# Author Loses Rights to Her Series, Fights Back



## Kyle R (Apr 20, 2014)

When L.J. Smith, popular author of the hit Paranormal YA series, _The __Vampire Diaries_, received a letter from her publisher after submitting her latest book, she was surprised to find the letter was not actually addressed to her—it was a carbon copied letter addressed to another writer, telling her to "completely rewrite" Smith's novel.

Smith responded, even pleaded, only to discover that not only had the publisher decided to rewrite her latest novel, but they'd also decided to remove Smith from any future involvement in the series. Smith was, essentially, fired.

Her characters and story-world, however, remained the property of Harper Teen/Alloy Entertainment, who made it clear Smith's series would continue—with Smith's name still on the cover, but with a ghostwriter penning the prose.

Smith's misfortune was a result of not carefully inspecting the fine print in her publishing contract when she signed on with Alloy Entertainment. As a result, Alloy/Harper were completely within their legal rights to take Smith's creative rights (as well as her name) and continue to publish her series as they saw fit.

Smith, however, found a way to fight back. In May 2013, Amazon opened a new publishing opportunity to the general public: _Kindle Worlds_. _Worlds_ allowed fans to publish their own fan-fiction of pre-approved stories and characters, without penalty of copyright infringement. 

After speaking with Amazon about her situation, Smith's original creation, _The Vampire Diaries_, was added to the list of creative properties available to be fan-fictionalized.

As a result, Smith has been able to continue writing stories with her original character-creations for her fans to follow, though under the official title of "fan-fiction." Meanwhile, Harper/Alloy continues to take the series in a different direction, with Smith's name on the cover—and a ghostwriter at the helm.

If you'd like to read Smith's own words about this situation, you can read it here: 
http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/stefan-.../title/lj-smith-fired-from-writing-own-novels

What do you think about this situation? What would you do if you were the author?


----------



## patskywriter (Apr 20, 2014)

Whaaat?! How odd! I guess it really pays to have a lawyer or at least to read any and all contracts we might be signing. Wow.


----------



## Hunter56 (Apr 20, 2014)

That is pretty weird. It just goes to show that if you're presented a publishing contract (as exciting as it may be) you better read it over thoroughly to see what exactly you're signing yourself into.

Also, do you know if she still gets paid anything for the ghostwritten books?


----------



## A_Jones (Apr 20, 2014)

This is one of my biggest fears about publication.


----------



## Apple Ice (Apr 20, 2014)

How awful, what a poor woman. It can only act as a lesson to everyone else. If I ever get offered a contract I think I may fire it off to a solicitors first for safety.


----------



## Gyarachu (Apr 20, 2014)

I don't like being reminded that there are those in the world sick enough to deceive and screw others over for mere profit (though this is obviously a minor example of the evil that exists), but I suppose it is a necessary reminder. I just don't understand how people can do this to each other.

Good for her for fighting back though. Hopefully it will make people think twice about the companies they support financially.


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 20, 2014)

I don't see this as "evil" - I see this as a business transaction where both parties attempt to get the greatest benefit. Contracts are never written or presented as non-negotiable. Each party haggles to get the best they can, compromising on minor items to get the major items, and walking away if the final terms are untenable to them. Unfortunately, in this case, one party got careless (didn't read and/or _understand _the fine print) and lost out. This isn't The Evil Publisher. This is how all manner of businesses operate. If you don't read it, don't understand it, don't sign it.


----------



## Gyarachu (Apr 20, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> I don't see this as "evil" - I see this as a business transaction where both parties attempt to get the greatest benefit. Contracts are never written or presented as non-negotiable. Each party haggles to get the best they can, compromising on minor items to get the major items, and walking away if the final terms are untenable to them. Unfortunately, in this case, one party got careless (didn't read and/or _understand _the fine print) and lost out. This isn't The Evil Publisher. This is how all manner of businesses operate. If you don't read it, don't understand it, don't sign it.



I completely and utterly reject this. I am not saying the author is without fault, but that does not mean there was no deception on the publisher's part. And beyond that, commandeering the woman's creative property is morally reprehensible, no matter what the law says on it, no matter if she should have seen it coming. There is a point where a line is crossed.

The phrase "It's just business" is a poison and plague that is used to justify far too many unrighteous deeds. Don't try to feed me that bullshit.


----------



## Kevin (Apr 20, 2014)

'Good faith"?  Yes, even in business there is an assumption... I know it so often not practiced, but it still legally assumed that both parties enter the agreement with fair intention. This just proves that you must understand that you are not an expert (not you Shadow, all of us) Even the experts miss things. What chance does a relative newcomer have? Contracts? Danger, Will Robinson... get someone to read it for you. Question their expertise, also... "It's a jungle out there." The law of the jungle applies.  Businesses try to build in unfair practices. It how they maximize profit. That's not to say that it is the only way, but it is an additional way.


----------



## bookmasta (Apr 20, 2014)

I've never read any of her works and probably won't, simply because its not my genre. But, wow. Respect for her.


----------



## dale (Apr 20, 2014)

i think if this happened to me i'd pretty much be "incited to violence" angry. i don't know if i'd actually do anything, but i would be FUMING.


----------



## Morkonan (Apr 20, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> ...If you'd like to read Smith's own words about this situation, you can read it here:
> http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/stefan-.../title/lj-smith-fired-from-writing-own-novels
> 
> What do you think about this situation? What would you do if you were the author?



I think that there's a _big _misunderstanding going on here...

First of all, this is not a case of an author presenting a publisher with a story, signing a publication contract and then losing their "rights" to their own intellectual property. That is not what has happened at all.

From: http://bookalicio.us/2011/05/interview-with-l-j-smith-part-duex/



> ...I signed on over twenty years ago, in 1990, just to do a sort of upscale  trilogy about vampires.  Normally, back then, a book packager put  together “bargain” books, using “bargain” authors and a huge amount of  editing.  But even before I got The Phone Call That Changed My Life,  Alloy had decided that this was going to be a chic trilogy.  I remember  that at first Elise D.—the editor that called me to ask me to write it,  saying she’d read my first two fantasy books and thought I’d be great  for the job—was saying that they were going to do “special photographs”  for the cover....



So, a rep from Alloy, a book packager, _solicited_ L.J. to write as a *contract writer* for a typical teensploitation YA vampire series of books that Alloy was thunking up... This is like hiring a painter to paint a room. You own the room and the paint, you're just contracting for the painter's labor. The painter has no claim to your real-estate or the paint on your walls. Well, unless you don't pay them, of course. Then they can sue... But, let's continue:



> ...So, I had a different kind of contract when I wrote three more Vampire  Diaries books, although it didn’t change the “work for hire” idea that  had been set in stone when I had signed my original contracts. (“Work  for hire” means the author doesn’t get most of the important rights she  would if she were just writing the book for a regular publisher.  It  means, for me, that Alloy owns the books.)..



And, though she received another contract, she was still a *contract writer.* In essence, she never had any ownership of the IP at all. Alloy always owned the series.

What do I think?

I think that hopeful fiction writers need to pay strict attention to facts, whether it's the interpretation of a contract or something they saw on _teh intranet_z.  Publishers are not "out to get you." But, one should never sign anything that one doesn't fully understand and one should never harbor any expectations in a contractual business arrangement that are not _specifically_ provided for in a contract. An "assumption" is not a legally defensible point...


----------



## dale (Apr 20, 2014)

Morkonan said:


> I think that there's a _big _misunderstanding going on here...
> 
> First of all, this is not a case of an author presenting a publisher with a story, signing a publication contract and then losing their "rights" to their own intellectual property. That is not what has happened at all.
> 
> ...



ok. maybe that does kind of change things from them trying to get over to her trying to get over.


----------



## Gyarachu (Apr 20, 2014)

Ahh, Mork with some clear-headed thinking. I must ashamedly admit that I responded to his thread without reading the details.[-X Shame on me. Lesson learned (if I was into social media I might've used a hashtag). Apologies to you shadowwalker. I will keep my previous post as is so that everyone may publicly witness my shame.

Something still bothers me about it, though. Still not sure I totally agree with the publisher's actions, but my protest is nowhere near as vehement as it was before.

----EDIT----

Looking through stuff now, it still seems like the publisher sort of screwed her over. Not like I had thought at first, but it still looks a bit less than honest to me.


----------



## Kevin (Apr 20, 2014)

> Publishers are not "out to get you."


 big fish eat the little fish 





> An "assumption" is not a legally defensible point...


 better ask an attorney 





> one should never harbor any expectations in a contractual business arrangement that are not _specifically_ provided for in a contract


 YES! Never assume...


----------



## Kyle R (Apr 20, 2014)

Morkonan said:


> I think that hopeful fiction writers need to pay strict attention to facts, whether it's the interpretation of a contract or something they saw on _teh intranet_z.  Publishers are not "out to get you." But, one should never sign anything that one doesn't fully understand and one should never harbor any expectations in a contractual business arrangement that are not _specifically_ provided for in a contract. An "assumption" is not a legally defensible point...



I agree. Understanding and knowing what you're getting involved with is tremendously critical.



			
				L.J. Smith said:
			
		

> Although I didn’t even understand what “for hire” meant back in 1990, when I agreed to write books for them, I found out eventually, to my horror and dismay.




Gotta know what you're signing and getting into! A lot of new authors don't even know the difference between vanity publishing and traditional publishing, let alone writing for hire, and will leap at signing the first contract thrust their way. L.J. was under the assumption that her creations belonged to her. Sadly, this wasn't the case. Education is important.


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 20, 2014)

Yeah, so much for the bull***t, eh? 

Businesses - like individuals - design contracts to their best advantage. It would be stupid not to (and again, this also works for individuals). Go to a garage sale, for heaven's sake - do you pay straight out the price marked? Of course not. You haggle, trying to get the best deal. Do you pay list price for a car? Ridiculous. 

If you don't like the terms of a contract, you negotiate. And before you sign any contract, you do your homework. If you don't, the business_ or person_ who does will get the better of the deal. That's life.


----------



## bazz cargo (Apr 20, 2014)

Lesson #1


----------



## Gyarachu (Apr 20, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> Yeah, so much for the bull***t, eh?
> 
> Businesses - like individuals - design contracts to their best advantage. It would be stupid not to (and again, this also works for individuals). Go to a garage sale, for heaven's sake - do you pay straight out the price marked? Of course not. You haggle, trying to get the best deal. Do you pay list price for a car? Ridiculous.
> 
> If you don't like the terms of a contract, you negotiate. And before you sign any contract, you do your homework. If you don't, the business_ or person_ who does will get the better of the deal. That's life.



There remain moral boundaries in business as in all things. Maximizing gain is all well and good, so long as you aren't deliberately trying to screw someone else over in hopes that they might overlook a pivotal line in a contract, or something similar.

That being said, it doesn't look like this is quite the case in this situation.

As a final point, I would like to emphasize that there is in fact room for generosity in business.


----------



## Greimour (Apr 20, 2014)

I think I would make sure as many people as possible knew about the situation.

With such a big fanbase following, I would have it posted everywhere that MY BOOK, with MY NAME on it, was not in fact written by me. 
I would then ask all books be snubbed by fans of the storyline until the dispute was settled.

After finding the fan-fiction alternative, I would tell fans they can purchase the books really written by me under a fan fiction pseudonym at a much lower cost than what the publishing house was demanding.

All such wording aiming to, but not illegally, brand the publishing house as the bad guys and have their public opinion discredited and as many future authors as dubious of them as possible. Hoping in all hope that it somehow puts them out of business somewhere down the line.

I would even go so far as - if their leading staff went to work for a different company, or they opened a new company (essentially changed its name and started fresh) I would spread word that it is still Harper Teen - or whichever company it may be.

I think I would read all contracts properly - my dad taught me not to sign my life away... if it did happen however, I would be as spiteful as one can get and I would do everything in my power to hinder everything they do in regards to my work and if possible, anything to prevent them gaining further works to make money from.

Lastly - what I have to wonder is... what did she do with the stories that made the publishers seek an alternative?
Did her writing really go so downhill?
Was it really likely to lose fans with the course she took?
Was they aiming to get more fans and felt the work being produced had reached its fan limit?
Did they just want the books to take a better line for the TV series?

What. The. Hell.

Smithy should've read the fine print.


----------



## Bishop (Apr 20, 2014)

And this is why you read EVERYTHING you sign, twice. And then have your lawyer review it. And then have him explain it bit-by-bit. 

And then you read it again. And if it says anything where you forfeit creative control/rights to your book? Well, in my opinion, you're better off self-publishing. At least then you know it's yours forever.


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 21, 2014)

Greimour said:


> I think I would make sure as many people as possible knew about the situation. ... Hoping in all hope that it somehow puts them out of business somewhere down the line.



I hope that's sarcasm, because the company did nothing wrong here. She wasn't writing her own books - she was writing under contract. Those books belonged to the publisher, not her. Never her. It's not their fault she was stupid.


----------



## Greimour (Apr 21, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> I hope that's sarcasm, because the company did nothing wrong here. She wasn't writing her own books - she was writing under contract. Those books belonged to the publisher, not her. Never her. It's not their fault she was stupid.



Nope, not sarcasm.

As I stated, I would have read the contract... but if somehow there was something in the contract that allowed a publisher to do that to me - I would not have signed it knowingly... so out of spite - there is a 99.99% probability I would hope for the demise of that publishing house and would in all likelihood make it an aim to see such a result. 

This is how I look at it:

Game of Thrones - Characters and World... is a production of George R R Martin. 
It is his world, his story and his characters... they were borne in his heart, mind and a production of his labor... without him, they would not exist.
Some publishing company spreading his wonderful world to the masses reaps a nice big fat reward - but their business senses telling them they could earn more if they had the story take a different direction means it is no longer the work of G. Martin. therefore, I do not want to read it. Me, as a reader - nothing to do with the author himself. 

Imagine - stark wasn't killed by Joffreys command... the entire story changes. Thanks, but no thanks.

So, if they asked me, as an example, to write the rest of the book series... I would point blank refuse. Not my world, not my cast and I am not a writer of fan-fiction... thank you very much. 

I don't care if a company is 'legally allowed' to do something... legally allowed doesn't make something morally right.. and its the principle of the thing... not the legal rights.


----------



## Gavrushka (Apr 21, 2014)

If I've understood Morkonan correctly, there's a huge difference between this situation & George R R Martin... - Martin spent his time writing and then looked for an agent. - The agent found a publisher, and they agreed to pay him a percentage of sales in exchange for first rights.

Now HERE we have an author who seems to have been employed by a company to churn out her words and, as with any employee, they receive an income exchange for that work... - They don't get to own the thing they produce too!

So out of spite, you'd malign your employer for your own ineptitude? Not a great career move.


----------



## Greimour (Apr 21, 2014)

Gavrushka said:


> If I've understood Morkonan correctly, there's a huge difference between this situation & George R R Martin... - Martin spent his time writing and then looked for an agent. - The agent found a publisher, and they agreed to pay him a percentage of sales in exchange for first rights.
> 
> Now HERE we have an author who seems to have been employed by a company to churn out her words and, as with any employee, they receive an income exchange for that work... - They don't get to own the thing they produce too!
> 
> So out of spite, you'd malign your employer for your own ineptitude? Not a great career move.



Rewind a bit... clearly misunderstandings are underfoot.

My posts were NOT directed specifically in regards to Vampire Diaries.
My posts WERE directly in response to the Question in the original thread.



> Smith's misfortune was a result of not carefully inspecting the fine print in her publishing contract when she signed on with Alloy Entertainment. As a result, Alloy/Harper were completely within their legal rights to take Smith's creative rights (as well as her name) and continue to publish her series as they saw fit.





> After speaking with Amazon about her situation, *Smith's original creation,* _The Vampire Diaries_, was added to the list of creative properties available to be fan-fictionalized.





> What do you think about this situation? *What would you do if you were the author?*



So... my reply was directly aimed at the original posts implications and questions.

The implication being that Vampire Diaries was as much Smiths as 'Great Expectations' being 'Charles Dickens'

The question being - what would I do about it, personally, if it was me in the stated(or seemingly implied) situation...

... If I was hired to write a story - then I imagine it is not much different to a ghost writer... in which case, it's likely I would not even care. 
So as I said... what my comments were in reference too is a little different to the exact situation Smith was in. 

Markonans illumination on the subject didn't actually change the original question - it only changed our understanding of what _REALLY_ seems to have happened opposed to what conclusions have been made in regards to Smiths situation. 

So - my comments = the question that originally stood in place. Not a response to the revelations that followed replied posts.


----------



## Gavrushka (Apr 21, 2014)

Sorry for the misunderstanding. - Still, you are saying that out of spite you'd malign the publishing house. Such an act may well lead to the demise of your aspirational career, I fear.


----------



## Greimour (Apr 21, 2014)

Gavrushka said:


> Sorry for the misunderstanding. - Still, you are saying that out of spite you'd malign the publishing house. Such an act may well lead to the demise of your aspirational career, I fear.



I believe the misunderstanding was of my creation - so if any apology is necessary it is mine and I give it. (Sorry)

As for an end of my career, something like that would likely undo me anyway. I would self publish from that moment onward - hoping that perhaps any fan base already created would carry my writing through if I still wished to pursue it.


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 21, 2014)

Ironically, it's the publisher who agreed to open the books to legal, published fanfiction via Amazon. Had they not done so, she wouldn't be able to sell the fanfic either.


----------



## Kyle R (Apr 21, 2014)

I think the part that rubs me the wrong way was how Alloy/Harper continued to parade Smith's name on the cover of the future books after her outing, as well as her photograph and biography in the "About the Author" section in the subsequent ghostwritten novels—which she had nothing to do with.







The only hint, for the readers paying close enough attention, are the words "Created By" above Smith's oversized name. No mention of another writer is listed anywhere in the novels, though not a single word was penned by Smith herself.

It's one thing to be fired from a series as the creator. It's another to have some invisible ghostwriter prancing around under your name.

Smith mentioned she "fought and fought" over the ghostwriting issue but was told by Alloy/Harper (she doesn't clarify which) that readers "wouldn't know the difference."

It took three books before Alloy/Harper conceded and added a _Written By ..._ disclaimer, in minuscule font, on the next books. The disclaimer sits dwarfed below L.J. Smith's oversized name like an afterthought—or like something the cover designers want to go unnoticed.

I say, if you're going to discordantly fire the writer who created your series, at least stop suckling her name for profit.


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 21, 2014)

But again, that's not unusual. It was created by Smith, and that's the author name readers will look for (along with or instead of the series title). A lot of authors who went to ghostwriters/contract writers still have their name on the book - prominently - and may or may not mention the real author of it. And it's not unusual in other businesses. Companies buy out other companies and keep the original name because of the reputation/goodwill/recognition, even though the original owners are no longer in the picture.

JMO, but I think people are looking for a bogeyman that just isn't there.


----------



## garza (Apr 21, 2014)

I've written 12 books for hire. It's a good deal so long as you understand from the start that what you write belongs to the publisher. To get the best deal you need an agent and a lawyer. Beginning writers often have neither.

Edit - Correction. Make that 13 books. I had forgotten about a novel which I wrote for hire for a supermarket check-out rack publisher of romances. The deal was a straight sale. Once the typescript was accepted and the cheque deposited I had no further rights.


----------



## Kyle R (Apr 21, 2014)

shadowwalker said:
			
		

> Companies buy out other companies and keep the original name because of the reputation/goodwill/recognition, even though the original owners are no longer in the picture.


That's a great analogy and completely accurate.

I suppose my response comes from a less rational, more emotional place. Personally, I'd hate to see a ghostwriter replacement publishing under my name. Talk about adding insult to injury! Especially if the writing takes a nosedive.

Then you get fans who, misled by the fact that your name is still on the cover, complain about the direction the ghostwritten stories have been taking. (This has already happened to Smith.)

Or worse, the awful possibility of _losing_ reader interest in your future works, due to your name on the cover of poorly-ghostwritten works! (Hopefully this _hasn't_ happened to Smith.)

I suppose the only real solution, in cases like these, is to make sure you understand any contract you sign in the fullest. :grief:


----------



## garza (Apr 21, 2014)

Please don't put down ghost writers. They play an important part in mainstream publishing. The case under discussion illustrates only one aspect of ghost writing. Politicians, televangelists, actors, sports figures, musicians, other public figures, and even a U.S. president or two often have interesting stories to tell but either have no time for writing or no ability. Without the ghost writer, either recognised or out of sight, many good books would never be written. That's one kind of ghost writing. Another is the one I mentioned above, the supermarket romance. Often these come in lengthy series and the author's name on the cover may or may not be the real name of the first writer in the series. They are formula novels written to the publisher's specifications and amount to piece work. It's a cottage industry that provides some extra income and not to be taken seriously as literature.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Apr 21, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> I don't see this as "evil" - I see this as a business transaction where both parties attempt to get the greatest benefit. Contracts are never written or presented as non-negotiable. Each party haggles to get the best they can, compromising on minor items to get the major items, and walking away if the final terms are untenable to them. Unfortunately, in this case, one party got careless (didn't read and/or _understand _the fine print) and lost out. This isn't The Evil Publisher. This is how all manner of businesses operate. If you don't read it, don't understand it, don't sign it.



My thoughts exactly.  Publishing isn't Evil per se.  It's business and corporations in general that are evil.  Publishing is just a part of that.  
I suppose I have a higher standard.  I believe that an evasion is a lie.  Not telling someone that buried beneath their thousands of pages of contract is a clause that allows Company X to steal (legally) from customer / client Y is inherently EVIL.  And most companies do it.  
Business is EVIL.  Contracts are more deadly than AK47s.

DGB


----------



## bazz cargo (Apr 21, 2014)

Clive Cussler springs to mind. What we have here is a business adopting an author's name as a brand. Think Land Rover, Skoda, Fry's, Hoover. Anyone wanting to change the rules only needs to get elected and reform the law. Good luck.


----------



## garza (Apr 21, 2014)

There is no evasion in a piece work or for hire contract and the contracts are not 'thousands' of pages long. Many are very brief and to the point. Publishers deal with writers for this kind of work every day and most writers who actively pursue this kind of work fully understand what they are signing. If there's any doubt a lawyer or the writer's agent can clear up that doubt. 

If I sign a contract without knowing everything that's in it, then any consequences are my fault, not the fault of the person who wrote the contract. I've signed lots of contracts, and I've never been cheated. If I don't like a deal, I don't sign. It's that easy.


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 21, 2014)

Yeah, let's drop the whole "evil" thing. This gal didn't do her due diligence and it bit her in the butt. Not to mention - AGAIN - that this was a contract for hire, not a regular publishing contract, and _that _she knew. 

I guess I'm just tired of people (here and elsewhere) acting like writers are somehow losing all intelligence when it comes to the business end of writing. I mean, seriously - do writers sign mortgages without knowing what interest rate they'll pay? Do writers purchase cars without knowing they're getting a four door instead of a two door? Are they lost in the pizza aisle? 

Poor little writer, getting taken advantage of by Big Bad Publisher. Yeah, we're all schmucks... :stupid:


----------



## Gyarachu (Apr 21, 2014)

garza said:


> Please don't put down ghost writers. They play an important part in mainstream publishing. The case under discussion illustrates only one aspect of ghost writing. Politicians, televangelists, actors, sports figures, musicians, other public figures, and even a U.S. president or two often have interesting stories to tell but either have no time for writing or no ability. Without the ghost writer, either recognised or out of sight, many good books would never be written. That's one kind of ghost writing. Another is the one I mentioned above, the supermarket romance. Often these come in lengthy series and the author's name on the cover may or may not be the real name of the first writer in the series. They are formula novels written to the publisher's specifications and amount to piece work. It's a cottage industry that provides some extra income and not to be taken seriously as literature.



I don't think anyone was putting down ghost writers. If I understood Kyle correctly, his reaction was against the Publisher, not ghost writers themselves.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Apr 22, 2014)

The topic title is a bit misleading, isn't it? Shouldn't it be, "Author never had rights to her series, gets upset"?


----------



## Morkonan (Apr 23, 2014)

Gyarachu said:


> There remain moral boundaries in business as in all things. Maximizing gain is all well and good, so long as you aren't deliberately trying to screw someone else over in hopes that they might overlook a pivotal line in a contract, or something similar.
> 
> That being said, it doesn't look like this is quite the case in this situation.
> 
> As a final point, I would like to emphasize that there is in fact room for generosity in business.



++1

In business contracts, each side attempts to achieve their goals, usually by providing adequate incentive to the other negotiating party. However, there are times when people attempt to take advantage of another party. In almost every single possible case, this is one entity attempting to take advantage of the ignorance of another for profit. It's despicable, deplorable and downright rude... But, it happens. In "business", however, it's a bit rarer than it would be in interpersonal contracts that most people experience. For instance, it's more likely one is going to have to be wary of being "Cheated" when one is doing something like signing a contract for a house, personal insurance, individual investment schemes and tempting agreements, like getting your house painted for five bucks.

The biggest thing that I have found in business contracts that often pushes the limits into absurd usually revolves around "liability" and the other negotiating party's desire to assume none, instead requiring another to assume all liability. Liability, along with contract performance clauses, are often argued more strenuously than the price of a product or cost of a contract. That's because liability and performance clauses can sometimes exceed the total value of the contract... Which is weird. 

But, for the most part, businesses don't want to screw each other out of a buck. They're usually going to want the other guy to stick around so they can benefit from a continued fruitful relationship. They also don't want lingering animosity from someone who they screwed over in a contract. It's for the same reasons why you don't purposefully insult your waiter... Nobody likes their soup served with extra spit in it.


----------



## Morkonan (Apr 23, 2014)

Greimour said:


> Nope, not sarcasm.
> 
> As I stated, I would have read the contract... but if somehow there was something in the contract that allowed a publisher to do that to me - I would not have signed it knowingly... so out of spite - there is a 99.99% probability I would hope for the demise of that publishing house and would in all likelihood make it an aim to see such a result. ....



Here's the thing - The publisher "did" nothing to her by deciding to use another author.

She was hired on contract to write a series targeted at a specific demographic and with specific content. She did that and fulfilled the terms of the original contract. The book bundler offered her another contract for more books, under the same conditions as the original. She also agreed to those terms.

At no time did the bundler or the publisher "do" anything to her since there were no conditions under which she had any rights to her produced product which could have been infringed. (AFAIK - I don't have access to the contract and most articles seem to just be sensationalized and digested versions of the story.)

For myself, I probably wouldn't take a bundler deal without an arbitration and renegotiation clause if the bundler desired to fire me. I would also refuse to relinquish the rights to my own name. But, that's probably as far as I could possibly push such a deal as any bundler is going to jealously guard the IP with every bit of ink they can manage. Heck, they'd probably stick on the name bit before they'd balk at renegotiating/arbitration.


----------

