Book Filter: I got the contract! Now what?
November 5, 2008 4:20 PM Subscribe
Book Filter: I got the contract! Now what?
I submitted a manuscript to a university press months ago. Yesterday, I received a contract! I have a few questions and seek your advice.
I have found a lawyer to examine the contract so I'm not asking for legal advice.
I, not being a lawyer, focused on a just a few issues for the time being, which were: the press would retain (among other things) television and movie rights and my royalty fee would be less than ten percent.
What I want to know is: For those of you who have dealt with a university press, have you been able to retain the television and movie rights and what sort of royalty fee did you receive? Were you able to negotiate a higher royalty fee or not? If so, what worked and what didn't? Overall, what has your experience with a university press been like?
My book can be categorized as a regional study with broad appeal that could be picked up for course adoption. The subject is becoming more and more popular and could make a great movie or television docudrama, so I'm hesitant to give up the media rights. As far as the royalty fee goes, I know I'm not going to get rich off of this deal, but is it reasonable to at least ask for ten percent?
I have found a lawyer to examine the contract so I'm not asking for legal advice.
I, not being a lawyer, focused on a just a few issues for the time being, which were: the press would retain (among other things) television and movie rights and my royalty fee would be less than ten percent.
What I want to know is: For those of you who have dealt with a university press, have you been able to retain the television and movie rights and what sort of royalty fee did you receive? Were you able to negotiate a higher royalty fee or not? If so, what worked and what didn't? Overall, what has your experience with a university press been like?
My book can be categorized as a regional study with broad appeal that could be picked up for course adoption. The subject is becoming more and more popular and could make a great movie or television docudrama, so I'm hesitant to give up the media rights. As far as the royalty fee goes, I know I'm not going to get rich off of this deal, but is it reasonable to at least ask for ten percent?
Get an agent. Don't sign. You should totally keep the film rights and you typically in trade press get 15% royalty. Your agent will take 15% of advance but will almost always make the contract much better than you lose by paying the agent. University presses tend to give crappy advances-- but you can make serious money if books are adopted widely for courses. So, get an agent!
posted by Maias at 4:54 PM on November 5, 2008
posted by Maias at 4:54 PM on November 5, 2008
Here's a good primer on getting an agent from Making Light. The best time to go looking for an agent is when you have a contract.
posted by mynameisluka at 5:19 PM on November 5, 2008
posted by mynameisluka at 5:19 PM on November 5, 2008
Do they say how long they get the movie rights for? Sometimes rights revert, and if this is the case, you might not care (for now).
posted by cjorgensen at 5:22 PM on November 5, 2008
posted by cjorgensen at 5:22 PM on November 5, 2008
With all due respect to the prior respondents, they may be talking apples and oranges. You're not going to make a living publishing academic books. You're making a living being an academic who publishes books. Big difference. And very different framework.
A decent selling title for a university press might, over a few years, sell six or seven thousand copies, *if* it is widely adopted for course use. Assuming it's your first book, publishing it and getting tenure as a result is the main economic benefit you'll ever see unless it's a surprise best seller. I've been in the biz a few years, published one sole-authored book and been involved with lots and lots of others. I can tell you that very few academics ever have agents, nor are agents ever interested in academic writers unless you've got a potential trade book to pitch (and that book, no matter how well it sells, will not get you tenure, which is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars to you over your career). Only a few star academics -- one thinks of Skip Gates or Stanley Fish -- get to negotiate beyond the very minimal level over a first book contract. They are virtually standardized within any one press, often across any one discipline and several presses. They'll laugh at you and say find another press if you get pushy about royalties and film rights. They have a stack of decent dissertations ten feet high on related subjects in their inbox. It's getting harder and harder for scholars in many fields (eg, classics, philosophy, archaeology, and other specialized fields with small trade market potential) even to publish a first monograph. The market is shrinking and course adoption is not replacing it. We're five to ten years from the end of the printed academic monograph as we know it - I say this based on years of following the academic publishing industry closely.
The major question I'd suggest asking is whether paperback and hardcover come out simultaneously, something a lot of presses now do (and you want that); and make sure you are comfortable working closely with the editor -- that s/he gets you and the kind of work you do. And then ask how well that press markets, promotes, and penetrates the markets you want reading your book, not for sales, but for influence and good reviews and citations -- those are the capital of an academic career. Are their books attractive? Decently priced? Can you agree on a concept for the design, or do you like the artists (amost always freelance) they work with? Are their books meticulously copy edited -- look at some, and hunt for typos. Do they have tables in the book displays of major conferences in your field? How is the indexing going to be paid for? Or do you have to do it yourself? Can you use photos? Color photos? What about diagrams and other expensive-to-typeset materials? Can you put out the book you imagine with them? Are they taken seriously as a publisher *in your specific discipline,* since your tenure committee in your department will have to judge your work?
I wrote a book that has been fairly widely adopted for courses and been a modest trade seller as well. I use the annual royalties to buy a new iPod every six months (a nice iPod, to be sure). Seriously. But I've got job security for life because I published it with the right press. I love my publisher, and the editor I worked with, and the way the press focused on putting out a bunch of good titles in my broad field over a few years and really building a reputation that helped all of its authors gain an audience. My next contract is with the same press. All the rest will be as well. I don't even have a lawyer look at the contract, either. It's the same one all my pals signed with the same press. Generic. Irrelevant, almost. A press that treats you like your work matters and cares about helping you reach the right market is a huge asset to an academic career. A shitty attitude from your publisher (very common toward first book authors in general in UP world) is a real hindrance. Many presses are under serious economic stress right now. Authors suffer from that, so get a read on the health of the press. But don't expect them to cough up more money unless you've got a competing offer (which is just short of unethical in academic publishing anyway, given the cost and timeline of the peer review process).
Think long term. You won't make much money from the book itself. MOST academic titles lose money, and the U Press business is undergoing huge transitions right now.
I am of course assuming you have an academic career in mind, or are embarked on one. If not, ignore me, but maybe other academics will find this helpful. It's true.
posted by fourcheesemac at 5:29 PM on November 5, 2008 [19 favorites]
A decent selling title for a university press might, over a few years, sell six or seven thousand copies, *if* it is widely adopted for course use. Assuming it's your first book, publishing it and getting tenure as a result is the main economic benefit you'll ever see unless it's a surprise best seller. I've been in the biz a few years, published one sole-authored book and been involved with lots and lots of others. I can tell you that very few academics ever have agents, nor are agents ever interested in academic writers unless you've got a potential trade book to pitch (and that book, no matter how well it sells, will not get you tenure, which is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars to you over your career). Only a few star academics -- one thinks of Skip Gates or Stanley Fish -- get to negotiate beyond the very minimal level over a first book contract. They are virtually standardized within any one press, often across any one discipline and several presses. They'll laugh at you and say find another press if you get pushy about royalties and film rights. They have a stack of decent dissertations ten feet high on related subjects in their inbox. It's getting harder and harder for scholars in many fields (eg, classics, philosophy, archaeology, and other specialized fields with small trade market potential) even to publish a first monograph. The market is shrinking and course adoption is not replacing it. We're five to ten years from the end of the printed academic monograph as we know it - I say this based on years of following the academic publishing industry closely.
The major question I'd suggest asking is whether paperback and hardcover come out simultaneously, something a lot of presses now do (and you want that); and make sure you are comfortable working closely with the editor -- that s/he gets you and the kind of work you do. And then ask how well that press markets, promotes, and penetrates the markets you want reading your book, not for sales, but for influence and good reviews and citations -- those are the capital of an academic career. Are their books attractive? Decently priced? Can you agree on a concept for the design, or do you like the artists (amost always freelance) they work with? Are their books meticulously copy edited -- look at some, and hunt for typos. Do they have tables in the book displays of major conferences in your field? How is the indexing going to be paid for? Or do you have to do it yourself? Can you use photos? Color photos? What about diagrams and other expensive-to-typeset materials? Can you put out the book you imagine with them? Are they taken seriously as a publisher *in your specific discipline,* since your tenure committee in your department will have to judge your work?
I wrote a book that has been fairly widely adopted for courses and been a modest trade seller as well. I use the annual royalties to buy a new iPod every six months (a nice iPod, to be sure). Seriously. But I've got job security for life because I published it with the right press. I love my publisher, and the editor I worked with, and the way the press focused on putting out a bunch of good titles in my broad field over a few years and really building a reputation that helped all of its authors gain an audience. My next contract is with the same press. All the rest will be as well. I don't even have a lawyer look at the contract, either. It's the same one all my pals signed with the same press. Generic. Irrelevant, almost. A press that treats you like your work matters and cares about helping you reach the right market is a huge asset to an academic career. A shitty attitude from your publisher (very common toward first book authors in general in UP world) is a real hindrance. Many presses are under serious economic stress right now. Authors suffer from that, so get a read on the health of the press. But don't expect them to cough up more money unless you've got a competing offer (which is just short of unethical in academic publishing anyway, given the cost and timeline of the peer review process).
Think long term. You won't make much money from the book itself. MOST academic titles lose money, and the U Press business is undergoing huge transitions right now.
I am of course assuming you have an academic career in mind, or are embarked on one. If not, ignore me, but maybe other academics will find this helpful. It's true.
posted by fourcheesemac at 5:29 PM on November 5, 2008 [19 favorites]
It is rare for academic books to sell that well-- however, there are some people I know who actually have made serious money with books adopted for big courses like Psych 101 or something like that. those sell a lot more than 7,000 copies.
of course, the average academic book sells a few hundred at best. and it may be hard to find an agent but there are some who will do this. it's not going to be huge money for them but it takes very little work, also.
posted by Maias at 5:33 PM on November 5, 2008
of course, the average academic book sells a few hundred at best. and it may be hard to find an agent but there are some who will do this. it's not going to be huge money for them but it takes very little work, also.
posted by Maias at 5:33 PM on November 5, 2008
I work for a university press and I have published regional titles. Fourcheesemac is pretty on the money. An agent is likely not a good investment, it usually means a more expensive book for a university press. And UPs have collective agents for schlepping subrights that might fare better than your attempts to sell those rights. That said, no reason you can't just sign their contract while letting them know you want to seek a subrights deal, and if they approve (which they probably will) if you find a producer, they'll negotiate the agreement. Remember, they are non-profits and they primarily want to disseminate. Even in other media.
Not so sure I agree that simultaneous release of paper and cloth is a great idea. That seriously cannibalizes the cloth market (high margin) from libraries. It has a big effect on the books ability to break even. A modest cloth run (say 300-500 depending on the market) and then a paperback within two years is a better compromise. It really helps the financials of the book and will help the press take another risk with another book in the future. It is a much more sustainable model than the simultaneous model.
Regional books with strong coursebook adoption are pretty rare, by the way. Those are two great markets that many UPs do well in, but they're rather independent. Crossover is rare, but does happen.
Our press prides itself on author relations, as long as that author is reasonable, so I'm a bit disappointed to hear reports of poor author experiences with UPs. We see ourselves as a service industry, rather than a producer. Sure, we make books to sell, but that's kind of a byproduct. What we do is clean and design scholarship for distribution. We have two customers, the author and the reader. We very much value both. But we're in pretty good financial health so perhaps for those under institutional pressure, it's different.
Anyway, I encourage you to talk to your acquisitions editor. If they're worth their salt, they're doing what's best for the work. They will probably encourage and negotiate what ever it takes to serve the work. Talk to them and they're likely to be more than willing to work with you.
posted by Toekneesan at 7:13 PM on November 5, 2008 [2 favorites]
Not so sure I agree that simultaneous release of paper and cloth is a great idea. That seriously cannibalizes the cloth market (high margin) from libraries. It has a big effect on the books ability to break even. A modest cloth run (say 300-500 depending on the market) and then a paperback within two years is a better compromise. It really helps the financials of the book and will help the press take another risk with another book in the future. It is a much more sustainable model than the simultaneous model.
Regional books with strong coursebook adoption are pretty rare, by the way. Those are two great markets that many UPs do well in, but they're rather independent. Crossover is rare, but does happen.
Our press prides itself on author relations, as long as that author is reasonable, so I'm a bit disappointed to hear reports of poor author experiences with UPs. We see ourselves as a service industry, rather than a producer. Sure, we make books to sell, but that's kind of a byproduct. What we do is clean and design scholarship for distribution. We have two customers, the author and the reader. We very much value both. But we're in pretty good financial health so perhaps for those under institutional pressure, it's different.
Anyway, I encourage you to talk to your acquisitions editor. If they're worth their salt, they're doing what's best for the work. They will probably encourage and negotiate what ever it takes to serve the work. Talk to them and they're likely to be more than willing to work with you.
posted by Toekneesan at 7:13 PM on November 5, 2008 [2 favorites]
Toekneesan, thanks for your insight. You sound like my publisher. The houses I think really do not serve academics well are the hybrid shops (you know which I mean, I'm sure). They are churning out shitty books with a shadow of the real peer review process as it should be. You sound like you work for one of the good guys. Don't get me wrong -- there are a lot of really good (and at least a few innovative) shops out there. And then there are some which are such behemoths that it's not worth generalizing about them.
Anyway, our one disagreement reflects our different locations in the political economy of academic publishing, which is why I raised it as my first question. For the academic, the waiting is the hardest part. 2 years is an eternity when your tenure review is looming and people have to go to the library to read your book. And as I understand it, library sales are in a tailspin anyway. Until we're into a fully electronic publishing era, paperback is vital to visibility for the author.
I will admit that I'm lucky. I work in a field that has some level of general interest even beyond the usual "educated public" (pop. 97) and a significant international readership for English language work. A nice looking paperback that's been well edited to be an appealing read can cover the costs of the book as quickly as library sales used to do more reliably. My book came out in paper and cloth simultaneously; its costs were covered in a year, and a second printing after 18 months, and it sells steadily 4 years out. Win/win for the press and for me. And I get a new iPod every 6 months in the bargain.
I realize the calculation can be different for titles in many less trade-friendly fields. But the converse of that is that it's possible to make many kinds of work more engaging and trade-friendly and grow the market for academic work by making it more marketable.
It's that or die, I think. Either way, paper's done by 2020, I suspect.
posted by fourcheesemac at 8:09 PM on November 5, 2008
Anyway, our one disagreement reflects our different locations in the political economy of academic publishing, which is why I raised it as my first question. For the academic, the waiting is the hardest part. 2 years is an eternity when your tenure review is looming and people have to go to the library to read your book. And as I understand it, library sales are in a tailspin anyway. Until we're into a fully electronic publishing era, paperback is vital to visibility for the author.
I will admit that I'm lucky. I work in a field that has some level of general interest even beyond the usual "educated public" (pop. 97) and a significant international readership for English language work. A nice looking paperback that's been well edited to be an appealing read can cover the costs of the book as quickly as library sales used to do more reliably. My book came out in paper and cloth simultaneously; its costs were covered in a year, and a second printing after 18 months, and it sells steadily 4 years out. Win/win for the press and for me. And I get a new iPod every 6 months in the bargain.
I realize the calculation can be different for titles in many less trade-friendly fields. But the converse of that is that it's possible to make many kinds of work more engaging and trade-friendly and grow the market for academic work by making it more marketable.
It's that or die, I think. Either way, paper's done by 2020, I suspect.
posted by fourcheesemac at 8:09 PM on November 5, 2008
Maias, the textbook market is a whole different beast, though a beast it is. You can make enough to buy a house from a widely adopted textbook. Won't cost you a thing but your soul. Kidding, sort of.
posted by fourcheesemac at 8:19 PM on November 5, 2008
posted by fourcheesemac at 8:19 PM on November 5, 2008
follow-up from the OP
OP here: My manuscript is based off of my master's thesis. I am currently working full time and am not pursing a Ph.D. so tenure is not a concern at the moment - but I'm hoping this book might open up some unforeseen opportunities. At times I think I might pursue a Ph.D. in the future, but I really do not want to teach and it's a heck of a lot of time and money for someone who does not want to teach in a oversaturated discipline.posted by jessamyn at 10:10 PM on November 5, 2008
Lastly, fourcheesemac recommended that I check on the health of the press. What's the best way to do this?
Keep the advice coming - it's been very helpful. Thanks!
I work in trade publishing.
You probably don't need an agent at this point--you already got the contract, and they'll just eat up your royalties. Get an agent when you're shopping your next book around.
You should keep the film and tv rights, by all means. I work for a major house, and we never get tv and movie rights, ever. The author always gets to keep them.
Is your royalty fee off net or gross? Is it a split (first 5k copies=x%, second 5k copies=y%, all copies therafter=z% where y and z are progressively larger)? Do you know the sales projections? Did you get an advance for signing or delivery? Under 10% does not sound that unusual, depending on the subject matter of the book.
Unless your royalty fee is very out of whack with convention (for university presses or your subject matter or something), you probably don't have much negotiating power. Most houses use a standard royalty split, and especially if this is your first book, they don't care if you don't like it.
Call some other presses and see if they'll tell you what their standard split is. Or do some research in the writing section of a bookstore.
posted by purplecurlygirl at 7:54 AM on November 6, 2008
You probably don't need an agent at this point--you already got the contract, and they'll just eat up your royalties. Get an agent when you're shopping your next book around.
You should keep the film and tv rights, by all means. I work for a major house, and we never get tv and movie rights, ever. The author always gets to keep them.
Is your royalty fee off net or gross? Is it a split (first 5k copies=x%, second 5k copies=y%, all copies therafter=z% where y and z are progressively larger)? Do you know the sales projections? Did you get an advance for signing or delivery? Under 10% does not sound that unusual, depending on the subject matter of the book.
Unless your royalty fee is very out of whack with convention (for university presses or your subject matter or something), you probably don't have much negotiating power. Most houses use a standard royalty split, and especially if this is your first book, they don't care if you don't like it.
Call some other presses and see if they'll tell you what their standard split is. Or do some research in the writing section of a bookstore.
posted by purplecurlygirl at 7:54 AM on November 6, 2008
Anon OP, if you'd like to contact me via memail I'd be happy to offer an opinion of the press.
posted by Toekneesan at 9:10 AM on November 6, 2008
posted by Toekneesan at 9:10 AM on November 6, 2008
You should keep the film and tv rights, by all means. I work for a major house, and we never get tv and movie rights, ever. The author always gets to keep them.
This may be a difference between UP and trade publishers. I've *never* seen a book contract for a UP that gave the author film and tv rights. They may exist, and especially for the few big stars, but as I said, the odds of an academic book being picked up for a film or TV script are slim indeed.
It may be negotiable, but only because it's virtually moot. I would not make an issue of it when negotiating a first academic book contract with a UP.
Remember -- the odds the press will make any money at all from the average academic book are not so good these days. They're already publishing most books at a loss, and yours is likely one of them unless you are sure there's a large course adoption market or a high level of regional interest in your subject. (Even then, as UT press how well its Texana titles send, or any other State U press. Those books make money, relatively speaking, because they're bought by nostalgic alumni and state citizens with interests in regional history and culture. But by "make money," I mean they make a few thousand dollars most of the time, just enough to keep subsidizing the vast number of books that never earn back their costs of production.
Since the OP has weighed in and stated s/he's not seeking to build an academic career, most of this is moot. But if you're serious about making money from writing a book, and it *really* has a commercial trade market significant enough to make these issues worth negotiating over, you should be pitching it to a trade press. Especially if you hope to build a career as a professional author. (And good luck with that; the trade press business is as f'ed up in its way as the UP business, and a lot more ruthless about profitability.)
As Toekneesan said, University Presses are generally non-profit (and subsidized, though decreasingly so) enterprises. You can't equate them with trade publishers. The economics of publishing academic books are totally different from the economics of publishing novels or popular non-fiction.
posted by fourcheesemac at 11:01 AM on November 6, 2008
This may be a difference between UP and trade publishers. I've *never* seen a book contract for a UP that gave the author film and tv rights. They may exist, and especially for the few big stars, but as I said, the odds of an academic book being picked up for a film or TV script are slim indeed.
It may be negotiable, but only because it's virtually moot. I would not make an issue of it when negotiating a first academic book contract with a UP.
Remember -- the odds the press will make any money at all from the average academic book are not so good these days. They're already publishing most books at a loss, and yours is likely one of them unless you are sure there's a large course adoption market or a high level of regional interest in your subject. (Even then, as UT press how well its Texana titles send, or any other State U press. Those books make money, relatively speaking, because they're bought by nostalgic alumni and state citizens with interests in regional history and culture. But by "make money," I mean they make a few thousand dollars most of the time, just enough to keep subsidizing the vast number of books that never earn back their costs of production.
Since the OP has weighed in and stated s/he's not seeking to build an academic career, most of this is moot. But if you're serious about making money from writing a book, and it *really* has a commercial trade market significant enough to make these issues worth negotiating over, you should be pitching it to a trade press. Especially if you hope to build a career as a professional author. (And good luck with that; the trade press business is as f'ed up in its way as the UP business, and a lot more ruthless about profitability.)
As Toekneesan said, University Presses are generally non-profit (and subsidized, though decreasingly so) enterprises. You can't equate them with trade publishers. The economics of publishing academic books are totally different from the economics of publishing novels or popular non-fiction.
posted by fourcheesemac at 11:01 AM on November 6, 2008
Well, we do contracts that exclude film and TV, but it's never made a whit of difference to the author as they've consistently gotten bupkis out of those rights, even with agents. On the other hand, we've sold options through our film agent for books I was rather surprised would even be considered as film material.
It's hard to advise you without more information on the topic of your book. If you really think you can find someone to develop the project, go back to your press and ask about re-negotiation. Just keep in mind you may also be losing an opportunity.
As for the royalty percentage, yes, it will probably be net. Net is calculated as retail price minus about 25% if they publish with a short discount (to retailers), minus 55% if they go with a trade discount. 10% royalty and you keep film and TV rights is likely to be rejected. 8% is pretty high for UPs. What they might offer is a yours-no-matter-what advance against royalties, rather than a higher royalty. They're also likely to offer a graduated royalty. You can ask for 10% after 10,000 copies, but not on the first 1,000. That might need to be closer to 7%.
Ask about price and discount. If you think it will sell primarily in bookstores, ask for a trade discount. If it will sell primarily on the Internet, accept a short discount. Textbooks also almost always have short discounts. Brick and mortar stores need a minimum of a 40% discount to stock a book. They don't usually stock books with short discounts.
Anyway, hope this helps.
posted by Toekneesan at 1:38 PM on November 6, 2008
It's hard to advise you without more information on the topic of your book. If you really think you can find someone to develop the project, go back to your press and ask about re-negotiation. Just keep in mind you may also be losing an opportunity.
As for the royalty percentage, yes, it will probably be net. Net is calculated as retail price minus about 25% if they publish with a short discount (to retailers), minus 55% if they go with a trade discount. 10% royalty and you keep film and TV rights is likely to be rejected. 8% is pretty high for UPs. What they might offer is a yours-no-matter-what advance against royalties, rather than a higher royalty. They're also likely to offer a graduated royalty. You can ask for 10% after 10,000 copies, but not on the first 1,000. That might need to be closer to 7%.
Ask about price and discount. If you think it will sell primarily in bookstores, ask for a trade discount. If it will sell primarily on the Internet, accept a short discount. Textbooks also almost always have short discounts. Brick and mortar stores need a minimum of a 40% discount to stock a book. They don't usually stock books with short discounts.
Anyway, hope this helps.
posted by Toekneesan at 1:38 PM on November 6, 2008
This may be a difference between UP and trade publishers. I've *never* seen a book contract for a UP that gave the author film and tv rights.
I'm sure this is a difference between trade and UP publishers, but a contract does not give the author film and tv rights. Those rights are intrinsically the author's to keep. The contract would detail the selling of those rights to the publisher.
It's a minor point, but it's worth haggling over. ALL of these rights are the authors' to keep or to sell as he or she wishes. The publisher doesn't get to dictate that. Yes, the publisher can walk or offer lower royalties, but the rights are the AUTHOR'S to sell, not the publisher's to bestow.
Ultimately, a thesis manuscript getting turned into a movie whether the publisher or the author holds the rights is a pretty slim prospect, but the OP and any others selling a book should understand that all creative rights to their work are theirs to sell and it should not be taken for granted that the first company to offer them a contract automatically gets them.
posted by purplecurlygirl at 12:34 PM on November 8, 2008
I'm sure this is a difference between trade and UP publishers, but a contract does not give the author film and tv rights. Those rights are intrinsically the author's to keep. The contract would detail the selling of those rights to the publisher.
It's a minor point, but it's worth haggling over. ALL of these rights are the authors' to keep or to sell as he or she wishes. The publisher doesn't get to dictate that. Yes, the publisher can walk or offer lower royalties, but the rights are the AUTHOR'S to sell, not the publisher's to bestow.
Ultimately, a thesis manuscript getting turned into a movie whether the publisher or the author holds the rights is a pretty slim prospect, but the OP and any others selling a book should understand that all creative rights to their work are theirs to sell and it should not be taken for granted that the first company to offer them a contract automatically gets them.
posted by purplecurlygirl at 12:34 PM on November 8, 2008
OP might be interested in this: Handbook for Academic Authors (Beth Luey, Amazon link).
Yes, purplecurlygirl is correct, the author owns all the rights, initially, to the text s/he has written. Even the right to print and sell copies in the first place is "assigned" or "granted" to the publisher for some specified period of time (and the question of what period of time, and when after the book goes out of print the rights revert to the author, is a relevant issue). You grant many different kinds of rights in a typical academic book contract - serialization, book club rights, reprint permission rights, etc. (The latest areas of controversy concern multimedia and digital publication rights, but that's a doozy of a subject.)
It's in your interest to grant these rights for an academic book. It's in your publisher's interest to expoit the work for maximum sales and revenues. And unless you're famous or about to be famous, or otherwise very well connected in the publishing world, you don't have the expertise or the time to exploit these potential revenue streams, and your publisher does.
The question comes down to ethos for me. Academic authors and their publishers tend to have long, multi-book relationships. These are relationships built on trust as much as on any contract terms. Academic publishers -- certainly non-profit university presses -- are not in the business of exploiting authors, and would be out of business if they were, and if there were much of anything to "exploit" in the first place. It's just not the same as the cut-throat world of commercial and trade publishing on any level, and if you approach dealing with a UP as if they were HarperCollins, you'll be shooting yourself in the foot.
I don't know a single academic author (and I know hundreds, including many of my own students, colleagues, and teachers whose book publishing adventures I have witnessed, been involved with, or advocated for) who has an adversarial relationship with a publisher, or who feels economically exploited by a university press. UPs can and do screw things up all the time, and I know authors who despise their press or their editor or who feel sorely disappointed by the marketing or production of their book. But I have never, ever heard anyone complain about being economically ripped off by a university press. Again, I'm sure it happens, but I believe it's very rare.
Then again, I have never known anyone to get a movie deal for an academic book. (On the other hand, I and many others have gotten nice consulting work for film and TV because we published an authoritative book with a major academic press on the subject under discussion. Again, look at the real economic issues and consequences of your work, rather than imagining the least likely ones, and you'll be better off).
One other matter that's gone unanswered: I don't really have a solution for the "how do I check the health of the press" question. See how many books they publish, whether they take out ads for new books in major publications (NYRB, NY Times Book Review, TLS, etc), see how luxurious their catalog looks, how beautiful their books are (paper quality -- not to be underestimated!). Mostly, talk to other authors who publish with the press. Get a strong sense in advance of what they pay for and what they don't (a lot of academic publishers no longer pay for indexing, for example; or pay too little for copyediting and get shit work as a result -- it's amazing how typo-ridden some academic press books are these days). Make *sure* the press buys a booth in the book display areas at as many of the major conferences where your book might attract an audience as possible, and if you can, go to those conferences and look at the display. Is it staffed all the time? Do they have a lot of new books on display? Is the acquisitions editor her/himself at the conference drumming up new books?
Maybe I've had a charmed experience -- like I said, I *love* my university press publisher and would never consider working with another press at this point. I'd sign anything they put in front of me, because I trust them, because they've done right by me for several years. There is no substitute for that kind of relationship, and you have to do your part to build it.
posted by fourcheesemac at 4:56 AM on November 9, 2008
Yes, purplecurlygirl is correct, the author owns all the rights, initially, to the text s/he has written. Even the right to print and sell copies in the first place is "assigned" or "granted" to the publisher for some specified period of time (and the question of what period of time, and when after the book goes out of print the rights revert to the author, is a relevant issue). You grant many different kinds of rights in a typical academic book contract - serialization, book club rights, reprint permission rights, etc. (The latest areas of controversy concern multimedia and digital publication rights, but that's a doozy of a subject.)
It's in your interest to grant these rights for an academic book. It's in your publisher's interest to expoit the work for maximum sales and revenues. And unless you're famous or about to be famous, or otherwise very well connected in the publishing world, you don't have the expertise or the time to exploit these potential revenue streams, and your publisher does.
The question comes down to ethos for me. Academic authors and their publishers tend to have long, multi-book relationships. These are relationships built on trust as much as on any contract terms. Academic publishers -- certainly non-profit university presses -- are not in the business of exploiting authors, and would be out of business if they were, and if there were much of anything to "exploit" in the first place. It's just not the same as the cut-throat world of commercial and trade publishing on any level, and if you approach dealing with a UP as if they were HarperCollins, you'll be shooting yourself in the foot.
I don't know a single academic author (and I know hundreds, including many of my own students, colleagues, and teachers whose book publishing adventures I have witnessed, been involved with, or advocated for) who has an adversarial relationship with a publisher, or who feels economically exploited by a university press. UPs can and do screw things up all the time, and I know authors who despise their press or their editor or who feel sorely disappointed by the marketing or production of their book. But I have never, ever heard anyone complain about being economically ripped off by a university press. Again, I'm sure it happens, but I believe it's very rare.
Then again, I have never known anyone to get a movie deal for an academic book. (On the other hand, I and many others have gotten nice consulting work for film and TV because we published an authoritative book with a major academic press on the subject under discussion. Again, look at the real economic issues and consequences of your work, rather than imagining the least likely ones, and you'll be better off).
One other matter that's gone unanswered: I don't really have a solution for the "how do I check the health of the press" question. See how many books they publish, whether they take out ads for new books in major publications (NYRB, NY Times Book Review, TLS, etc), see how luxurious their catalog looks, how beautiful their books are (paper quality -- not to be underestimated!). Mostly, talk to other authors who publish with the press. Get a strong sense in advance of what they pay for and what they don't (a lot of academic publishers no longer pay for indexing, for example; or pay too little for copyediting and get shit work as a result -- it's amazing how typo-ridden some academic press books are these days). Make *sure* the press buys a booth in the book display areas at as many of the major conferences where your book might attract an audience as possible, and if you can, go to those conferences and look at the display. Is it staffed all the time? Do they have a lot of new books on display? Is the acquisitions editor her/himself at the conference drumming up new books?
Maybe I've had a charmed experience -- like I said, I *love* my university press publisher and would never consider working with another press at this point. I'd sign anything they put in front of me, because I trust them, because they've done right by me for several years. There is no substitute for that kind of relationship, and you have to do your part to build it.
posted by fourcheesemac at 4:56 AM on November 9, 2008
I want to add this -- most academics do not intuitively grasp the importance of visual book design. But anyone in book marketing knows that 90 percent of selling a book (in a bookstore, to be sure, which is a fading model) is getting someone to pick it up and read the back or the first few pages.
Alas, many UPs -- while they may grasp the importance of design -- can't afford to make beautiful looking books, or don't bother to do so. It was not an important part of the business until recently. Some presses are famous for butt-ugly books, still.
You want to sell books? Make sure the press makes them beautiful to look at and to hold in the hand.
posted by fourcheesemac at 5:03 AM on November 9, 2008
Alas, many UPs -- while they may grasp the importance of design -- can't afford to make beautiful looking books, or don't bother to do so. It was not an important part of the business until recently. Some presses are famous for butt-ugly books, still.
You want to sell books? Make sure the press makes them beautiful to look at and to hold in the hand.
posted by fourcheesemac at 5:03 AM on November 9, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by johngoren at 4:29 PM on November 5, 2008