This is the first of a few critical posts I feel are important to outline about my upcoming Editoral project/ anthology, and glad that this one can come into focus. For the past few weeks I have been communicating with David Steffen at Diabolical Plots for inclusion of my submission call on the Submission Grinder. It has been a lot of interesting discussion about categorization of submission calls, how mine was classified. In addition, he and I got into a lot of depth about the copyright rights language and more importantly the protection of writers' rights behind this important topic. It was my goal to use industry standard language which would be designed to cover the important topics while ensuring ethical practices regarding writer's rights.
However, inadvertendly, the text copy I produced contained some problematic issues which he and I went back and forth to try to understand clearly. A core common understanding that we shared was that ethical practices should protect the rights of the writer's in submitting their story for publication. Something I understand from both sides, as a writer, but also from the position of publisher wanting to protect my own liability. It is helpful to go over these issues with someone like David who sees a lot of submissions calls and is protective and cautious never to post any listing on his site that might send writers into a publishing situation where he has any concern their rights might not be protected. I have absolutely no problem with anyone in the industry who has this concern - it is something I expect.
It might be helpful for me to review these important points, and cover industry standards. Why does it matter to the writer how a publisher discusses the rights the publisher obtains for their work, and what does it mean when the writer "retains rights to the copyright of their work." Of course, 100% every publisher should revert all copyright rights to the writer. However, the publisher always attains first rights to whatever market they are publishing - digital, print, English vs. other language, US market vs global.
Let's start at the beginning - how are rights obtained by a publisher or transferred? One of the problems in the language I used which David flagged, but was not my intent, was that those rights do not transfer simply by submitting your story to a publisher. My position as publisher in this instance is that if I receive a story and offer a contract of acceptance, it is a contract. As David said, that is not one sided, and cannot be granted merely by submission. This is where there was a lot of back and forth and miscommunication to understand what each of us meant, but in the end we ultimately agreed and were able to find language which matched intent. There must be a clear intent from the writer that they wish their story to be published, and there must be clear intent communicated from the publisher that the content is accepted for publication. Those are the standard expectations in the industry transfer the consent and rights from the writer to publisher in the terms agreed on or stated in the contract. Typical terms cover exclusivity period in terms of months or years, etc.
In these terms the publsher generally - standardly - uses language about "first rights" as mentioned previously, and that the writer retains the rights to the copyright. But an inexperienced publisher who thinks that protects the writer's content and marketability can put writers in jeopardy. Once the "first rights" are granted, they are gone. Most original content markets will not consider previously published work. Therefore the future value and marketability can be reduced by an inexperienced publisher who claims the writer retains the original copyright of their work, and why the clearly communicated expectations to transfer those rights are so important.
Writers need to understand that the first publication has the most value. Most publishers explicitly state they accept unpublished work that has not been previously published, and websites where authors can promote their work count as being published. What this means is that if you publish your story on Wattpad, you cannot try to sell your story to a publisher, because the value of original content has been lost.
Reprint markets differ from original content markets in that they only accept work that has already been published, whereas original content markets seek unpublished, first-run material. Reprint markets are more limited in scope and opportunities because they are less common, tend to pay lower rates, and typically attract smaller audiences compared to markets for original work. If you look on my list of publications, I have myself had an original first rights story published again as a reprint, and I did so intentionally. However, it is something writers should be aware of in making their publishing decisions, and wary of inexperienced publishers trying to define these terms incorrectly.
Writers often mistakenly believe that "retaining copyright" means they have full control over their work. In fact, retaining copyright means the writer legally owns their work, but granting first rights gives the publisher the privilege of being the first to publish the piece. After first rights are used, the writer still owns the work and can pursue other uses, such as selling it to reprint markets, including anthologies, foreign-language publications, or audio adaptations.
Publishers should always use clear, transparent language in their submission guidelines to avoid confusion. They must explicitly define the terms of first rights (e.g., which formats and markets) and any exclusivity period, so writers know exactly what they’re agreeing to. Before assuming any rights, publishers must communicate their intent to publish and receive the writer’s explicit agreement. Respecting the importance and protection of the rights of writers is and should be the only way for publishers to gain good standing and reputation in the industry. Mutual understanding and clear communcation by publishers, such as those scrutinized by people like David Steffen at Diabolical Plots, are crucial to avoid confusion or disputes over rights.
Comments