count. What matters is whether:
- they can get their books into bricks and mortar stores on a wide enough basis to generate sales;
- they're paying a fair advance; and
- they're paying fair royalties.
So far, I haven't see much evidence of this either on this Thread or on their own website.
I'm not sure what that has to do with selling books, which is what her job should be.
MM
Last edited:
I know that there are two regular AW posters that are overall happy with their Rain experience the last time I talked to them.
Also, one of them confirmed that Rain worked with them to get books out for reviews -- far beyond the 5 books mentioned above. (Not sure of exact numbers.)
While they aren't widely distributed, they do seem to have *some* distribution, which puts them ahead of many of the small presses that pop up in these threads.
The fact that they do print runs instead of just printing on demand and their average print run seems to be around 1,500 books bodes well. Again, not to be confused with mainstream publishers, but far above some of the places listed here. Last I heard, they had one book slated for a 10k print run, so it seems they are able to produce some sales.
I do agree their contract needs work and the fact that they won't work with agents on it (that I've heard) or negotiate with writers smacks of being an amateur.
I'd like to hear that they've established some distribution relationship perhaps with someone with the independent bookstore distributor (forgot their name) to give them a wider variety of distribution.
My thoughts on them: While I would definitely exhaust mainstream publishers and agents before looking at them, an author could definitely do much worse.
Also, one of them confirmed that Rain worked with them to get books out for reviews -- far beyond the 5 books mentioned above. (Not sure of exact numbers.)
While they aren't widely distributed, they do seem to have *some* distribution, which puts them ahead of many of the small presses that pop up in these threads.
The fact that they do print runs instead of just printing on demand and their average print run seems to be around 1,500 books bodes well. Again, not to be confused with mainstream publishers, but far above some of the places listed here. Last I heard, they had one book slated for a 10k print run, so it seems they are able to produce some sales.
I do agree their contract needs work and the fact that they won't work with agents on it (that I've heard) or negotiate with writers smacks of being an amateur.
I'd like to hear that they've established some distribution relationship perhaps with someone with the independent bookstore distributor (forgot their name) to give them a wider variety of distribution.
My thoughts on them: While I would definitely exhaust mainstream publishers and agents before looking at them, an author could definitely do much worse.
IMNSHO, a publisher so unprofessional as to mislead its authors, much less attempt to intimidate critics with blacklisting, is not headed in a direction any career-minded author would want to go.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 25,582
- Reaction score
- 3,785
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Website
- madhousemanor.wordpress.com
)
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 25,582
- Reaction score
- 3,785
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Website
- madhousemanor.wordpress.com