Clearing Permissions in the Digital Age

Once again it’s time to play You Be the Agent.

Today’s question is, How much is one line of poetry worth? Not a lot, you say? Suppose you represented the Robert Frost estate and someone requested permission to use the line “And miles to go before I sleep” in an anthology. Still think it’s worth nothing?

That’s the kind of question that comes up daily in every literary agency. But with the introduction of digital technology, decisions that were once fairly cut and dried have become head-spinningly complex. Marc Aronson, in an op-ed piece published in the New York Times, stated the issue cogently: “In order for electronic books to live up to their billing, we have to fix a system that is broken: getting permission to use copyrighted material in new work. Either we change the way we deal with copyrights — or works of nonfiction in a multimedia world will become ever more dull and disappointing.”

What does Aronson mean? “Given that permission costs are already out of control for old-fashioned print,” he writes, “it’s fair to expect that they will rise even higher with e-books. After all, digital books will be in print forever (we assume); they can be downloaded, copied, shared and maybe even translated. We’ve all heard about the multimedia potential of the iPad, but how much will writers be charged for film clips and audio? Rights holders will demand a hefty premium for use in digital books — if they make their materials available in that format at all.”

Aronson thinks it’s high time for a new permissions model grounded in the realities of the digital paradigm. “Instead of paying permission fees upfront based on estimated print runs, book creators would pay based on a periodic accounting of downloads.” Though accounting for sales under this system might at first seem daunting, the micropayment management such as Paypal is already commonplace.
Aronson is onto something. Expect to hear more about it.

Richard Curtis

Every Blogger owes a debt of gratitude to newspapers and magazines. This posting relies on original research and reporting performed by The New York Times.

Tags: Digital Rights Management (DRM)
Posted in Advice for Writers, All, Copyright and Piracy, Miscellaneous, Publishing Contracts, Publishing Industry | 4 Comment »

Frank James Gunn wrote on June 14, 2010 at 8:50 am

Time to stand up more assertively for fair use.

Too many times publishers bend over backwards to license work which, if it should come to court, would undoubtedly be justified under fair use and therefore a justifiable infringement of copyright.

Unless rights owners face up to the realistic position that one line of poetry is worth next to nothing then ultimately the system will collapse and the end result – a free-for-all like the current situation with music downloading on the internet.

FJG

Rowena Cherry wrote on June 14, 2010 at 9:16 am

As a rights holder who has been pirated by big and small, I think there would be a problem with being paid a percentage of downloads.

Consider the logistics. An ebook is distributed by multiple legitimate resellers. There is a possibility that not all the distributors report every download. What happens with Amazon or Nook, where one sale might result in several “legal” but unreported downloads?

What happens with libraries? Do they account for all downloads?

What about Google downloads?

What about piracy?

I think a copyright owner and her literary agent would be much better off either refusing permission, or taking money up front.

Kent Larsen wrote on June 14, 2010 at 10:31 am

OK, I’d love to hear more about it. I’ve already heard that this is a problem from many different commentors. What I haven’t seen is many proposals or even discussions of the details of the problem. Where do I go for that?

Steve Boyett wrote on June 14, 2010 at 10:59 am

Given that Congress and Disney have colluded to keep anything from entering the public domain since the 1920s, a rethinking of what constitutes “fair use” is in order, along with more concrete legal definitions. Expecting to be paid when someone quotes a paragraph you wrote seems greedy and absurd, and laughably unrealistic in an age in which media are freely reproducible, redistributable, recontextualizable, and remixable.

I quoted four lines of a Mark Strand poem as the epigraph to my latest novel. I was charged separately to use it for the hardcover, the paperback, the audiobook, and the e-book. I elected not to pay to use it in the e-book and the audiobook, as I was feeling nickeled & dimed.

I am happy to pay an artist when his work is being used in such a weighty manner — four lines from a poem acting as a kind of gateway to my own work. But being chiseled by his publisher ended up making me happy not to use the quote and created a situation where nobody wins.

Publishers had best take a look at the public perception of the RIAA, and the overwhelmingly negative response to their tactics, before mounting their high horse.

I once asked permission to use four lines of music lyrics from a well-known band as a chapter epigraph and was quoted a per-copy rate equivalent to about half my paperback royalty. My solution was to laugh and quote a public domain source. I guess they showed me, huh?

Meanwhile, if someone wants to quote me as an epigraph to his own work, so long as I am properly attributed, be my guest.

4 Comments - “Clearing Permissions in the Digital Age”