After signing contract, editor kicks me out of book - can that be done?

Okay, but you called it a 'book' initially, only later saying it was actually a short story.

As others have said, if you never got the signed contract from them, you'd best just move on and try selling it elsewhere. Maybe ask for them to send you a voided copy of what you signed, to be on the safe side. Unfortunate things happen sometimes; and there isn't always recourse for every bad thing that does, especially if in the grand scheme of things, it's relatively minor. For all you know, you'll find a better 'home' for what you've written anyway....

I'm no legal expert either but fwiw I agree with the others. First, they didn't sign the contract. My guess is that's their usual procedure. From their point of view, it makes sense. That way, they have the commitment from the authors and can get their issue together without worrying about authors backing out. But if they run into the occasional problem, they're still free to back out of it.

So, you and they ran into a problem and they backed out.

Even if you could somehow get around the lack of a signed contract, I doubt it would be worth legal action. A short story in a "semi pro pay" magazine isn't worth a lot (financially). An attorney told me once that principle makes for bad law. Unfortunately, in civil court, the focus is on actual monetary damages, not how much someone pissed us off.

Sorry you had a bad experience. But as they say, if it's good for one magazine, it will be good enough for others. I'd send it out elsewhere right away and leave this mess behind. Good luck.

Rechan said:

His words were the story was released, it would not be published.


No. In fact the editor never sent me any edits.

Click to expand...

Did you sign the contract as presented or edit it in any way? Did you have any ongoing discussion about the story with the editor after the initial offer or was it just dead air?

Rechan said:

Yeah. It was just my first publication outside of a niche market, and the first I could actually share with others, so I have told quite a few people about it.

Click to expand...

Don't worry. If your experience is anything like mine was, nobody will ask about it!

Rechan said:

Your snark is neither helpful nor appreciated.

Click to expand...

It was meant to be a joke, Rechan. Not snark. I'm sorry I upset you.

Next time someone here upsets you, though, I'd be grateful if you'd use the "report post" feature rather than responding in-thread. It prevents derailing conversations, and keeps us all on track.

I'm sorry I'm not using precise terminology. I'm using publishing and printing synonymously in terms of "putting out the product".

Click to expand...

I understand that, but the problem is the two terms don't mean the same thing. They are not interchangeable. You've also confused a few people in this thread by referring to the work in question as a book, rather than a short story. I see that you've explained this here:

Rechan said:

My mistake - I was thinking anthology = book, and this is an ebook of a magazine, that's close enough to an anthology.

Click to expand...

Such imprecise use of terms can and does lead to confusion, and as this issue does seem peculiar I have to wonder if confusion over things like this might have played a part.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't be disappointed, or that I think you're to blame for anything at all: just that it's something to consider if you're trying to understand what went wrong.

Because I signed a contract and they voided it at the last minute. It's the principle. I feel wronged. I want to know if they have the power to do what they did and what I can do about it.

There was friction, but no direct disagreements or confusion. However, I started this thread to ask about the powers a publisher has relating to a contract. I want to know if they can do what they did.

Click to expand...

They didn't do anything. They decided against signing the contract with you, which is there prerogative.

If they'd signed the contract they still might not have been obliged to publish your work--it all depends on what was in the contract.

I understand that it's upsetting, but I don't think you'll gain anything worthwhile by taking any sort of action against them.

I wonder if the friction you mentioned was enough to make them change their mind about publishing your piece. But it doesn't matter now: they've made their decision and that's that.

Without seeing the specific language in the contract it is hard to say for certain, but most short story contracts I have seen are phrased such as "publisher will do x within y time frame, and if they do not then rights revert". So, by my reading (insert IANAL clause) that means they do not *have* to publish it, only that they can only not publish it for a certain amount of time and still retain the rights contracted.

In this case it sounds like they released the rights back to you without waiting the time frame. Also, a contract generally has to be accepted by both parties. Were there changes you requested that might have caused them to reject it? Even if not, either party has the option of refusing a contract until both sign, so while it sucks that this happened, I'm pretty sure they are well within their rights.

Rechan said:

Book, ebook, same difference.

Click to expand...

Well, first you said book, then you said ezine, then you said short story, then anthology - words have meaning and as a writer, you need to pay more attention to that.

Rechan said:

No, it was ready to release, and it was a lot of a lack of communication, he rarely responded period. There were several delays in the publish date, so I finally said "Look it's November. I want to know when it's coming out and when the checks are going out. " the next response is to release my story.

Click to expand...

And...there's your answer.

I have to be the bearer of bad news: The short reason is you might have been considered a "problem child."

The long answer is that business of publishing is made up of people with huge amounts of stress placed on them from a dozen different sources. Editors of periodicals are especially prone to having short tempers. Setbacks are part of the business because of a variety of reasons, none of which are usually the fault of the editor or the author. So it becomes a "you and me against the world" sort of relationship between the editor and writer, and when one of the people feel that the other doesn't understand that, it causes a rift that might well be unfixable.

Delays are part of this business. Know that now and know that making demands of a person who has no ability to fix the delay won't win you friends. If your writing is brilliant, celestial and worth you being pushy, they'll put up with it. If you're good or average, sometimes they won't.

My best advice is to take a deep breath and apologize to the editor. Something along the lines of, "Thank you for getting back to me. I'm sorry if I came off sounding pushy. I was just so anxious to be published by your company that I got a little edgy. I appreciate all your efforts for me and hope I can work with you on a future project. Sincerely..."

Then let it go. You may never hear back because you might have burned that bridge. Or it could be that the editor will get back to you with a "Hey, it wasn't you at all. We just shelved that antho. Keep the stories coming!"

Either way, it's been a good lesson and you know that the story has publishing potential. Send it out again.

Rechan said:

I knew that was the reason why. This thread was asking if they could do what they did legally, not why.

I understand delays. Delays are constant. You ever try to get anything done with a bureaucracy? When they don't respond in x weeks, you send an email, then reset the clock after their response. Unless you stay on top of it, it doesn't get done. I've had publishers flat out forget about books.

As an anthology editor myself, I keep my authors up to date about decisions, and when plans change, I let them know. It's courtesy on top of just being responsible.

However, while this guy is being non-communicative, he's got the time to tweet every day "Hey buy our stuff. Buy our stuff. Want to see our stuff? Come buy our stuff." He can beat the promotion drum but can't be bothered to let his authors know what's up?

And to void a contract because someone asked for an update is flat out unprofessional. It's a legal agreement, not toilet paper.

Click to expand...

As you intimated up front, the only one with authority in this matter is an attorney specializing in intellectual property. If the principle is really this important to you, find the funding and get a consultation.

I have to wonder if you understand the question you're asking. Because none of your criticisms of the editor are (so far as I can tell) relevant to whether or not it's legal for the editor to release you like that.

Being released isn't a punishment. It's entirely possible that the editor realized that the organization couldn't meet your expectations. In which, voiding the contract and returning everything to how it was before is the proper, ethical, even professional thing to do.

You have to decide which it is that matters to you, and act accordingly. An online forum maybe not be the worst way to get legal advice, but I'm fairly sure it's in that ballpark.

Rechan said:

I am going by what is in the contract. If I could I would post the contract here and show the exact wording, but there's no means to attach a document. Nothing in the contract states the publisher has the power to release the rights without publication. So if the publisher is releasing me from the contract, there has to be something outside of it granting them the power to do so.

Click to expand...

You could quote portions of the contract here: but I'm not sure it would be productive because as the contract wasn't signed by the publisher, it's not legally binding.

My guess--and it is a guess, because I haven't seen the contract--is that there is a clause in the contract which gives the publisher an out somewhere. With a good publisher, there always is.

And they publisher doesn't have to release you from the contract because they didn't sign the contract. They are not bound by the contract: the contract, legally, doesn't exist.

This is a forum for publishing, so it stands to reason there should be some publishers in here. While they may not be lawyers, publishers are in turn working with contracts

Click to expand...

There are publishers here at AW. And editors, and agents, and all sorts of other very experienced publishing professionals. In this very thread you have an acquisitions editor (me!) and a paralegal (I think) who happens to also be a best-selling author, and we're both doing our best to help you.

and I expected someone with experience on the publisher end to be able to answer if a Publisher can refuse to publish something after a contract had been signed when the contract says they will publish it.

Click to expand...

I've taken several cracks at this question already but you don't seem to be listening.

The contract WAS NOT SIGNED by the publisher.

The contract, therefore, is not valid.

The publisher is under no obligation to publish your work.

The publisher has told you that it is not going to publish your work.

Take Cathy C's advice if you want: send that email to your editor and hope he or she will consider your future submissions.

If you don't want to do that, that's fine. But recognise, please, that there exists no valid contract between you and this publisher, and this publisher is not obliged to publish your work in this instance.

Rechan, it only matters whether you could force the point legally if you might indeed force the point legally.

What would that mean? That would mean you would use legal redress to try to force the editor of a respectable online anthology to publish your piece against his or her wishes and better judgment--a judgment call which initially was based on a history of you being pushy and aggressive (from the reluctant editor's perspective). Even if your legal play works, now you've just confirmed that judgment in the most blatant way possible.

Man, that's not the reputation you want. That's not worth a single publication. Honest. It will follow you.

If that path isn't on the table anyway, then it's a moot point.

Even if you could legally force this publisher to publish your work, what's to stop them from doing so in the most obscure way possible? i.e. "Your work was available on our website for 120 seconds in 2-point white font on a white background on an obscure page no one ever, ever visits. You were published. Obligation met."

And with that, I think we're done.

If anyone has a good reason for this thread to be reopened, PM me.