The Reason
PatriciaL - Thank you for the response, and I hope to read other thoughts on this too. The first book is a traditional royalty agreement. The reason for writing again on the same topic is that the core concept of the book is quite different and based on a different approach to the topic. So the second book is not just an expansion, but it is what I originally intended the first book to be. However, the first several chapters basically cover the same topics, but are not exactly worded the same and have some additional content. Although the titles are different, they use different wording but do cover much of the same topic. After those chapters, the second book will go in a different direction. At this point, I believe (and hope) the second book idea is okay because this premise is the way I originally intended the first book to be but it got sidetracked in my push to move forward with the project at the time. So my question here is to just be more assured that it is okay to write a second book with some of the same beginning concepts, with some of the same material (albeit worded differently) but then expanded in later chapters. I would think that even if the first publisher owns the copyright to the first book and the wording, the fundamental concept is something that I am free to write about again? And if the first few chapters cover the same topics, and I am able to get permissions again from the citations that I used (plus some new ones) for other sources that I cited and used in illustrations, that it is okay to write again about the same topics? The rest of the book is more detailed, and I will elaborate more on previous areas and add new chapters. I adhered too much to the first editor's approach and want to go with my original direction on the basic concepts that I am writing about, with the wording and terminology that I believe is best for this subject. What do you think?