
Do You Make More Than Your Publisher?
from The SFWA Bulletin #159, Fall 2003
In "The Price of One Book" in the March 2003 Romance Writers Report, Deanne Carlyle asked Steven Zacharius, president and COO of Kensington Books, to provide one such sample analysis. The following costs are for a 50,000 copy first print run of a 384-page mass market paperback retailing at $5.99, with a 52.5% sell-thru (65% sales for direct channels and 40% for wholesale [supermarkets and mass merchandisers]).
In the publisher's eye, therefore, the author is making eleven times as much as the publisher for the first printing of this book. And there is simply no more room at all for an increased advance or higher royalties.
Several comments could be made at this point. For one, the comparison of the author's $12,579 to the publisher's $1,121 is apples and oranges, comparing the author's gross against the publisher's net. Overhead is also a fudge factor category, almost impossible to quantify. While applying a standard percentage is appropriate, in practice the number of books printed is almost completely irrelevant to actual costs. And note that if books sold rather than printed were the criterion, the Total Net Profit would improve to $11,791 or nearly equal to what the author gets gross.
Despite author quibbling, this is the way that publishers look at books and for that alone must be taken at face value.
Subsidiary Rights Splits
Legal Matters
While Jeffrey Poston may be able to give a table of ideal subsidiary rights, they continue to be harder to come by in the real world, no matter what the contract might say. In the Spring 2003 Authors Guild Bulletin, Kay Murray reports that a New York State court approved the settlement of a class action suit against HarperCollins. The publisher was accused of selling works to foreign affiliates at discounts of up to 75%, breaching its express royalty rates clauses in its contracts.
By now, I'm sure most of you know that the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA). Also in that Spring 2003 issue, Rebecca Fenigstein summarized the arguments made in the case. The petitioners advanced several arguments against the CTEA: that Congress had essentially made the term unlimited by serial extensions; that the extended length of copyright limited the incentive to create anew; and that the law unwittingly acts as a government-imposed restriction of speech in violation of the First Amendment.
The seven justices in the majority turned these arguments around. They noted that no such objections had been raised the four earlier times that Congress had extended copyright. By keeping the term in step with the Berne Convention, the CTEA increases incentives for creativity by making protection equivalent essentially worldwide. There is no restriction of free speech, because only expression and not content is under copyright. Additionally, "fair use" allows the public to use both ideas and expression when appropriate.
Justices Steven Breyer and John Paul Stevens in the minority argued vehemently that copyright is for the long term benefit of the public and not individual creators. Allowing heirs or corporate successors long years of protection after the creator's death keeps the work from the public without promoting any new acts of creativity.
In the Summer 2003 issue, Fenigstein discussed a case involving the 1995 Federal Trademark Dilution Act (FTDA). Victoria's Secret sued Victor's Little Secret, a store selling adult entertainment items and lingerie, claiming that the name bred confusion and was likely to dilute the distinct character of the Victoria's Secret mark. The Supreme Court ruled that the FTDA required a showing of actual dilution that must be proven before action could be taken. Even if consumers were likely to confuse the firms, Victoria's Secret had demonstrated no economic harm by it.
How to Beat the System – Free Audits
Skeptical? So was RWA President Shirley Hailstock when she looked into this. She found, as reported in her "From the President" column in the May 2003 RWR that the Escheat or "Unclaimed Property" laws in New York says that any business operating in the state must distribute the funds it receives for another person to that person. This would apply to undispersed royalties. Sending a letter, even an e-mail, to the state with a name of a company can – and presumably would - trigger an audit of that company. All complaints receive "serious consideration."
There is a caveat, of course. The State of New York cares whether corporations are obeying the law, not with whether you personally get your money back. They do not disclose to the public which firms are under audit or what the results are. However, they also do not disclose the names of complainants.
Send your detailed complaints to J. Hanson at jhanson@osc.state.ny.us
YA Science Fiction & Fantasy Markets
After the success of its Starscape paperback imprint for readers 10 and up, Tor has announced Tor Teen for those 12 or 13 and up. According to Senior Editor Jonathan Schmidt, who heads both imprints, Tor Teen will publish one book every other month and is open to unsolicited manuscripts of up to 55,000 words. He's defining the field broadly as "work that shows a recognizable element of imaginative writing" and urges writers not to feel limited by boundaries. Send manuscripts to Jonathan Schmidt, Tor Books, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010.
The well-know Cricket Magazine Group already pushed through a similar brand extension, starting Cicada for readers aged 14 and up. Editor Deborah Vetter is looking for fantasy and science fiction stories with an average length of 5000 words, although they do one longer story of up to 15,000 words each issue. Payment is 25 cents per word on publication with rights negotiable. Send manuscripts to Submissions Editor, Cicada magazine, PO Box 300, Peru, IL 61354-0300.
Full Luna guidelines and submission information are available on the eHarlequin web site at: www.eharlequin.com/cms/learntowrite/ltwArticle.jhtml?pageID=030317wu01001 or at the Romantic Science Fiction and Fantasy site at: www.romanticsf.com/news/00000093.shtml.
A listing of paranormal publishers and their contact information is available at: mywebpages.comcast.net/glick/ppubpara.htm.
No longer. The new law requires that taxes be paid only on the depreciation recapture portion, not on the gain itself. And the new rules are retroactive, so if you recently sold a house and paid taxes on the gain, you can amend your return. In most cases, you have up to three years from the date the return was filed. Therefore, returns back to 2000 can still be amended.
2. Anne Holmberg, "The President's Voice…," NINK, April 2003.
3. Campbell Geeslin, "Along Publishers Row," Authors Guild Bulletin, Spring 2003.
4. Chip McGrath, "Reviewers' Revue," Authors Guild Bulletin, Spring 2003.
Novelists, Inc., NINK, P.O. Box 1166, Mission KS 66222-0166, www.ninc.com
Romance Writers of America, Romance Writers’ Report, 16000 Stuebner Airline Dr., Suite 140, Spring, TX 77379, www.rwanational.org
Society of Children’s Book Writers & Illustrators, Bulletin, 8271 Beverly Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90048, www.scbwi.org
Western Writers of America, Roundup Magazine, 1012 Fair St, Franklin, TN 37064-2718, www.westernwriters.org
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
