The US Authors Guild has responded for the first time on the moves by the Wylie Agency to launch a digital publishing imprint and strike an exclusive deal with Amazon. In the statement released this morning, The Authors Guild say that publishers have brought the current situation on themselves and are ‘governed by old publishing contracts in which the authors didn’t expressly grant electronic rights to the print publishers.’ However, The Authors Guild statement did express its concern about the power of Amazon in the marketplace and that such an exclusive deal was not in the interest of authors.
You can see the whole of that statement here and an addendum here, but below are the four specific points the statement makes:
1. Authors retain e-rights in standard publishing contracts unless they expressly grant those rights to the publisher, as we’ve consistently said and as a federal court held in Random House v. Rosetta Books. It’s fine and proper for these authors and their heirs to exercise those rights, and we applaud the Wylie Agency for finding a way to make it happen.
2. That said, when an agency acts as publisher, serious potential conflicts of interest immediately come to mind. The most obvious of these is the possibility of self-dealing to the detriment of the agency’s client, the author. If, by acting as publisher, the agency receives a higher percentage of the author’s income than it would normally be entitled to, or if it receives other benefits that the author doesn’t share in appropriately, then a conflict seems unavoidable.
3. That the Wylie/Odyssey agreement is reportedly exclusive raises many questions and concerns. Authors should have access to all responsible vendors of e-books. Moreover, Amazon’s power in the book publishing industry grows daily. Few publishers have the clout to stand up to the online giant, which dominates every significant growth sector of the book industry: e-books, online new books, online used books, downloadable audio, and on-demand books. (That Random House, by far the largest trade book publisher, has retaliated against the powerful Wylie Agency but not against Amazon, which must be equally culpable in Random House’s view, tells you all you need to know about where power truly lies in today’s publishing industry.) Adding to Amazon’s strength may yield short-run benefits, but it’s not in the interests of a healthy, competitive book publishing market.
4. To a large extent, publishers have brought this on themselves. This storm has long been gathering. Literary agencies have refused to sign e-rights deals for countless backlist books with traditional publishers, even though they and their clients, no doubt, see real benefits in having a single publisher handle the print and electronic rights to a book. Knowledgeable authors and agents, however, are well aware that e-book royalty rates of 25% of net proceeds are exceedingly low and contrary to the long-standing practice of authors and publishers to, effectively, split evenly the net proceeds of book sales.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Authors Guild on the economics of the Wylie/Amazon agreement – a 300% increase in author income?; may give Amazon too much power (teleread.com)
- Authors Guild on Odyssey Editions: ‘Weird’ (observer.com)
- Authors criticize agency’s e-book deal with Amazon (seattletimes.nwsource.com)