#DisneyMustPay - Part Deux

A long time ago, in some states not so far, the name Disney was synonymous creativity and fairness.

Not so much anymore.

Back in November, I talked about SFWA publicly shaming  the House of Mouse in order to get them to pay back royalties to esteemed SFF writer Alan Dean Foster. I'm glad to say according to SFWA, Mr. Foster and Disney came to an agreement.

Unfortunately, that "agreement" is lawyer speak for Disney giving Foster some of the money, but not all of it with a high probability of "If you take this to court, we'll bury you" and/or "You'll die before you win in court" thrown in.

(Sometimes, I hate knowing enough to read between the freakin' lines.)

The problem is Mr. Foster wasn't the only creative Disney has been abusing. More writers have been coming out to SFWA and other author organizations. Worse, there could be hundreds, or even thousands, of writers who have been screwed over and don't even know it.

The #Disney Must Pay Taskforce is working to rectify these problems. It isn't just a matter of money. Copyright law hinges on it. Disney claims it can make money on intellectual property without paying the owner. This is an incredibly dangerous precedent if it is either codified or becomes a judicial ruling.

It means no writer is safe if Disney is allowed to continue on this route.

Check out the #Disney Must Pay Taskforce, especially if you could possibly be an affected author.

Disney Refuses to Pay Author!

And this time, it is TOTALLY Disney's fault!

The dicks at Disney are refusing to pay the royalties due to famed SFF writer Alan Dean Foster.

 

You see Foster was hired as a ghost writer by  George Lucas for the original Star Wars novel back in the '70's. Foster then adapted Lucas's unproduced script into the novel Splinter of the Mind's Eye under Foster's own name.

Foster also write many of the movie tie-in novelizations for what was 20th Century Fox, including the Alien franchise. Heck, he's even done move tie-ins for Disney's own movies, like The Black Hole.

Now that Disney bought the rights to Lucasfilm and 20th Century Fox, they think they don't have to honor the old contracts. That's not how the law works, but the execs at Disney are banking on their own legal team to outspend and outlast the pesky little writers like Foster.

And they're still making money of Foster's work.

Disney sucks! And this in one of the many reasons I would think twice before licensing some of my properties, much less submit anything to a large corporations.

Look, I understand wanting success, recognition, and acceptance. But bending over and letting big companies have their way with you does not guarantee those things.

And even if you do everything right, like Foster did, it doesn't mean someone down the road isn't going to screw you over.

The only thing we can do is publicly shame the executives at Disney, like fans did with another company Disney bought--Marvel. Here, there's no question about ownership of characters. Foster did the work according to contract.  Disney cannot have all the rights of the companies they bought without accepting the liabilities.

I know, I know. Sometimes, there are exceptions. However, there's a reason Disney discontinued the publication of books, comics, games, etc. that made up the Star Wars Extended Universe. They wanted to go in a different direction, and they didn't want to pay the creators.

But Disney still publishes Splinter of the Mind's Eye, along with all the other movie tie-ins. In fact, they issued a new version in both mass market paperback and ebook. So if they're still using Foster's material, then they should be honoring his contract.

In addition to protesting, you can donate to the Science Fiction Writers of America's legal fund to support Mr. Foster and any other writers being screwed over by Disney

The Eye of the Storm?

Last week, one of Kris Rusch's reasons for cutting back on her business blogging was that the publishing business had entered a period of stabilization. But with the Gulf hurricane season officially starting a month from Thursday and preparation ads starting to spring up, I wondered:  Are things really stabilizing or are we in the eye of the storm?

1) Writers

The trickle of writers who had contracts for novel length works leaving publishing companies has turned into a steady stream. Many new writers are refusing to even consider  working with a major publishing house. We haven't gotten to the point where that steady stream turns into a gush, or where a MAJOR name like King, Roberts or Grisham walks away from their publisher.

2) Publishers Houses

Sure, you've got guys like Joe Konrath predicting the big publishers will collapse, but the bigger publishing houses made record-breaking profiits in 2013. There's also a lot of issues not being said.

Both Disney and Warner Brothers streamlined their print book operations so that they are focusing on materials and IP properties they fully control, e.g. Star Wars and Superman among others. Supposedly, Disney is keeping the contract Lucasfilm had with Random House to produce Star Wars novels, but I question how long that arrangement might last.

After news got out that Harlequin used contractually sleight-of-hand to rip-off writers, pitch slots to their editors were empty at the 2013 Romance Writers of America Conference. Other small publishers, such as Kensington and Ellora's Cave, are seeing a drop in submissions, and the submissions coming in are dropping in quality.

Overall, the publishing houses are reducing advances, reducing print runs, and issuing draconian contract terms to keep the writers they already have tied to them. They are also tying up reversion rights even though they seem to have no interest in reissuing the older books.

The question is at what point will the majority of writer grow tired of these shennanigans and walk way from the publishers, or writing, altogether.

3) Brick and Mortar Stores

It's been a little over two years since Borders collapsed here in the U.S. Barnes & Noble is scrambling to stay alive by cutting down on books and selling trinkets and toys. Book-a-Million and Half-Price Books only sell a fraction of what the ailing B&N sells. Walmart, Target and Costco will only sell  book on the top twenty of the New York Times bestseller list. Groceries stores and pharmacies are whacking their mass market paperback displays in a quarter of what they used to carry, assuming they are still carrying books at all.

On the plus side, many independent bookstores have arisen from the ashes of the Borders collapse and the closing of several B&N's. They've learned their lessons that they can't compete on price alone and are focusing on service and the customer experience.

Can the bigger stores afford to carry books? And if not, at what point do they quit?

4) Devices

This is where I think the most pundits are short-sighted. I've read article after article about slow down in sales of dedicated e-readers. Barnes & Noble is floundering. Sony gave up on devices totally, then sold its e-book division to Kobo. Kobo turned around and laid off 63 people last week. Yet, I still see publishing CEOs claim the slow down in dedicated device sales means adaption to e-books is also slowing.

This is where I *facepalm*.

First of all, if e-book adaption is slowing, why are the same companies claiming record profits? Sales of paper books are down or steady according to the folks who keep track of such things like Bowker.

Second of all, consumers are buying more and more tablets and smartphones. These multi-purpose devices are driving technology sales right now. In fact, tablets sales are seriously impacting Dell's laptop business. Executives don't seem to understand that you can READ on these multi-purpose devices.

Do you want a prime example? Two weeks ago, an older woman and I were sanding in line at the post office to mail Easter packages to family. I was reading on my iPhone 4. She had a HC. She didn't understand how I could read on such a small screen. I showed how I could adjust the font on the Kindle app, which led to an explanation of how apps work on a phone.

And why am I reading so much on my iPhone? Because the toggle switch on my Kindle 2 broke. While I like reading on e-ink since I spend twice as much business time on my computer than I ever did when I was a programmer or systems engineer, I question why should I spend the extra money. If my eyes need a break, I have 1300+ paper books I can read.

Even Genius Kid, who just got a Galaxy S4, doesn't think he needs another device, even though he's been asking for a Kindle for the last year.

When are execs going to understand that the loss of dedicated devices doesn't mean the loss of e-books?

* * *

With all these issues still outstanding (and I'm sure there's more I missed), I can't see any supposed stability lasting for long. The real question to me is--are we on the clean side of the hurricane or the dirty side when the storm roars past us?