Nov 29, 2007

Don’t Be Fooled About Your Rights as a Writer

by Cyndy Hardy

The U.S. Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit today reversed a lower court’s decision that would have paid about $18 million to freelance writers whose work was unlawfully distributed by some major publishers and electronic database services.

The writers lost this round of litigation because they had not registered their work with the U.S. Copyright Office. The lower court had no jurisdiction over unregistered work according to the decision.

Why should you care? Because the publisher who bought your $20 article might be illegally posting it on hundreds of Web sites, selling it to an article database or rewriting your words. The law says you have a right to be paid.

As an independent professional writer, you do not ‘sell’ an article. You license specific uses of it, according to the American Society of Journalists and Authors. The organization is a plaintiff in the case.

“The question isn't whether you will ever resell your piece. The question is: Should others resell your work for their profit alone? Writers shouldn’t let publishers and others profit perpetually from their property while they – the creators of that property – get nothing,” states the ASJA.

Retention of copyright is essential, as many freelancers make a significant income through the resale of their work,” according to the National Writers Union, which is also a plaintiff.

Twenty individuals and five organizations and companies are listed as plaintiffs in the $18 million suit. Certifying the case as a class action implies the widespread harm done to individual writers.

The second you put an original article in a fixed form, you exclusively own and control the rights to publish and republish your work. Be safe. Print a copy. You also own the right to display the work, change it, and distribute copies.

You don’t have to publish the work. You don’t have to put a copyright symbol on it. You can, of course, but it’s not required by law.

You don’t even have to register it with the U.S. Copyright Office. However, if you don’t register, you cannot sue for infringement. Note: the ‘poor man’s’ method of sending a copy to yourself does not fly with the law.

There are only two exceptions to your rights under a provision called “work made for hire.” Refer to the Copyright Office Basics on the U.S. Copyright Office Web site.

If you are employed by a publisher you do not own your work if it was prepared within the scope of your employment. You do own work you create for yourself or other publishers.

As a freelancer, if you write a specially-ordered or commissioned work for use in a collection or compilation, the copyright is yours unless you expressly agree in writing to transfer your rights to the buyer.

In plain English, when you sell a license to a magazine, a newspaper, a compilation book or a Webmaster, it is only a ‘work made for hire’ if you agree by signing away your rights in writing. You own the copyrights to your work. The publisher owns copyright to the compilation and is allowed to make derivatives, for example ‘The Best of 2007.”

The Internet poses significant challenges to protecting one’s copyrights. Many compilations are sold to electronic directories and databases. Many publications sell ‘reprints’ from their online archives.

This “invades the core” of authors’ rights, according to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2001 ruling in New York Times Co., Inc., et al. V. Tasini et al.

“[The] electronic publishers infringed the authors’ copyrights by reproducing and distributing the articles in a manner not authorized by the authors and not privileged by sec. 201(c). We further conclude that the print publishers infringed the authors’ copyrights by authorizing the electronic publishers to place the articles in the databases and by aiding the electronic publishers in that endeavor,” wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

With so many authorities battling over the issue, why do so many writers continue to squander their rights? Maybe the task of copyright registration is too daunting. Several online resources explain the process. The Copyright Office is the horse’s mouth.

First, the piece must be an original literary work and you must own the copyrights. Make a copy of your work, complete and application and write a check for $45. Put everything in an envelope and send it to the Copyright Office.

Some organizations say you can save money by bundling several pieces in one application. The Copyright Office Web site states this is only true for unpublished works. Published works “may only be registered as a collection if they were actually first published as a collection.”

If your submission is in order, your registration is effective on the date the office receives it. They will send you a certificate in about four months, according to the Web site.

You can register your work anytime; however, your ability to recoup damages is tied to the date of registration. If you register within three months of first publication and before an infringement you could get statutory and actual damages for infringement. Otherwise you can only sue for actual damages.

A more likely reason amateur writers give up their rights may be because they don’t understand the value of their work. Most writers today allow buyers too much control over pricing. Many writers are shocked to learn what professional writers earn.

U.S.-based Editorial Freelancers Association will not post jobs that pay less than industry average fair market prices. For writers, that means $40 to $125 for one to three pages per hour. Research is an additional $25 to $50 per hour.

The Professional Writers Association of Canada lists industry averages of $350 to $500 per page for advertising copy, scripts and news releases. That is not a typo. Online and Web site writers make $1 to $3 per word.

You can bet your buyers understand. SEO is advertising. Because most writers don’t understand this, buyers get ad copy for pennies-to-the-dollar to what they would pay ad firms, magazines and newspapers. Uninformed writers often give away full rights for $0.01 or less per word.

The sound you hear is your money blowing out the window. Stop it.

Disclaimer: The content of this article provides general information. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such.

© 2007 Cyndy Hardy All rights reserved. Reprints available by request.

Read more!

Nov 28, 2007

Opinion: If Mitt WereTwo-Faced He’d Wear the Other One

by Cyndy Hardy

Updated Jan. 13, 2008

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney bombed at CNN’s Nov. 28 YouTube debate. The meltdown started when he bashed Rudy Giuliani for his sanctuary policies as mayor of New York City.

Giuliani said his policies complied with federal mandates to provide healthcare and education regardless of immigration status. Like it or not, those are rights protected by the U. S. Constitution. Maybe Romney does not defend the Constitution.

Giuliani said his policies allowed illegal immigrants who were victims of crimes to report those crimes without fear of deportation. Romney’s criticism implies that he supports no such protection for undocumented crime victims.

Giuliani fired back, accusing Romney of having a “sanctuary mansion,” referring to allegations that illegal immigrants performed work on his home. “You did have illegal immigrants working at your mansion,” Giuliani said.

“No I did not,” Romney said. From the other side of his mouth, Romney said it wasn’t his fault if the contractor who worked on his house employed illegal immigrants. Homeowners shouldn’t have to ask for documentation if someone looks different or has a “funny accent,” Romney said.

Romney bashed candidate Mike Huckabee for supporting a bill that would have given collage funding for children of illegal immigrants. Huckabee said the funds would go to students who excelled and who had been in the school system for a long time.

Huckabee said Americans are above punishing children for crimes committed by their parents. “We’re not that kind of country,” he said. We don’t do it for any other crime so why should we do it for illegal immigration, he said.

Romney said no public money should ever be used for anyone “who stays in this country illegally.” Apparently he believes children of illegal immigrants should do ‘the right thing’ and leave the country.

Huckabee defended his record well. He said college funding rewards good students and invests in their momentum to become contributing taxpayers.

When one ‘YouTuber’ asked if candidates absolutely believe every word in the Bible, Romney puffed his chest and declared his faith. Moderator Anderson Cooper said the question was “every word.”

Romney pursed his lips and hemmed and hawed while the moral majority, millions of Mormons and their critics held their breath. “Yeah, the Bible is the word of God,” Romney said, firmly between a rock and a hard place!

Romney was asked if he would allow the interrogation technique of water boarding to continue under his administration. Waterboarding simulates drowning in a controlled environment.

Romney said he is against torture but believes it is not for candidates to determine whether waterboarding is torture. “I’d seek [McCain’s] counsel,” he said.

McCain – a former prisoner of war – was “astonished” that Romney still didn’t know that waterboarding is torture. So, Romney has McCain’s counsel and still would not take a stand against the practice.

Updated on Sunday, Jan. 13, 2008: Appearing on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, Romney said he won't utter the words 'waterboarding is torture' because it sets a precedence that he may be held to if elected president. He reiterated that the U.S. does not condone torture, but said an event, such as a direct nuclear threat on a city, might warrant extreme interrogation measures.

Romney completely welched on his prior support for “a day when gays and lesbians could serve openly in the military.” He stumbled over himself saying this is not that time, as if the issue is not as important as it once was. Trying again, he said that this is a time of war, so it is not the time to defend homosexuals’ service.

Grasping for a life line, Romney finally said he changed his position because “I didn’t think ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ would work” and that the past 15 years proves to him it does work.

Romney was also called on his flip-flop on abortion. Once a pro-choice advocate, he said he changed his mind in 2004 during debates on stem-cell research. “On abortion, I was wrong,” he said.

After the debate, a studio of undecided Republican voters agreed that Romney did not do well. CNN analysts agreed.

“If people are looking for somebody in this country who has never made a mistake … they ought to find somebody else,” Romney said. Perhaps that came from his other face – the one he would see later in the mirror.

Read more!