North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

[Claude Sweet <sweetent@home.com>]

PermacultureNo1@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 12/20/00 10:16:59 AM, sweetent@home.com writes:
> 
> << I don't wish to claim the expertise of an attorney on copyrights,
> but as
> an author I have had experience and can state that both the author and
> the publisher can own copyrights.<<
> 
> RIGHT.  However, we already know that the author wants copyright and
> in that
> case I would not seek it.
> 
> >>For example, I as an author can transfer a one time North American
> right
> to publish my article to a publisher. The publisher will copyright the
> publication. >>

D.H.

I previously pointed out that for an author to enforce their rights
becomes a legal matter that becomes very costly, especially when pitting
someone with small financial resources against a major publishing chain
or a third party who republished the author's material without
permission or providing compensation to the author. They may have
contacted the publisher and believe they obtained the rights to
republish; however, in many cases, it is the original publisher who
takes an article purchased for print media and then incorporates it in
an archive on a CD or posts the materials on their corporate web site.

Contacts can be very specific and still require costly litigation to
enforce from an authors perspective.

The NAFEX handbook does not seem to be the result of a single
contributor, but may have been edited by one person, and certainty was
published by NAFEX.

I was attempting to point out that if the NAFEX handbook was reissued in
its original form without change, I assumed its original title would be
retained. Thus a membership form would be an excellent way to achieve
new members for the group, especially if the marketing would be directed
towards non NAFEX members. NAFEX could direct market the handbook in
POMONA to members and receive a profit with none of the financial risk.

The information could be rewritten and used in a new, expanded
publication without permission of owners of the copyrights - either
NAFEX or the author(s). If copyrights are the only issue, reprinting the
handbook in its original format with changes should have been discussed
in the original contract. Most contracts spell out revisions and updates
to the material by the author(s) for a specific number of reprints by
the publisher. The agreement between NAFEX and the author(s) may not
have included language for such revisions and reprinting. Thus the
contract difficulties resulting in negotiations that presently seem to
be in limbo.

Is there a market for the handbook? I would need to see an outline for
the publication and an analysis of the target buyer. 

Are there examples of other publications that provide similar
information? The niche marketing of publications is a competitive area
requiring more investigation to determine the fruits and the USDA plant
hardiness zones that would be discussed.

Would it make a profit? Depends on the size of the publication, if color
is used, and marketing plans that would generate specific costs and
revenues. A small press run would have high printing costs and larger
runs would take longer to sell, thus reducing the return on investment
because of storage costs.

Discussion of when compensation is paid to the author (i.e. upon
publication) has no bearing on the issue of copyright ownership and
future use by the author of materials assembled as research. Some
contracts have an exclusionary period in which the author agrees not to
publish the contents of the article in a competing publication for a
specific period of time after the article appears.

There has been lots of discussion in the GWAA Quill and Trowel
newsletter about these issues.

Claude Sweet
 
> WRONG.  If you transfer one-time rights, that's all the publisher
> owns,
> whether or not s/he puts a copyright bug on the publication.  The rest
> of the
> copyright belongs to you, the author, unless you expressly transfer
> it.
> Generally, without a specific agreement to the contrary, an author not
> in the
> fixed employ of his/her publisher grants ONLY one time rights.  If the
> 
> material is previously unplublished, than it may be assumed to be
> first
> publication rights, also.  Assumptions get you in trouble, of course,
> and
> everyone gets along better in the long run if allthe agreements are
> explicit.
> If I sold a new article to, say, Organic Gardening Magazine, and they
> were
> tardy in publication, I would not publish elsewhere without advising
> them and
> giving them a chance to respond.  That is just good business manners.
> It
> becomes relevant since, at least the last time I sold them anything,
> they pay
> on publication, not on acceptance.  These are fairly involved
> transactions
> and include things like agreements on the editorial rights of the
> publisher
> (e.g., how far can s/he go in changing the work of the author), etc.
> 
> DH
> 
>                       eGroups Sponsor
> [Click Here!]

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/0/_/423498/_/977336616/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->