Comments on: Richard Nash on a new business model for publishing

By: Agents Need to Develop Alternative Models | Digital Book World

Agents Need to Develop Alternative Models | Digital Book World — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:18:46 +0000

[...] Agents need to innovate on contracts to keep themselves, as well as their authors, alive through the transition. Richard Nash has the right thinking in this area. [...]

By: Andrei Mincov

Andrei Mincov — Sun, 30 May 2010 18:56:06 +0000

Critics of today’s copyright laws often contend that instead of trying to control the use of their works through copyright, “old industries” must adopt “new business models” that would address the public’s desire to have unlimited access to content and impracticality of copyright enforcement in the context of the Internet. Usually adoption of such new business models is offered as a remedy for the growing number of copyright infringements.

In my new article, Failed Business Models of the Past, Eh?, at http://mincov.com/articles/index.php/fullarticle/business_models/ (http://bit.ly/b2TceK), I explain why adoption of new business models has nothing to do with abandonment of the underlying principle that the owner of copyright should be allowed to decide how its content is used. If a business decides to use their property in an inefficient manner, it is perfectly OK to let such a business fail. We should not “save” this business by stealing from it the property that we think it uses inefficiently.

By: You Get The . Info » Reinventing Book Publishing: Building Real Communities, And Only Holding Rights For Three Years – 4039th Edition

Tue, 18 May 2010 02:30:20 +0000

[...] to me is because Nash has decided that, unlike pretty much every other publisher in the world, to purposely limit the length of the contract away from “life-of-copyright.” As he notes, traditionally, when you sign a publishing deal, the publishing house controls the [...]

By: Reinventing Book Publishing: Startup “Cursor” to Build Ebooks on Communities | The Buzz on Ereading

Tue, 18 May 2010 00:05:35 +0000

By: Max Guevara

Max Guevara — Thu, 13 May 2010 16:15:43 +0000

Btw, Richard is right about the contract for foreign rights not being bound to the original license (if the original license expires or is cancelled)… But I would suggest either a) putting a clause (in any sub-license agreements) making it clear that the contract should survive the original agreement or simply make the contract between author and foreign publisher including the original publisher as an ‘agent’ for that deal. Just to make things more clear. Wife might have better ideas maybe.

By: Max Guevara

Max Guevara — Thu, 13 May 2010 15:22:43 +0000

Publishing agreements for a ‘short’ term… such a revolutionary idea! Publishers in my (developing) home country have been doing this for ages now – contracts with local authors are normally for 5 or 10 years. If a publisher suggested a contract for the term of the copyright the author would think they went mad!
Actually, note that US and UK publishers don’t normally license translation rights to foreign publishers for more than 5 or 10 years… But try to suggest that the same should apply to their contracts with their authors! Well… looks like you have already tried.

By: Crosbie Fitch

Crosbie Fitch — Thu, 13 May 2010 14:02:19 +0000

Given copyright is coming to an overdue end anyway (within the decade, let alone within the century), it makes sense for publishers who see the writing on the wall to ‘get the authors in’ quick = before they realise the publisher is redundant.

By: Ren Cummins

Ren Cummins — Wed, 12 May 2010 17:55:55 +0000

Fantastic news! I’ve been very buoyed by all the groups staking their claim on the bleeding edge of New Publishing. It’s a very exciting time to be an independent author.

By: Richard Nash

Richard Nash — Wed, 12 May 2010 14:40:16 +0000

Thanks for the very useful comments! Some thoughts/responses:

Mike, you’re right, three years from publication. To have it three years from the contract would result in far too much variance between writers, given how much contract-date-to-pub-date can vary from project to project.

The question of other licenses arises from a few commenters. The brevity of our license does not preclude us from granting longer terms to, say, an audio book publisher, or an Italian publisher. In fact, the industry deals with these issues already all the time given that a book may go out-of-print and rights revert to the author, even though the book might still be in print in other countries per the terms of sublicenses previously granted. So we deal every day with the problems you describe, Those licenses would in no way be impinged. (It is, as I mentioned above, convenient to be married to an intellectual property lawyer who deals with far greater complications every day!)

By: Midweek Miscellany | The Casual Optimist

Midweek Miscellany | The Casual Optimist — Wed, 12 May 2010 12:29:24 +0000

[...] “We are your platform” — Richard Nash, formerly of Soft Skull, talks about his new start-up Cursor at The Literary Platform. There’s something about this that reminds me of Factory Records in good ways and bad… [...]