Archive for June, 2011

  • 29 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    Killer clauses – a summary and some thoughts

    0

    Just to recap, the past six weeks have been taken up with looking at nefarious publisher clauses in an admittedly limited pool of contracts. I briefly touched on:

    Length of rights
    Right of first refusal
    Subsidiary rights
    Out of print & bankruptcy
    Auditing
    and even some Kooky bits.

    Now, to the summary.

    In the great self-publishing debate, I often read advice to the effect that (a) you shouldn’t self-publish because you demean your own writing, and (b) if your writing was any good, it will find a traditional publishing home eventually anyway.

    The problem is when your story does find a traditional publishing home but that home is owned by toxic and dysfunctional people. Under such circumstances, would it really have been better to have signed with AC-Pub than to go my own way? With full knowledge that, not only would my story be locked up ad infinitum, but my career (and my estate) would be hobbled as well? Is there any other industry in the world that thinks it has the right to say to me, “I will employ you on a variable wage that may be pennies per quarter, but you can never ever use your expertise again for any other employer in the world for as long as you live”??? It beggars belief, doesn’t it? Yet that’s exactly what traditional publisher, Acme Coyote Publishing, expected me to swallow.

    Interestingly, when I queried a more innocuous contract clause (as a test, to do with royalty levels), this is the response I got from the publisher:

    I’m sorry that the terms of the contract now appear inequitable to you. It also concerns me that you interpret the terms to reflect an opportunity for [Acme Coyote Publisher] to take advantage of the author.

    Whoo hoo! Like that? “Now appear inequitable to you”? “Concerns me that you interpret”? Remember that this was the first time I had the final contract in my hands. (Yes, a draft one had been forwarded to me earlier, but I take little notice of them as they are not legally binding. I prefer to save my focus for the final contract…you know, the one I will sign and be bound to.)

    After this paragraph, while conceding the point on royalties, AC-Pub goes on to say:

    If you would prefer…[to modify some royalty terms]…we can do that. Otherwise I think you might want to explore the opportunities with another publisher.

    Now, if AC-Pub could tell me to piss off when I hadn’t even broached the topics of length of rights, subsidiary rights, right of first refusal, and so on, could you imagine what they would have said once I itemised, clause by clause, exactly what was concerning me? Would have signing with them really have been more beneficial than going my own way?

    And that reminds of a different publisher. I had been promised the final contract…and promised…and promised. In the end, the contract was two months late in getting to me. Remember that. Two months late. I took one week to go through the contract and respond with my concerns. And do you know what? In a subsequent editorial meeting, I was named as being the person responsible for holding up that entire month of releases. (I had a friend at that meeting, which is rarely/never the case.) It was not the publisher’s fault for being inefficient. Oh no, stalwart reader, it was mine for daring to take a week to read through a 16-page small-type contract. Live and learn.

    Publishers take advantage of authors because they can. Because they know that each and every author who submits to them is looking for validation of their work. Sometimes you can use it to get something out of them as well (shorter rights periods, more recognition, higher royalties), but when you hit the situation where none of those apply, then you have the choice of sticking with them—for the chance to see your book on a bookshelf somewhere—or walking away.

    I won’t kid you, it’s a tough tough decision. I’m happy I made mine my way. The question stands, what would you do?

  • 22 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    Killer clauses – the Kooky Bits

    1

    If you’re enjoying this little series, bear in mind that it’s from a very very limited pool of only half a dozen or so contracts. Should you wish to be educated more on the wily traps in contract clauses, I can’t recommend The Passive Voice highly enough. His blog is incredibly informative and knowledgeable and I’m only scratching the surface of what he manages to produce week after week. To top it off, he was actually a lawyer, so he would know waaaay more about the legal ramifications of clauses than I would. Please do add him to your reader.

    So, coming back to ME, I previously blogged about:

    Length of rights
    Right of first refusal
    Subsidiary rights
    Out of print & bankruptcy
    Auditing

    of Acme Coyote Publishing (et al.), the house that originally extended a contract for War Games and that I subsequently walked away from. Today, in the penultimate in this current series, I hit the kooky bits. This is good because contract reading requires many iterations and a high level of focus, so a chance to laugh out loud in the midst of this is always appreciated. Behold the Kooky Clause:

    Author agrees that during the course of this Agreement or at any time thereafter, Author shall not disparage Acme Coyote Publishing, its employees, volunteers, or anyone associated with it in any manner whatsoever to anyone whatsoever. The parties acknowledge and agree that their respective remedy at law for any actual or threatened breach of this provision would be inadequate and that each party shall be entitled to specific performance or injunctive relief, or both, in addition to any damages otherwise recoverable in law. [Oh and in case you didn't get it from the first sentence...] This clause shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

    Now firstly, what the hell is “injunctive relief”? And how come AC-Pub is already saying that all this is waaaaay outside any legal purview BUT that they’ll go for legal relief in any case? Or, are they saying that if I dare–dare!–say something negative about “Frozen Fluids” path to publication with AC-Pub, they’ll come over to my house and spraypaint the walls a lurid green?

    And, considering that the Agreement is designed to carry on until Earth itself is consumed by the Sun, how exactly can this clause “survive the termination of this Agreement”???

    But, as amused as I was, this clause was unfortunately part of a very legal document. And, putting all the clauses together, all it did was reinforce the idea that I really didn’t want to deal with AC-Pub at all.

    Now, at this point in this series, you might be thinking that Acme Coyote Publishing is one of those loony digital houses that open and shut in a matter of a couple of months/years, but AC-Pub is a traditional (print) small press. Y’know, one of the supposed Good Guys. They have a very good reputation, have excellent editors (which is why I subbed to them in the first place) and their books have won major awards. So what’s the deal? Was I given the Bottom-of-the-Barrel contract because this would be my first book with them? Or is this standard for all their authors? And, if this was their boilerplate contract, what does that say about the desperation of their authors that they would allow themselves to be tied down to such a degree? It boggles the mind.

    There were other clauses in the contract that I didn’t like. (No, really!) They included royalty levels and so on. But I didn’t want to get into that with this series. All I wanted to do was point out the really bad bad clauses in the hope that you’ll know what to look for when it’s time for you to get a contract from a traditional small press with a solid reputation. And no, I’m not kidding with that one.

    Next week, I wrap up.

  • 17 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    On homeschooling and learning difficulties

    0

    Last week, I updated you a little on our homeschooling activities but added that it hasn’t been all beer and skittles. Read on….

    We had a problem. Little Dinosaur is a whiz at maths. She can be playing with her dolls, colouring in a picture, essentially not paying attention to the teacher. But, when the teacher asks her a question, she’ll answer it. That was the surprised revelation from one of her pre-primary teachers. The woman didn’t want to believe it, but had to admit that LD’s mathematical ability was above average.

    As you can imagine, as a result of this, we were feeling pretty confident putting her in school. Then her Maths marks started to drop. And drop. And we were facing a cliff. We didn’t pull our kids out of traditional school because of this, but for other reasons. And when I took over LD’s math instruction, I found something horrifying. At the age of eight, she didn’t even know her two times table.

    I queried her more closely about what happened at school and discovered that (a) even in exams, she used to copy answers from a friend of hers, and (b) the teacher ignored a whole swathe of the class, concentrating instead on the brightest students. With no attention and no motivation, LD just stopped caring about a subject that she was having difficulties with anyway.

    The first six months of homeschooling were filled with drills. Multiplication tables written down, recited out loud, five times, ten times. She’d be able to do complex long division and then, one week later, not even know what three times two equals. It was driving me insane! Until J intervened one morning, pointed out that our little girl was not doing this just to get a rise out of me, and suggested I do a bit of research to get to the bottom of the problem. And so I did.

    The problem, as far as I can ascertain, is dyscalculia and we should’ve seen it coming. LD was born two months premature and was in Intensive Care for a month. The doctors constantly told us that she might face developmental problems when she got older. Seems they were right.

    Just as dyslexia is a learning difficulty associated with language, dyscalculia is a learning difficulty associated with mathematics. Although there can be a genetic component to the disorder, J and I have ruled that out because we both come from families with strong mathematical abilities. We think there’s a physical, neurological deficiency in LD’s brain that’s causing the problem, linked to lack of long-term retention of core mathematical concepts.

    Let me speak plainly. Education in Asia is primitive, geared to mountains of rote learning and resistant to innovative paradigms. Within that environment, if you’re not smart, you’re “stupid” and the school’s Maths teacher plainly regarded LD as being “stupid” and, therefore, not worthy of his attention. This is a prevalent attitude in Asia. I’m glad we pulled LD out of school because she would never have been correctly diagnosed in such a rigid learning environment. The thing that really bites though is, once she’s mastered a maths skill (whether it’s adding improper fractions, long division, rounding), she aces the tests. She takes real pride in being able to complete the questions accurately and quickly. Yet, two weeks later, and she’s lost it all, not even remembering what the long division symbol is supposed to look like.

    So what are we doing about it? We’re trying several strategies, with several more waiting in the wings.

    I’ve given LD her “back-up brain” (BUB for short). Because she likes the colour pink, it’s a big pink notebook. Every time we do something new in Maths, she has to explain it to herself in her BUB, using colouring pencils. At the front of the book are all the times tables, because I don’t think she should be forced to remember them AND whatever she’s learning.

    J is buying more games for us to play as a family, so look out for reviews of Mille Bournes, Dixit, A La Carte, and others in the future. We also play mah-jongg (Malaysian rules) regularly. In this way, we’re hoping to stimulate LD’s maths sense through other paths in a fun, yet slightly competitive, way.

    LD is learning violin (her choice of instrument) because there’s a strong link between maths and music. Again, we see this as a way of stimulating the neural pathways and boosting her self-confidence. And, speaking of self-confidence, both kids also take part in Wushu classes. (Wushu is like a martial arts ballet.)

    Still on my list are neuro-sensory therapies, although it appears I inadvertently stumbled across part of them when instructing LD to write in her BUB with colouring pencils.

    And lastly, in class, I use a smartboard (more on that in another post) and different colour pens to illustrate mathematical concepts. The kids love the technology and they laugh at Sausage (aka The Teacher’s Assistant) who dutifully watches every movement of the cursor projected onto the wall and barks if nothing moves for a few minutes. Anything that makes learning fun, even if it’s taking time out to watch Sausage chase the laser pen, is a plus in my book.

    I am pained by LD’s difficulty. I love maths, I believe “God is Mathematics”, so this one bites particularly hard. But, with luck, effort and hard work, I’m hopeful that we’ll get through this.

    UPDATE: I found a site called Learning Link Technologies and am exploring it at the moment to see if it’ll help. If anyone has any experiences with this site and their products, I’d be most grateful for some feedback.

    I have also joined the Dyscalculia forum in an effort to find more things I can do to help LD with her difficulties. If you’re there as well, please say hi!

  • 15 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    Killer clauses – Auditing

    0

    Wow, this series of posts is proving to be more popular than any two years of my blog put together! (And John, I’ll be doing another post on Malaysia soon.) So far in this series, I have tackled:

    Length of rights
    Right of first refusal
    Subsidiary rights
    Out of print & bankruptcy

    I hadn’t originally planned to include anything on auditing but was struck by Mags’ comment on the Length of Rights post. Mags said:

    What happens if you do not receive any money or sales figures but know your book is selling? Does that give you an option to get out of the contract early?

    In a nutshell, no, although I wonder whether Mags should be approaching a lawyer. If she has evidence of sales and no royalties forthcoming, I’m sure a good lawyer will be able to work with that. However, let’s see if we can distill some general points from a situation like this.

    It occurs to me that the publishers that behave in this way (selling but not paying) have the worst contracts. I don’t know why that is. A correlation between being bastard people and creating bastard contracts perhaps? Your guess is as good as mine.

    As I replied to Mags, some contracts have clauses that say that if you haven’t been paid for a certain amount of time, you have the right to take back your work, however this is by no means universal. What is more universal is an auditing clause that normally gives you the right to audit the Publisher’s books once a year. Something like this:

    The Author may, with sixty (60) days [sic] written notice but not more than once a year, assign and designate a certified public accountant to examine the Publisher’s records as they relate to the Work. Such examination shall be at the Author’s expense unless errors are found in excess of ten percent (10%) of royalties in the Author’s favor, then Publisher shall pay amounts owing for the Work and the reasonable cost of the audit.

    That’s not a bad deal. I quite like this one, which doesn’t have such an annual limitation:

    The Publisher shall keep professional, comprehensive and complete records of all dealings of any nature, disposal or transfer in respect of the Work. The Publisher shall co-operate fully with the Author in any audit and assist in providing such information as the Author may request to establish whether there are any errors or omissions and to fully audit the accounts.

    A couple of contracts I’ve seen (including the notorious one from AC-Pub) doesn’t even have a specific audit clause, content to lump such issues together in the general Disputes clause. But my favourite comes from a big big women’s fiction publisher. The clause is quite long so let me summarise the legalese:

    Author shall have the right, upon reasonable notice and during usual business hours but not more than once each year, to have the books and records of Publisher examined at the place where the same are regularly maintained insofar as they relate to the Work, by a certified and independent public accountant. [okay so far] Such examination shall be at the expense of Author unless the net of all errors found aggregate to mroe than five percent (5%) of the total sum accrued to Author and are to Author’s disadvantage, in which case the reasonable expense of such examination shall be payable by Publisher. [there's that fluffy word "reasonable" again, but that's mighty decent of them, nonetheless] … No such examination shall be made by Author’s accountant upon a contingent fee basis.

    Whoa, Nelly! So Big Women’s Publisher is telling me under what conditions I can hire an accountant that **I’m** paying for???? They put this last sentence in, of course, to circumvent all those freelance auditors out there who make a living from finding publisher errors, charging only a percentage of what they find. Still, arrogant much on behalf of the publisher? It gets worse though.

    As a condition precedent to the exercise by Author of this right…Author’s…accountant shall execute an agreement, in a form acceptable to Publisher, to the effect that any information obtained as a result of such examination shall be held strictly confidential and shall not be revealed to any third party other than Author or Author’s representative, without Publisher’s prior written consent, [and, in case that wasn't clear] which consent may be withheld in [sic] Publisher’s sole discretion. Author also agrees to hold all information and statements provided to Author or Author’s accountant in strictest confidence…

    This is the problem with writers. As a general rule, they don’t like to help each other. They see every other author out there as a potential rival for readership and the editors’ and publisher’s largesse. Clauses like this don’t help because they enable such ultimately self-defeating behaviour. What it’s saying is that if I find that Big Pub is swindling me, I cannot tell anyone else about it without Big Pub’s written consent. This is not a slam-dunk for the publisher because, if I was caught in this situation, my first avenue of recourse would be to consult an IP lawyer and find out if the clause is even enforceable. (Remember that: Publishers knowingly put in clauses that are not enforceable by law. They depend on your ignorance–and, quite frankly, your desperation–as an author to go along with them.)

    The thing that saddens me about this clause is that a lot of authors will read it and actually sigh with relief. As long as they are all right, that’s all that matters. The publisher won’t let them tell anyone else, so it’s not really their fault if their fellow authors get shafted, right?

    That’s a tad depressing (and one I’ve had personal experience of) so next week, some humour as we hit the kooky bits with AC-Pub, who escaped the blade in this particular episode.

  • 10 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    An update on the homeschooling situation

    0

    It’s been a while since I wrote about homeschooling, so I thought I’d rectify that today.

    For those of you just joining us, we decided to pull our kids from a local private school this time last year (or was it July?) due to a number of reasons, including the fact that we were paying a hefty sum per month only to find our children jammed 37 to a class and being taught nothing.

    The education system here in south-east Asia is very (did I say “very”? I meant “extremely”!) dependent on tuition centres, which follow a particular school’s curriculum lock-step. Therefore, it’s expected that the teachers at schools will do a piss-poor job because it justifies them taking up spots as tutors at the tuition centres, teaching the same thing all over again and essentially making double the money. If you think this is a scam of the highest order, you’d be right.

    I don’t play nice in such situations. So rather than give the school (that had its own tuition centre) double money, we gave them nothing and decided to take on educating our kids ourselves.

    One year on and how is it working? Well, I had the kind of super-obsessive, “Asian tiger” parents that I detest but I have to admit they did a good job on brainwashing me. So I had to get rid of all that “it’s A’s or it’s nothing” shit (including the classic “you only got 99% for that exam; I refuse to talk to you for the entire day”) that made my own childhood such a misery. Forming new disciplinary pathways in my brain took months, to be honest. Months to relax into the kind of attitude that put comprehension, fostering an air of exploration, and questioning above 100-question drills on how to add mixed numbers. (Not that I don’t do that, but that’s usually at the end when the kids can do all that in their sleep!)

    I also put down a curriculum and haven’t strayed from it too much. One year on, this is what our schedule looks like.

    Maths – 3-4 times a week
    English – 3-4 times a week
    Science – 3 times a week
    Music (external provider) – once a week, practice every day
    Wushu (external provider) – once a week, practice every day
    Touch-typing – they’ve learnt the basics, so now it’s about 2-3 times a month
    Mind mapping – once a month
    Art appreciation – twice a month
    Art – twice a week
    Foreign language – once a week

    In addition to this, the kids have asked that I teach them TurtleScript (a simple programming language) via KTurtle, so that will be twice a week starting next week. (I’m now learning it myself.)

    In Living Skills, they have begun Knife Skills with real knives, not those plastic kiddie-safe knives. They are constantly supervised. I also get The Wast to cook the occasional curry while I prep ingredients. While shopping, I get them to check labels and choose what brands of food to buy while comparing prices.

    They have both completed an Electronics ECA (Extra-Curricular Activity) course, including putting together their own simple robot kits using breadboard soldering. Little Dinosaur (9yo) is very methodical and is turning out to be a fine engineer. She can also fix things that her father occasionally breaks.

    The Wast (11yo) designs game levels for one of his favourite games, Hamumu’s “Dr. Lunatic Supreme With Cheese”. His first world is currently being tested and is due to go up at Hamumu within the next two weeks. He’s very excited about that.

    But it hasn’t always been beer and skittles. More on that next Friday. In the meantime, have a good weekend. I’ll catch you next week.

  • 08 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    Killer clauses – Out of Print & Bankruptcy

    1

    In the previous three episodes, I blogged about:

    Length of rights
    Right of first refusal
    Subsidiary rights

    Let’s talk out-of-print.

    For a number of digital publishers, this is a no-brainer. You’re given a specific amount of time and your rights come up at the end of that period. But what happens when a digital publisher also has print releases? With a lot of them, the rights term covers both ebooks and pbooks. Sweet.

    For a publisher who is moving from print to digital or has print progenitors, however, they can’t seem to let go of that out-of-print (OOP) definition, even for their ebooks. So, for a publisher like that, their OOP definition may look like this:

    (b) For the purposes of this agreement the Work shall be considered to be “in print” if:

    (i) it is available for sale in an electronic format which generates aggregate sales of at least fifty (50) units in the four (4) consecutive accounting periods immediately preceding the Author’s request for reversion of rights; or

    (ii) it is available for sale in a physical print edition which generates aggregate sales of at least one hundred (100) units in the four (4) consecutive accounting periods immediately preceding the Author’s request for reversion of rights.

    The problem with going digital with such publishers is that, in the third quarter, just as you’ve totalled the sales and are getting ready to shoot off that letter asking for your rights back, they can have a “Retro Special!“, with every old ebook title being sold for 50% off! Readers soooo like bargains and what are you going to say? “Don’t buy my book!”?

    If the publisher pulls this stunt once a year (they probably have it diarised), you’re screwed.

    Speaking of screwed, we come to my favourite, Acme Coyote Publishing. Perpetuity folks. Go back to the first in this series where:

    …The terms of the contract will remain in effect as long as the work is made available for sale in any form…

    And, as we know from the dreaded Section 1A, that includes “Print, hard cover and soft cover (of large or small format), electronic, digital, and audio versions.” I’m surprised they didn’t include TV and movie in that, but maybe they were just happy to rest on their laurels. (Yes, I know that’s covered in subsidiary rights, I’m just trying to make a joke here.)

    Under such circumstances, it’s no wonder that AC-Pub reminds you that:

    The parties agree that these terms shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators and assignees of both parties for all copyrights, all revisions and abridgements and of all proceeds therefrom…

    If you’re a desperate author with your genitalia tied to AC-Pub, you’d be hoping for bankruptcy right about now, even though the Publisher is in no position to say this:

    Upon the occurrence of any affirmative act of insolvency, or in the event that Publisher goes out of business, or in the event of a filing of a petition for bankruptcy against or on behalf of Publisher (either voluntary or involuntary), any and all rights conveyed to Publisher herein shall immediately revert to Author and this Agreement shall be terminated.

    In actuality, once a company files for bankruptcy, the rights become part of the assets of the company to be disposed of as a court decides. It’s out of the hands of the Publisher completely, which makes me wonder why the bastards keep putting it in there. And that clause, with minor variations of wording, is in Every. One. Of. My. Contracts. Regardless of publisher.

    Just in case you’re thinking that, in this one instance, AC-Pub is behaving just like everyone else, they would like to remind you that:

    However, a bona fide sale of the company to a third party shall not constitute a liquidation and shall not be cause for termination under this paragraph.

    What this means is that if AC-Pub know they’re heading for the wazoo, they can carve off part of their business, sell it to, oh I don’t know, a new company they’ve just set up before filing and you’re still chained to them, baby. No negotiation of a new contract included. Mmm mmmm. Delish.

    Next week, how about auditing the publisher?

    POSTSCRIPT: It seems a bit inane to put this down but I’ve got to Cover My Ass here. You should know that I am not a lawyer or solicitor or attorney or whatever you call them in North America. This series of posts just highlights my personal musings as a lowly, ignorant author and should not be construed as legal advice of any kind.

  • 03 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    My relationship with reviews

    2

    If you are a reviewer, and you think about how to couch your review, and you detail in plain language what works and what doesn’t, then you’ll be pleased to know that I take your criticisms to heart. In fact, I do more than that. Allow me to explain.

    In Enemy Hands was the first novel of mine that was published. Up till that time, my released stories were mostly novellas. For anyone who’s written both, you’d know that novels and novellas are two different kettles of fish. Now, with an author’s myopia, I thought I had written a good novel but, in fact, it had a number of flaws, flaws that were pointed out to me via several very good reviews.

    1) The mix of erotic romance with hard sf. I still have some people tell me that they think the mix works. I don’t think so and, obliquely, other reviewers don’t think so, so that’s going to be my default stance for future novels. If I’m writing hard sf, I’ll ditch the erotic rom elements.

    2) Internalisations and set-up. This one is a difficult one for the sf author. It’s not like I can ask a reader to go download a map of Slater’s End from Google and follow along from there. However, an author can go too far and I think I did that. So, lessons from readers for next time: fewer internalisations and cut back on all that set-up information.

    3) Pacing. This is tied to (2). I spent so much time explaining the Republic that my pacing was off. By the time I’d set up the world, more than half the novel had staggered past. Things only started to get good in the latter half of the book. This might be okay for Iain M Banks, but I’m not Banks. So no self-indulgent treatises.

    What was very interesting to me was that a friend of mine, who hasn’t read much modern SF and doesn’t have much interest in the internet to follow blogs and review sites (I know, it’s true though), read my novel and nailed every single one of the flaws as pointed out in reviews. Of course, I asked him to be my DevEd for future projects and, after a bit of cajoling and bartering, he agreed.

    When I decided to revamp War Games, I sat down with the criticisms of In Enemy Hands fresh in my head. I took a 102,000-word novel and cut it back to something like 82,000 words. Or, to put it another way, I threw away eighty manuscript pages. And do you know what? I like the result! The book is leaner and more focused and even DevEd is only muttering a bit rather than metaphorically throwing down a page and shouting at me.

    But, I couldn’t have done it without the time and effort of several reviewers. With that in mind, I’d like to offer a big thank you to:

    Black Sun Reviews
    Panic in the Lingerie
    Janicu’s Book Blog
    RhiReading
    Book Chick City

    If War Games is a better book than In Enemy Hands, it’s because of readers like you. Thanks for taking the time to help me.

  • 01 Jun

    Posted by


    Category

    Killer clauses – Subsidiary Rights

    4

    In the previous two episodes, I blogged about:

    Length of rights
    Right of first refusal

    from various publishers I’ve dealt with. Not an extensive list, but entertaining enough.

    Subsidiary rights are rights that fall out of the original (usually) print rights. These are things like book club editions, serialisations, reprints, movies, television deals, and so on.

    Some publishers don’t have Subsidiary Rights clauses at all, so if I bump into Spielberg one night, I’m free to offer him one of those stories and rake in the millions, baby! Yeah, right.

    Others are a bit coy, but generally the majority of the cut belongs to the author. Paraphrasing another publisher’s contract, this is their split:

    Motion Picture – 70% Author / 30% Publisher
    Dramatic Stage Play Adaptation & Performance – 70 / 30
    Television – 70 / 30
    Radio – 70 / 30

    You may wonder if the above publisher even deserves thirty percent for something YOU slogged over but, hey, it’s a livable compromise. Until we come to our good pals at AC-Pub who have to take it one step further and rub it in at the same time. This is their clause under “Subsidiary rights”:

    Publisher shall have the exclusive, worldwide right, at Publisher’s option, to sell or license the rights in the Work indicated below upon such terms as the Publisher deems advisable to domestic or foreign accounts. Author retains no right of approval for such sales to commence or cease. [did you like that sentence? rofl] The proceeds received by Publisher from the sale or license of such rights shall be divided between Author and Publisher 50/50 respectively.

    Riiiiiggghhhhttt. All they did was publish a book I wrote, but they’re still entitled to fifty percent of the spin-off take AND I have no say whatsoever in any discussions associated with my book. Such an ethical mob. Next week, how about some out-of-print considerations and praying for bankruptcy (for them, not me)?