-
Guest please check The Index before starting a thread.
Future House Publishing
- Thread starter celoise
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
DanielRand
Registered
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2014
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1
Hey, just checking in on this thread because someone mentioned Future House Publishing today.
I did send my contract to Victoria Strauss ages ago. I haven't asked for her permission to paste the following, but I figure it won't be a problem since it's constructive and would help the greater good. So, here on is the email she sent me in relation to my contract (that I DIDN'T sign! You'll see why!)
You asked why the contract isn't a good one. Here are the highlights. Obligatory disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, so what follows isn't legal counsel.
- It's a life-of-copyright contract (Clause 2). A life-of-copyright clause should be balanced by a termination clause ensuring that you can terminate the contract and regain your rights once sales or income fall below a stated benchmark (for instance, fewer than 100 copies sold within the past 12 months). This prevents the publisher from sitting on the rights to a book that isn't selling. Once sales fall, it's better for the writer to have the option of regaining his or her rights and doing something else with them.
In this contract, there's no termination language _at all_. This means the publisher can hold onto your rights for as long as it pleases, and you have no recourse even to ask for them back. This is a huge red flag.
- The publisher can edit, abridge, or adapt the work without seeking your approval or permission. You are giving up almost all control over your work here. The author should _always_ have control over publisher changes (with the exception of routine copy editing), and adaptation or abridgment should be a separate subsidiary right that you can choose not to grant.
- Speaking of rights, it's an all-rights contract. A small press shouldn't claim rights it isn't capable of licensing to others or using itself. Is there any evidence this publisher can use or license such subsidiary rights as foreign-language editions, book club rights, film/TV/dramatic rights? If not, then it shouldn't be asking for them--or you should be able to carve them out of the contract.
- The Competitive Works clause (clause 5) is much too vague and sweeping, and could prevent you from writing any other books in the same setting or featuring the same characters or even themes. A Competition clause should more narrowly define what a competing work is (for instance: a work of fantasy for the young adult market) and should limit the competition period to no more than a year after publication.
- The Royalties clause is a "gotcha." Royalties on print editions look competitive--but check out the reduction in royalties to a measly 2.5% of list for POD or short print runs. POD or short runs is how a small press is most likely to produce its books. So 2.5% is the royalty you'll most likely receive for print sales--a ridiculously tiny amount.
The ebook royalty is also substandard, at 20% of net. Even big publishing houses pay 25% of net; reputable small presses pay 30-40%.
Another "gotcha": royalties are reduced for sales at discounts greater than 50% of retail. That could cover everything sold on Amazon.
- You're required to indemnify the publisher for all claims and lawsuits. Less punitive indemnity provisions would require you to indemnify only for claims or lawsuits that are upheld in court.
- You're barred from disclosing the provisions of the contract to "any third party." You can't legally be barred from sharing this kind of information with your lawyer .
- Any disputes between you and the publisher must submit to mediation before they can go to court--and you're on the hook for 50% of the mediation cost.
- The publisher can assign your rights under the contract to others as a result of a sale or merger of its business, but that third party isn't required to honor the terms of the contract.
- Clause 15 essentially allows the publisher to make any and all decisions without your consent (what's "a reasonable amount of time?" The publisher can make that mean anything it wants).
I did send my contract to Victoria Strauss ages ago. I haven't asked for her permission to paste the following, but I figure it won't be a problem since it's constructive and would help the greater good. So, here on is the email she sent me in relation to my contract (that I DIDN'T sign! You'll see why!)
You asked why the contract isn't a good one. Here are the highlights. Obligatory disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, so what follows isn't legal counsel.
- It's a life-of-copyright contract (Clause 2). A life-of-copyright clause should be balanced by a termination clause ensuring that you can terminate the contract and regain your rights once sales or income fall below a stated benchmark (for instance, fewer than 100 copies sold within the past 12 months). This prevents the publisher from sitting on the rights to a book that isn't selling. Once sales fall, it's better for the writer to have the option of regaining his or her rights and doing something else with them.
In this contract, there's no termination language _at all_. This means the publisher can hold onto your rights for as long as it pleases, and you have no recourse even to ask for them back. This is a huge red flag.
- The publisher can edit, abridge, or adapt the work without seeking your approval or permission. You are giving up almost all control over your work here. The author should _always_ have control over publisher changes (with the exception of routine copy editing), and adaptation or abridgment should be a separate subsidiary right that you can choose not to grant.
- Speaking of rights, it's an all-rights contract. A small press shouldn't claim rights it isn't capable of licensing to others or using itself. Is there any evidence this publisher can use or license such subsidiary rights as foreign-language editions, book club rights, film/TV/dramatic rights? If not, then it shouldn't be asking for them--or you should be able to carve them out of the contract.
- The Competitive Works clause (clause 5) is much too vague and sweeping, and could prevent you from writing any other books in the same setting or featuring the same characters or even themes. A Competition clause should more narrowly define what a competing work is (for instance: a work of fantasy for the young adult market) and should limit the competition period to no more than a year after publication.
- The Royalties clause is a "gotcha." Royalties on print editions look competitive--but check out the reduction in royalties to a measly 2.5% of list for POD or short print runs. POD or short runs is how a small press is most likely to produce its books. So 2.5% is the royalty you'll most likely receive for print sales--a ridiculously tiny amount.
The ebook royalty is also substandard, at 20% of net. Even big publishing houses pay 25% of net; reputable small presses pay 30-40%.
Another "gotcha": royalties are reduced for sales at discounts greater than 50% of retail. That could cover everything sold on Amazon.
- You're required to indemnify the publisher for all claims and lawsuits. Less punitive indemnity provisions would require you to indemnify only for claims or lawsuits that are upheld in court.
- You're barred from disclosing the provisions of the contract to "any third party." You can't legally be barred from sharing this kind of information with your lawyer .
- Any disputes between you and the publisher must submit to mediation before they can go to court--and you're on the hook for 50% of the mediation cost.
- The publisher can assign your rights under the contract to others as a result of a sale or merger of its business, but that third party isn't required to honor the terms of the contract.
- Clause 15 essentially allows the publisher to make any and all decisions without your consent (what's "a reasonable amount of time?" The publisher can make that mean anything it wants).