Hi Ren. There was some recent discussion on this topic here.

mabs has it correct.

The TOU are here. You can also access them any time from the nav bar at the top of the mb pages.

I do remember that Tad spoke to this question some long time ago, but I've not had a chance to hunt down that topic. I'm sure it can be found with the nifty search tool we have here now. I think it may have been in relation to the Shadowmarch Short Story Contest that we had way back when, but I can't be sure.

In any case, what mabs says is right on. And in a nutshell, what Tad has said before is that he's not planning to try and take advantage of anyone here (of course not!!), but for legal purposes on his websites, he has to clarify how things like this work (thus the TOU/Rules). Protection for Tad, protection for you.

[edit: Don't know why I use waffley language. Mabs doesn't just "pretty much" have it correct, he *is* correct. Didn't want anyone to doubt him based on silly wording on my part. *g*]

Last edited by strangeshe (2008-02-06 10:16:34)

Yes. The act of posting is what matters. You're actively exposing Tad to the ideas and concepts in the story, and you can't "un-expose" him, so that's what the legalese has to protect against. Note the word "submit".

By submitting Content to this Site, you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, and do hereby grant, to us the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, publish, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such Content (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form or media now known or later developed. Under no circumstances will we be required to treat any Content as restricted or confidential (subject to our Privacy Policy). We will be entitled to use any Content you submit for any purpose whatsoever without compensation to you or any other person. You acknowledge and agree that no fiduciary relationship between us is established by your submission of Content, nor is any contract made for any compensation to you for the submission of any Content. We will not be liable to you or any other person for any ideas for any books, characters, plots, product ideas, movies, television shows, plays, or anything else derived or adapted from or inspired by the Content, and we will not incur any liability as a result of any books or other properties by Tad Williams appearing in the future which may bear similarities or be identical to the Content in theme, idea, plot, format, characters, or other respects.

(Excerpted from the terms of use, emphasis mine.)

It absolutely sucks that ours now is a world where authors need to protect themselves like this, and of course Tad will never actively go out to profit from your work (the entire concept is ridiculous; authors are never short of "ideas", so why would they need to go and mimic the ideas of others?) - but legally, he could, and in the very strictest interpretation, for this story that you posted here, you can't ever promise anyone exclusivity to it anymore, as you've already granted Tad all those rights. (Although of course again Tad will never make any claim to it. The language is purely there to pre-emptively prevent anyone suing Tad for "using" that person's "ideas".)

Urgh, I loathe the concept of "intellectual property". You can't copyright ideas! *grumbles and starts a chant about imaginary property*


Oh, and finally, to share your work without giving up any rights to it, find a different place to host it (and make certain to read their terms of use!) and then just link us.

& yeah, I'm with you, Aan, in disliking the whole 'intellectual property' Gordion Knot that has grown up in the last decade or so. It's a mess. But if you want to sell your stuff to someone else -- or they hire you to create such & such for them -- then they pretty much set the terms of the purchase, 'cause you can always take it elsewhere (or so the idea goes). It sucks, but that's the way the market operates these days, sad to say. Perhaps someday, we'll figure out how to do all these things differently, but for now, the 'big'uns' have to make sure they squeeze as tight as possible. After all, they might lose 'control' of something. bleh.

I've always kinda liked the idea in Snowcrash about a sort of Central Library of Everything, that is on a pay-per-view sort of arrangement with everyone owning their own stuff. (It's been a -long- time since I read the book so I may have the details a little off.) I think something like that would require the demise of the various publishing outlets in existence now (not just books, but music, movies, tv, everything). Would be complicated, to be sure, but seems pretty fair.

Now whomever can figure out how to make *that* happen will be plenty rich. ;)


[eta: or dead, if I consider the dark side of such an implementation...]

[btw, I'm certainly not talking about Tad or Tad's publishers -- or anyone specific, for that matter. Just a general conceptual thing. Please don't sue me. ;) ]

Last edited by strangeshe (2008-02-06 10:51:37)

Ren wrote:

Since I DO intend to hopefullt/maybe someday purchase the Od stories I may have to work something out with Tad et al to regain MY ownership...if it's possible.

You're still missing an important distinction: You still own your work; posting does not change that. What you gave up is *exclusive rights* to usage.

US Code collection: Title 17 - copyrights

Copyright Ownership Issues

Stanford Copyright and Fair Use

Thanks for the help!

Aan`allein wrote:

Although this is essentially correct, I'm not certain if the publishing industry really cares about complete exclusivity. (Does it?) It'd seem much more logical to me that they'd be happy enough with exclusive commercial publishing rights, which could in general still be granted despite putting a text online - just as long as the place where it was put online didn't have terms of use such as those here. (Then again, when was any industry ever logical?)

I could answer this, but then I'd have to invoice you (and everyone else reading this) for intellectual services/advice. ;)

You're correct, of course. No one (that I know of) ever actually sells their exclusive rights anyway. If they do, they're a complete noob and deserve it ;) (Actually, sadly, this does happen -- or used to, anyway, I've not heard any recent tales of it. It's one of those things that can occur when a bright-eyed hopeful artist trusts and believes the people s/he's selling to and fails to read the fine print.)

There are all kinds of 'rights' that can be sold in a publishing agreement: rights to international publishing contracts, rights to publish the softcover version after the hardcover has been released, movie rights, etc etc. All these get spelled out in publishing contracts, as far as I understand it.

I don't believe commercial publishing houses care about 'exclusive' rights, no. They frequently do care, however, about whether the material has been published elsewhere because that *could* open them up to someone else later challenging their own right to publish the material (esp. if it's been published in a very public way as on the net). I'm not an expert in this stuff by any means, and so not explaining well here -- which is why I suggest to anyone they conduct their own personal research and consult reputable professionals about legal angles.

I'm quite certain the publishing industry has had to adapt their contracts for this very situation. More and more people are putting there stuff 'out there' in hopes of getting interest, publicity, what-have-you, so I would imagine that the commercial houses are having to deal with this often these days. They're probably pretty willing to handle material that's been previously published -- especially if just in excerpt here and there -- but you'd have to ask them ;)

That'll be five bucks, please.

All good advice there. I'm not going to get all technical because others already have, instead I'll give a simplified version of my own "rule-of-thumb".

Basically, it depends on what you want to do with the story. If you just want to share it and don't care, either way, then go for it.

I, as a rule - because I do intend to sell my stories - avoid posting them in most places. On my own domain, only if I write them as a *gift* to people who follow my Domus Exsulis stories. Everything else is kept under close wraps, unless it's beta-readers (friends who have been suckered into copyediting for me) as they go through the rounds of submission and rejection *sigh*

So yeah, read all those links. And really, if you mean the story as a "gift" to friends, no sweat. If you want them for something else, like eventual publication - hold them close to you.

If you want them for something else and _still_ want to share them - yes, it is very good advice to post it on your site and then share a link. Don't worry about your site so much. It's the stories in  the end that people want to read, no?

Also, I can't help feeling that internet promotion is overrated sometimes. I've had my stories up since `97, it's got some nifty awards (which I no longer display as I consider them irrelevant), reviews, nice remarks, a yahoo listing, but after awhile? It all goes away and no one remembers if you don't work on putting yourself out there in  a professional market (a reminder to myself as well). That is why I save my work, I don't post them on listservs, or bulletin boards or other places people post. I see them all as irrelevant to the actual nittygritty of learning how to format my work, submit and stuff, I guess. Because that is what counts in the end.

Again, this is all _very_ different from the stories you write to share with friends and readers. That is why I still post free stories to my site. It allows me to write for pleasure as well, and the joy of sharing your fiction overrides fear of encroaching rights or anything else. So, yeah. I hope that makes some sort of sense, it's just how I have personally worked through my writerly issues, so YMMV.

Last edited by Nin Harris (2008-02-06 20:37:48)