Publishers and Prints

[FearfulSymmetry]

As I get closer to completion on my deck I am starting to wonder about commercial publishing. I do know what my legal rights are, but that doesn't mean publishers adhere to them or (I worry anyway) that they will sign you up if they thing you won't give up some of your rights.
Some of the things I wonder about are:

1. If I make prints, posters, etc. now, will it affect my desirability to a publisher later? Also, would I need to stop all marketing of that kind after publication?

2. What about all the people who I have allowed free use of my images mostly on websites, will I have to go back later and ask them to take it down or comply with the publisher's rules?

3. After publication will I still have use of my images? I know that legally I have the right to negotiate that in the contract, but ......you know how it goes.

4. What about books that I have allowed to use the image?

I know a lot of you here have far more experience than me in these matters! I would love to hear what you think.

Thanks!

[baba-prague]

I'm not sure that my reply will be all that helpful to you, but basically, I think the answer is that it all depends on the contract. In your situation I would be inclined to ask some people privately about their contracts as well as asking more publicly here. Of course, it may not be possible for published deck creators to say much - for obvious reasons (and I think usually quite fairly) publishers tend to say in the contract that details of it shouldn't be revealed, but I expect that people will be able to tell you broadly if they retained copyright of their images etc.

Speaking purely personally, I think it would be unreasonable of a publisher to forbid some of the things you talk about here (they are all good publicity after all) - and what you did prior to contracted publication is, after all, your own business (as long as it doesn't hugely interfere with publication).

Again, sorry if this is a bit vague, but it's one of those areas where I don't think there are definite answers.

[baba-prague]

Originally Posted by FearfulSymmetry

3. After publication will I still have use of my images? I know that legally I have the right to negotiate that in the contract, but ......you know how it goes.

Actually, thinking about it some more, maybe this is one area that I can be a bit more specific on. I think it depends a lot on how licensing rights are assigned. If, for instance, someone wanted to launch, I don't know, a range of "tarot sweets" or something else tarot-related, and use your images and the name "Mary-el Tarot (assuming that's the name you'll publish under), then it would have to be clear, in advance, whether that should be negotiated via the publisher or direct with you - and my guess is that it would be done via the publisher, as the "Mary-el Tarot" would be their publication. However, in any reasonable contract you would get a high percentage of the licensing fee. But if you wanted to license some images for some non-tarot related purpose (as we in fact are in the process of doing with some of our Bohemian Cats images) then it's more likely that you could negotiate that directly, as you wouldn't be capitalising on the "Mary-el Tarot" publication. However, it's likely that there would be something in the contract to say that any such licensing would have to be agreed in advance with the publisher - but that would be just a way of them ensuring that you didn't suddenly decide to license to something that could damage the associated publication and hence their name (for example, the publisher might well object to the images being licensed to a gambling site - not that I can imagine YOU would do that, but the contract is likely to have something to safeguard the publisher just in case.)

Hmm - actually, I'm not sure that came out very clearly at all! But you get the broad gist - I think you may well have to give up some control of the tarot images as once the publisher has invested in them they will need some of their own safeguards. But this should be done in a reasonable way, and if any extra fees become available later, you should get a fair share of them.

Hope that's a bit more helpful!

[FearfulSymmetry]

Hi Karen

No, you were being clear. I have talked to quite a few artists who have published wth different publishers privately about what was in their contract ans basically how the whole process went. Many of them had to turn in their originals and were not allowed to use the images again. These were things published a long time ago though so it might be different now.
I hear what you are saying about them having a vested interest. It is totally understandable that they would want to make money on their investment and I don't begrudge them that.
I suppose that I need to decide if I am willing to let go and enjoy the benefits of having a publisher take the helm or if I want to self publish and keep total control of the images.

I wish I didn't suck so bad at business <sigh>

[baba-prague]

Originally Posted by FearfulSymmetry

I have talked to quite a few artists who have published wth different publishers privately about what was in their contract ans basically how the whole process went. Many of them had to turn in their originals and were not allowed to use the images again. These were things published a long time ago though so it might be different now.
I hear what you are saying about them having a vested interest. It is totally understandable that they would want to make money on their investment and I don't begrudge them that.
I suppose that I need to decide if I am willing to let go and enjoy the benefits of having a publisher take the helm or if I want to self publish and keep total control of the images.

I wish I didn't suck so bad at business <sigh>

Hmm. Well, I do know that one tarot publisher had a reputation for making artists give up the originals - but I honestly think that's not so much the case nowadays and rumour has it that recently they haven't insisted on it (but it's rumour, I have no way of checking it). It's different if the work is "for hire" because then the publisher clearly does own the originals - but that isn't your case at all.

Maybe I should add though that this is one reason we turned down a publishing offer on Baroque Bohemian Cats - we knew that the images would and could be used elsewhere (by us I mean - even back then we knew some of the imagery was probably licence-able) and we wanted to have full control over that. So I understand the kind of decision making you are going through.

[FearfulSymmetry]

I actually hadn't even thought of it as licensing, a big duh on my part. What really brought this up in the first place was that I was thinking of adding my stuff to Art.com so there can be really nice prints, but I was concerned doing something like that would harm the marketability of my deck. You would think it wouldn't because the more demand there is the better but then I wondered if there was an issue of first production/publication rights and things like that.
I want to step carefully and not screw up.
And you know this is my baby, nobody else is going to invest 10 years in it so likely no one else will feel the same motivation to make it successful, however you define success. I want to do the right thing by it.

[baba-prague]

Basically, if you sell direct yourself, it isn't licensing (for instance, we sometimes sell our own prints). I don't know how Art.com works, so I don't really know if it's licensing or not. But if you sign a contract with someone else to give them the right to use certain of your images (for anything - could be teeshirts, porcelain, posters, whatever) then that is certainly licensing - because you are literally granting a license to use the images (we're doing this right now for the first time so I have some, if not much, direct experience). I think nearly all publishers will have something about licensing in the contract, but obviously, it ought to be reasonable. Horribly complicated, all this! I hope others here can help and advise as well. You're right to take things a bit slowly after all this time - best to get it sorted properly.

[cirom]

It would be unethical for me to go into too much information publically, so you are welcome to pm for more details. But the way I understand things, for example in the case of the Gilded, is that I still have the rights to my individual images. They, the publisher have the rights to the use of the entire set of images as a deck. That is'nt as contradictory as it sounds. in other words I can and do sell prints for example of various images from the deck. I could license lets say the mayors or the royals for reproduction onto coffee mugs or whatever. But I would need permission for any venture that would use the entire set of images, which by definition is the Gilded Tarot. The logic is that as a complete set their usage may compete with the sale of the deck itself.
I think you'll find the publishers are not always the big corporate ogres they are often portrayed as being on these forums. For example they had no problem with letting me produce my limited edition version of the Gilded.

Just read through their standard contactual offer, get an attorney to review things if you are not clear on the ramification, and if you are unhappy on a particular point, ask them to consider deleting or modifying.
Ciro

[baba-prague]

Originally Posted by cirom

I think you'll find the publishers are not always the big corporate ogres they are often portrayed as being on these forums.

I'd agree with that. In fact, most of the publishers who do tarot aren't "corporates" in any sense - they are quite small in publishing terms (obviously it's rather different with some publishing houses that are part of very large conglomerates).

I think the nervousness comes in part from one rather notorious case that involved a publisher insisting on owning all the originals - many of us have heard about this on the grapevine and no doubt the story has been embellished in the telling. But it was quite a long time ago, and I doubt that this sort of thing would happen now unless there was a good reason.

[FearfulSymmetry]

Hi Ciro, thanks!

That does make sense that they wouldn't want anything to compete. I think most of the stuff I do with them now won't compete but will promote so it's probably ok. And if they want a pristine work for hire, they won't be getting that from me anyway.
I've calmed down a little since I first made this post, hehe. I think I'll just keep doing what I'm doing and when the time comes will try to strike up a deal thats good for everyone and if that's impossible I'll then self publish. I do know they are good people, especially in this field I know it's done for the love of the subject.
Thanks again!