Comments on: Simon & Schuster wants ebook royalties to be 15%

By: FD

FD — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:00:31 +0000

Ta very much Jane. I wondered how that worked with e-books.

By: Jane

Jane — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:31:19 +0000

@FD – I believe that rights reversion is bound by contractual terms. I.e., digital rights can revert if fall below a certain sales level. Print rights revert if book is out of print for a period of time.

By: FD

FD — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:19:23 +0000

I’ve a question about that actually; is it industry standard for rights to revert when the item goes out of print – or is it a specified term arrangement? Because I can certainly see how the specified term model would put authors over the proverbial barrel.

By: veinglory

veinglory — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:37:19 +0000

MCHalliday, I think you are exactly right. 15% is way too low but S&S’s ongoing campaign to avoid works going out of print and reverting to the author is potentially a much greater issue.

By: MCHalliday

MCHalliday — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:57:59 +0000

Due to S&S creating a backlist in ebook format, including saleable out of print titles, I would assume they are seeking rights to secure the list permanently, hence the warning regarding the reversion of rights.

Considering this grab would ensure their catalogue and greatly reduce the maintenance, S&S should definitely be offering the industry standard for purchase direct from the publisher.