PSA: Who Pays Whom
Tuesday, November 24th, 2009 08:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rolanniNobody here lives under a rock, but in case you've been really, really busy having, oh, A Life, I'll just mention here that Harlequin Publishing (aka The Evil Empire) has hit on a scheme to make money from its slush pile, to wit:
It will start a vanity press arm, Harlequin Horizons by name, and! (here's the genuis) it will steer hopeful authors whose manuscripts Harlequin-not-Horizons are rejecting to the vanity press arm. Which will be happy to publish your book for you, as soon as your check to them for six grand clears the bank.
This is -- how to put it nicely? -- vile. Right up there with taking lollipops from three-year-olds. It preys upon hopes and dreams while deluding people -- and That's Just Wrong.
Harlequin has been Sternly Chastised by the Romance Writers of America, Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, Novelists, Inc, and Mystery Writers of America. At last report, Harlequin was Hurt and Dismayed by this reaction and has promised to rename the imprint -- which I see it has done -- DellArte Press. See? All better! Now, no one knows it's Harlequin behind the mirror.
Just so we're all on the same page, here's a glossary:
Vanity Publishing: You pay (a lot) for someone to publish your book for you. In Harlequin -- excuse me -- in DellArte Press' case, they also take a percentage of each sale -- sorta like reverse royalties. Never do this, no matter how much you want to see your name on a book cover.
Self-Publishing: You lay out and print your own book, either from a online service like Lulu, or the old-fashioned way of sending a printer the files and having them print and bind it for you. Or, perhaps you serialize on the web. You make all artistic and budgetary decisions. For some books, this is a perfectly valid choice and can be profitable for the author and beneficial to readers.
Small Press: Just what it says: a small publisher. Advances range from $0 to something more than that but still (probably) less than what a Big Press will pay. You take less risk than with self-publishing, enjoy a wider distribution, and close personal attention from your editor. NOTE: A legitimate small press does not ask the author for money to publish their book. They may not offer an advance upfront, but they will pay royalties. To the author. And they will bear production expenses.
Traditional Publishing: A third party publisher acquires your novel. They send you a check. When your book has earned out its advance (i.e. "advance against royalties"), you will begin to receive royalty checks from the publisher. This is the usual, normal way of things. See "traditional," above.
The phrase paying [one's] dues: is an analogy; it does not denote an Actual, Physical payment of money. The dues referred to are the time you spend honing your craft, getting rejected, and honing some more.
Warning signs: If your publisher hasn't asked you for money to publish, but they ask you for, oh, money to pay the artist, or the copy editor -- run away; it's a scam.
EDITED TO ADD: ...with thanks to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
houseboatonstyx for mentioning this in comments... Your copyright belongs to you. If a publisher (or agent, or...anybody, actually) tries to gain control of your copyright (which is, alas, a common practice in academic publishing) run away. This is not how we do it over here in Commercial Fiction. Common practice: An author signs a contract with a publisher, granting the publisher the right to publish a particular work for X time. When that time expires, the rights return to you. There is no, not ever, any "signing over" of copyright.
If you find yourself in doubt about an offer to publish, reference Yog's Law.
Small print: The above refers to the publishing of fiction, which is the industry I understand. Academic or other esoteric publishing practices are not relevant to the above discussion.
That's all I got.
G'night.
It will start a vanity press arm, Harlequin Horizons by name, and! (here's the genuis) it will steer hopeful authors whose manuscripts Harlequin-not-Horizons are rejecting to the vanity press arm. Which will be happy to publish your book for you, as soon as your check to them for six grand clears the bank.
This is -- how to put it nicely? -- vile. Right up there with taking lollipops from three-year-olds. It preys upon hopes and dreams while deluding people -- and That's Just Wrong.
Harlequin has been Sternly Chastised by the Romance Writers of America, Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, Novelists, Inc, and Mystery Writers of America. At last report, Harlequin was Hurt and Dismayed by this reaction and has promised to rename the imprint -- which I see it has done -- DellArte Press. See? All better! Now, no one knows it's Harlequin behind the mirror.
Just so we're all on the same page, here's a glossary:
Vanity Publishing: You pay (a lot) for someone to publish your book for you. In Harlequin -- excuse me -- in DellArte Press' case, they also take a percentage of each sale -- sorta like reverse royalties. Never do this, no matter how much you want to see your name on a book cover.
Self-Publishing: You lay out and print your own book, either from a online service like Lulu, or the old-fashioned way of sending a printer the files and having them print and bind it for you. Or, perhaps you serialize on the web. You make all artistic and budgetary decisions. For some books, this is a perfectly valid choice and can be profitable for the author and beneficial to readers.
Small Press: Just what it says: a small publisher. Advances range from $0 to something more than that but still (probably) less than what a Big Press will pay. You take less risk than with self-publishing, enjoy a wider distribution, and close personal attention from your editor. NOTE: A legitimate small press does not ask the author for money to publish their book. They may not offer an advance upfront, but they will pay royalties. To the author. And they will bear production expenses.
Traditional Publishing: A third party publisher acquires your novel. They send you a check. When your book has earned out its advance (i.e. "advance against royalties"), you will begin to receive royalty checks from the publisher. This is the usual, normal way of things. See "traditional," above.
The phrase paying [one's] dues: is an analogy; it does not denote an Actual, Physical payment of money. The dues referred to are the time you spend honing your craft, getting rejected, and honing some more.
Warning signs: If your publisher hasn't asked you for money to publish, but they ask you for, oh, money to pay the artist, or the copy editor -- run away; it's a scam.
EDITED TO ADD: ...with thanks to
houseboatonstyx for mentioning this in comments... Your copyright belongs to you. If a publisher (or agent, or...anybody, actually) tries to gain control of your copyright (which is, alas, a common practice in academic publishing) run away. This is not how we do it over here in Commercial Fiction. Common practice: An author signs a contract with a publisher, granting the publisher the right to publish a particular work for X time. When that time expires, the rights return to you. There is no, not ever, any "signing over" of copyright.If you find yourself in doubt about an offer to publish, reference Yog's Law.
Small print: The above refers to the publishing of fiction, which is the industry I understand. Academic or other esoteric publishing practices are not relevant to the above discussion.
That's all I got.
G'night.
Copyright question
Date: 2009-11-25 09:28 pm (UTC)Google settlement? Doesn't Google attempt to keep to books in the public domain??
Sorry if this is off-topic.
I'm glad you said something about it here - I've been following the story (and blogged about it myself) and it's amazing how confused and confusing it got.
Rock on RWA, MWA and SFWA
Lauretta@ConstellationBooks
Re: Copyright question
Date: 2009-11-26 04:34 pm (UTC)Since Google has a mandate to Do No Evil, it's trying to redefine what's "evil".
Re: Copyright question
Date: 2009-11-28 01:49 am (UTC)Lauretta