Archives

Categories

Submit Questions

Have contract or copyright questions? Drop me an e-mail. I reserve the right to edit questions to make them more broadly applicable before posting an answer.

E-Mail sheillev.aol.com

Want to follow questions and answers,
Go to Questions & Answers, Tab at top of page

What Rights Should an Author Grant in a Contract with a Traditional Publisher?

When lawyers talk about “standard” clauses and courts refer to publishing contracts as “standard agreements” it is not to suggest that there is a standard form such as we expect for certain real estate transactions.  What we mean by “standard” is that the contract clauses address similar concepts of rights and duties expressed in language differently crafted by each publisher.  We will comment on the standard clauses from the Author’s perspective. The reason to emphasize the Author’s perspective is that publishing contracts are not negotiated from the ground up.  They are prepared by the Publisher and delivered to the Author as though ready for signature.  And, many Authors (some to their regret) sign without understanding what the contracts contain or what rights they are giving up.

The first of the so-called “standard” clauses in traditional publishing contracts is the Grant of Rights.  Depending on the business model the author will grant many of her rights for the term of copyright to a traditional publisher, fewer rights for a limited term to an ebook publisher, or retain all rights granted under the Copyright Act if she self publishes.

We start from the proposition that if a Publisher offers a contract to an author the rights it is bargaining for have significant economic value.  Contracts signed without negotiation are drafted primarily with the publisher’s benefits in mind and only incidentally with the author’s.  Publishers understand this and are generally amenable to making some contractual changes as long as the changes don’t undermine their economic interests.  

U.S. copyright law and the Copyright Act are never far from publishing contracts.  A logical beginning is to consider the following questions:

1.  What rights does an Author have that a Publisher would want to license?  And,
2.  Where do the rights come from?

The answers are in the U.S. Copyright Act.  Section 102 provides that “Copyright protection subsists … in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression.  “Literary works” is the first of 8 categories of “works of authorship.” Other “authors” include composers, dramatists, choreographers, artists, sculptors, and architects.

Section 106 of the Copyright Act lists the exclusive rights granted to Authors.  The list is commonly referred to as a “basket of rights.”  The Author has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize others to

reproduce the copyrighted work
prepare derivative works
distribute copies to the public
perform the work and
display the work publicly  

This basket of rights is divisible, meaning that individual rights can be licensed separately.  Authors should resist giving Publishers every right they have.  There is no point, for example, in giving most Publishers “performance” rights, which they will not be able to exploit.  Most authors do not want to give up their right to prepare derivative works, yet some publishing contracts contain language that does just that.

At a minimum Publishers ask for the rights to reproduce, publish, distribute and sell a book to the public.  A “standard” Grant of Rights clause reads:
   
The Author grants to the Publisher the sole and exclusive right during the full term of copyright and any renewals or extensions thereof to exercise and license (i) the right to reproduce, publish, distribute and sell the full length Work in the English language in a product reproduced in print-on-paper or other physical media (“book form”); (ii) the right to use the full length content of the Work in the English language in electronic media; and (iii) the subsidiary rights to the Work specified below, in the following territories.

You will notice that the Grant of Rights clause contains six elements:
1.  The “sole and exclusive right” to exploit the Work;
2.  For the full term of copyright and any renewals or extensions;
3.  To reproduce, publish, distribute and sell the Work;
4.  HOW?  In “book form” AND in “electronic media”;
5.  The right to sublicense subsidiary rights; and
6.  All rights are to be exercised in stipulated territories.  

Under the 1976 Copyright Act the full term of copyright (if the contract is not terminated earlier) is the life of the author plus 70 years.  Publishing contracts also enumerate the Subsidiary Rights granted in a separate clause.  We will discuss subsidiary rights in another essay.

Acceptable and Unacceptable Terms of Agency Agreements

Agency agreements are not forever. Not like publishing agreements in which authors grant licenses “for the term of copyright.” Nevertheless, for the term of of agreement the agent has an exclusive right to place an author’s work and if the author retains another agent before termination of the first and is successfull the author is exposed to a double commission. It would therefore be prudent for the author to calendar the date for termination of the agency agreement and terminate according to the terms if she has lost confidence in the agent. There is no early termination without an agreement in writing.

Some provisions in agency agreements are unacceptable and should be questioned. There is a difference, for example, between a literary agent and an agent who manages an author’s career. A literary agent’s rights extend only to offering the work. More importantly, if the agent is successful in placing the work it is he who collects advances and royalties on the author’s behalf. Publishers and licensees pay agents who then distribute to their principals. This calls for a degree of trust in strangers. How those funds are accounted for (whether segrated in a subaccount and not comingled) and when distributed are important elements in the agreement. Breach of contract and fiduciary duty is not unknown. Payments due author are terms that have to be taken into account in reviewing and negotiating an agency agreement. In an unpublished decision from a New York trial court from 2006, Fay v. Yost co-authors charged their literary agent with failing to provide account statements in a timely manner and remit royalties earned from foreign sales. The court denied agent’s application to dismiss the complaint as against her on the theory that her agency was a corporation.

Authors should turn around the “know your customer” rule under securities laws to “know your agent” before signing an agreement. (Not all literary agents use written representation agreements; rather the author’s obligation to pay commission is drafted into the agency clause in the publishing or licensing agreement). Agency commissions are typically deducted upon the agent’s receipt of income before distribution to the author.

Aside from compensation and distribution of royalties — in Yost, the authors were unaware of foreign placements of their work — authors should also pay attention to the scope of agency. The larger the scope the more important to have a clearly spelled out early exit right. Literary, management, and licensing agreements are essentially performance based. Agents are only paid for success. However, as the market has tightened for print books some agents demand more than simply the right of placing an author’s work. The scope of services term should not be uncritically accepted. (Some non-traditional “publishers” have also expanded their services to include agency representation for subsidiary and ancillary rights. Watch out!).

Scope of services should be no greater than the agent is capable of performing. Question whether the agent should, for example, include in his provence any of the exclusive rights under the copyright law that the author would ordinarily retain in negotiating a publishing or licensing agreement. Dramatic, performance and movie rights should be granted to specialized agents (but not necessarily literary agents) who have the expertise to exploit them. Whatever terms are offered and ultimately accepted should be clear and precise. This applies not only to the handling of funds, but also to the scope of services and separation provisions.

Scope of services was the subject of one recent agency agreement.  The agent’s services included “development” of “your literary career.” This gives the agent the opportunity to throw in every right the author owns. This particular agreement read

Such representation shall include, without limitation, all rights to the Work, including, but not limited to, exploitation of the following: hardcover, paperback, serialization, condensation, translation, anthology, periodicals, electronic (including electronic books and electronic multimedia versions), motion picture, television, radio, dramatic, audio, video, commercial, and merchandising rights.

Even if it were appropriate to expand an agent’s role to television and movie rights they should never be given wholesale. Such a scope presupposes that the agent is qualified to negotiate and market to licensees the rights he is supposedly representing. If an author is tempted to do this, she should insist on a termination clause if no substantive negotiations commence within a stipulated time. The agent in the above grant of rights clause who would assist in the development of the author’s career wanted 2 years to exploit the work from receipt of an acceptable manuscript (rather than from execution of the agreement). Other agents ask for one year with notice. (Note: All agencies terminate automatically on the death of the principal, although accrued commissions continue to be earned under active contracts and survive an author’s death).

A typical termination provision reads: “This agreement shall remain in full force and effect until either of us gives the other written notice terminating the agency” following a stipulated period of time, which should not be unreasonably long. There are three possibilities at the time author exercises her right to terminate: the agent has performed and earned his commission for the life of the contract; agent is in negotiations; or, agent has exhausted all opportunities to sell or license the work. If the middle circumstance and the negotiations are unsuccessful, agreements typically provide that the author cannot (within a stipulated period) conclude an agreement with any contractor found by the agent without having to pay the commission set forth in the terminated agreement.

Some agency agreements, in fact the one mentioned above provide what could be considered a penalty, namely a provision that breathes the agency agreement back to life if the author subsequently succeeds where the agent could not in negotiating with a contractor originally identified by the agent. A back to life provision is less questionable if the author terminated the agent with the intention of avoiding paying the commission.  Otherwise, if a back to life clause cannot be resisted it should be limited to provide an appropriate exit within a further stipulated period of time.