Ellora's Cave Publishing, Inc.

It depends on what those sins are.

Everything gets discussed, all the time. It's a forum. And even having just said I don't personally sweat long terms, it isn't a good thing--and I did considerately point out an issue with their contract I hated more. Ah, feel the love.

Some are more equal than others

Hmm. Is it just me, or have I seen publishers shredded on this forum for lesser sins than lifetime copyright?

Click to expand...

Yeah, but those publishers weren't getting into the big book chains. All animals are equal but…

kristin724 said:

Everyon keeps mentioning that contracts are made to negotiate. Has anyone actually negotiated EC down from their all lifetime high horse? Who hasn't and late had an issue with it? How did EC make it this far with such a clause?

Click to expand...

I personally know several people who negotiated down from lifetime rights, and they only changed the terms to lifetime a year or so ago (if memory serves).

As I recall from my own contract there was only one or two things EC says are not negotiable one of which was royalties. I believe the lifetime rights option was open for negotiating.

You'd have to be nuts in the head to sign a contract that gave up lifetime (or "for the term of copyright") rights.

Jennifer Robins said:

I read on their site that they want rights for the entire term of the copy right. I don't think that is a good thing.

Click to expand...

That's standard print publishing contract language. As long as it's balanced by a good out of print/rights reversion clause (which should tie the publisher's OOP declaration to minimum sales or royalties, and provide a specific procedure through which writers can demand their rights back), it's not a problem. It only becomes problematic if the reversion language is vague or nonstandard, or if the OOP declaration is left solely to the publisher's discretion.

I would guess that EC made the change to life-of-copyright because it's doing so much print these days.

For ebook contracts, on the other hand, or publishers that are exclusively digital, it's much better to have a limited term.

- Victoria

Thanks James, I thought I was going crazy thinking I was alone! Well, Whether I'm crazy or not is another story 80)

So, EC just upped the anti to all lifetime forever copyright rights once they reached Everest? I just don't think my intellectual property is worth them doing what they will. It's like adoption with no contact, Ever.

I am curious as the what the WA's think on this, but I am clueless at legalese. Isn't EC RWA recognized? And EPIC?

RWA doesn't recognize publishers any longer. They've changed it to Non-Vanity/Non-Subsidy - but the criteria for gaining PAN membership has changed.

As for EPIC, their standards allow for self-published authors to join, so they are a little looser. They make no mention of copyright, but list a Right of First Refusal clause as a red flag. RWA and EPIC don't necessarily have the same criteria where publishers are concerned.

kristin724 said:

Thanks James, I thought I was going crazy thinking I was alone! Well, Whether I'm crazy or not is another story 80)

So, EC just upped the anti to all lifetime forever copyright rights once they reached Everest? I just don't think my intellectual property is worth them doing what they will. It's like adoption with no contact, Ever.

I am curious as the what the WA's think on this, but I am clueless at legalese. Isn't EC RWA recognized? And EPIC?

Click to expand...

No, EC upped the ante to lifetime copyrights when they revised their standard contract. If you're not happy with it, you can negotiate it. I'm really confused as to why so many people are not understanding this. Lots of publishers include clauses in their standard contracts that aren't ideal; lots of them allow authors or their agents to negotiate.

(The only place the lifetime copyright isn't negotiable is on the Cavemen anthos, because EC wants the stories to stay together and the anthos are extremely popular and stay in print forever, basically.)

I don't want to come off like an EC cheerleader. I am very happy with them, but no company is perfect and I would never claim some people haven't had different experiences or that people should just accept what they're given. But I really don't understand where the vituperation is coming from on this, when it's not set in stone.

kristin724 said:

So, EC just upped the anti to all lifetime forever copyright rights once they reached Everest? I just don't think my intellectual property is worth them doing what they will.

Click to expand...

Once again, it is not "all lifetime forever." For that, you'd have to transfer your copyright to the publisher, which is not what's happening here.

A life-of-copyright clause, when balanced by a reasonable reversion clause, simply gives the publisher the right to keep the book in print for as long as the book is selling. Publishers do tend to hold onto rights longer than they should--which is why reversion clauses should include specific provisions that allow authors to demand their rights back. But it doesn't benefit the publisher, any more than it does the author, to hold rights "forever." That is not the intent of life-of-copyright clauses.

If you don't like life-of-copyright, you're going to have some trouble if you get an offer from a commercial print publisher. In the commercial print world, life-of-copyright contracts are standard.

- Victoria

victoriastrauss said:

Publishers do tend to hold onto rights longer than they should--

Click to expand...

Just wanted to shed a wee bit of light as to one particular reason why publishers do this. Publishers keep a book that may not have sold well the first time around but feel it may have a new life if trends change. As an example, the DaVinci Code knock-offs appeared out of the woodwork like magic. Many of those books were ramrodded through editing, but a number of them were re-releases that publishers had kept around for just such an occasion. Invariably the contract states that they retain all rights while the book is in print. To get around that clause, they'll print up 1,000 copies or so and destroy most of them.

I am a newbie to the core. My first manuscript is near completion, and now it's time to start the search for an agent or publisher.

To anyone who has dealt with EC, would you, or would you not, recommend submitting to them? Or, is my best bet to try and find an agent?

Lindy, that really depends on what you write and what you're looking for. PM me if you like; I'm multi-published with EC and quite happy wth them, and I'll answer any questions you may have.

I have submitted to them and I'm crossing fingers and holding my breath with a prayer, waiting for a reply.

Good luck, Glenda! Keep us updated!

Critique Partners

I'm not sure where to post this, but since I'm wanting to submit to EC, I thought I'd post it here.

I read that critique partners are a good idea before submitting work to an agent or publlisher. Does anyone know of a thread on AW regarding this topic or know anywhere to find a partner?

Any help would be much appreciated!

You can post in SYW (Share Your Work)- but if it's erotic, you might want to check out the erotica sub-forum (you'll have to PM a mod for the password.) I don't know if you'll find a critique parnter, per se, but you might get some very useful feedback.

Possible storm warning for Ellora's Cave: Jasmine-Jade Enterprises, which owns both EC and Cerridwen Press, is suing Borders for "excessive" orders. It's also suing Baker & Taylor for "conspiring" with Borders.

- Victoria

victoriastrauss said:

Possible storm warning for Ellora's Cave: Jasmine-Jade Enterprises, which owns both EC and Cerridwen Press, is suing Borders for "excessive" orders. It's also suing Baker & Taylor for "conspiring" with Borders.

- Victoria

Click to expand...

Victoria, I blogged about this yesterday and have offered up my observations from this side of the desk. For what it's worth, this lawsuit is the dumbest thing to come down the pike, and they'll have their hats handed to them.

There's an interesting thread of comments on this over at Dear Author. Some of the comments are pretty interesting, but since a lot of them are also anonymous (some for pretty good reasons, though) it's hard to take them as complete truth.

My hunch is to agree with the Dear Author commenters who feel that the suit is a sign of trouble at EC. If I were an EC author, I'd be worried right now.

- Victoria

Thanks for the warning. I had a request for a full from them and now I'm reconsidering it.

Sorry to see them in trouble, though. I have friends who've been very happy with them for a long time and have enjoyed the books I've gotten from them.

I would agree to - and I fully understand why some anonymouses (anonymi???) are remaining such. I know a few EC authors who've been happy with them as well. It should be interesting to see how this plays out.

victoriastrauss said:

My hunch is to agree with the Dear Author commenters who feel that the suit is a sign of trouble at EC. If I were an EC author, I'd be worried right now.

- Victoria

Click to expand...

Agreed. What this boils down to is that J-J doesn't want to accept responsibility for their own stupidity. Every publisher with a pulse understands that books can and will be returned, and it's the smart ones who evaluate each PO that comes in from a bookstore account. If they feel the order number is too high, their sales teams contact the account and have them rewrite the order for a smaller number.

Stores can always order more books if they sell out. Orders are based on the publisher's and author's PR plan. But what happens is inexperienced publishers are more concerned with getting as much stock on as many shelves as possible and forget about the downside; returns. It's expensive as hell and can easily bankrupt a small publisher.