Sunday, 3 August 2014

Creator's Bill of Rights

People keep asking me what these "creators rights" are that I keep mentioning?  REALLY??? Some of these people are in comics -there is NO REASON why you should be ignorant of rights within the comics industry unless you want to support publishers ripping creators off.

There is a whole Wikipedia page on this:

  
But the basics are below and I know that there are certain 'comic artists' in the UK who violently oppose creators having any rights and will attack on line or on forums, anyone who promotes them.  These people, while bleating about "no real work coming in" doff their caps to comic bosses because they are the bosses so can dish out whatever crap to creators they want to.

Those people need to get into sewage pipe clearance.

Text of the Creator's Bill of Rights

For the survival and health of comics, we recognize that no single system of commerce and no single type of agreement between creator and publisher can or should be instituted. However, the rights and dignity of creators everywhere are equally vital. Our rights, as we perceive them to be and intend to preserve them, are:
  1. The right to full ownership of what we fully create.
  2. The right to full control over the creative execution of that which we fully own.
  3. The right of approval over the reproduction and format of our creative property.
  4. The right of approval over the methods by which our creative property is distributed.
  5. The right to free movement of ourselves and our creative property to and from publishers.
  6. The right to employ legal counsel in any and all business transactions.
  7. The right to offer a proposal to more than one publisher at a time.
  8. The right to prompt payment of a fair and equitable share of profits derived from all of our creative work.
  9. The right to full and accurate accounting of any and all income and disbursements relative to our work.
  10. The right to prompt and complete return of our artwork in its original condition.
  11. The right to full control over the licensing of our creative property.
  12. The right to promote and the right of approval over any and all promotion of ourselves and our creative property.
I think Kid Robson has made a few good points (see comments).  If a publisher is publishing work as a six issue comic series then that publisher decides the format of the book and how it is distributed. There is also the idea that, during a comic series run, which the publisher has invested money in and (presumably) paid the creator that the creator can say "No. so-and-so Comics is offering me a better deal" -THAT is wrong and I think goes too far.

Agree to a six issue series after which, if the publisher thinks it is selling well, you can re-negotiate a new contract for another six issues and ALWAYS make sure that it is stipulated that the publisher only has first English language printing rights so he cannot just keep publishing the work ad infinitum.

I think there is a bit too much of the "Creators have been screwed by publishers for decades -now its the publishers turn to get screwed!"   If a publisher is willing to offer your comic good printing and distribution (what you want: "I do not want THAT distributor to handle my books as I hear he is anti-vegan!")  and you are getting a fair deal and it's recognised as your creation then just take the pay-cheque.  "No, no. The quality of staples being used is not what I want -I want non-degradable titanium staples!"  Give the idiot a slap.

And the idea that your comic might be optioned for a movie and you want a seat on the movie set to make sure everything goes exactly how you want? Your movie will not be optioned.

The publisher, recognising that you created the character/series and pays you correctly and  offers you a royalties deal...that's good.  Remember: the publisher is paying for printing and the book has to sell to make money and distributors take a big cut.  The whole idea of Creators Rights is that you get a fair deal.  Not that you make publishers decide no longer to publish books.

The idea of being at part 6 of a 12 issue series and just saying "screw you!" to the publisher...VERY wrong.

We want to make sure that creators never have to sleep in alleyways (as quite a few did), no longer have to get food from soup kitchens (as more than a few did), have enough money for medical treatment if needed and keep creating.

In the end it all comes down to common sense and hoping that the publisher is willing to stand by the signed contract and not, as I know only too well, break every single agreement and even offers printing rights to foreign companies (cus he thinks he won't get caught -but denies it all when he is even if the foreign publishers produce the printed deal they made with him) and continues to print 2nd, 3rd and 4th editions beyond his first printing rights because he ALWAYS includes "first printing" in the legal indicia every time he reprints!

Some times creators need to be given a shake and told they are being just plain dumb. 

4 comments:

  1. Surely they've got all that already, Terry - when they exercise their 'right' to meet the full expense of publishing their ideas themselves. I really don't think that creators should be able to dictate to publishers the format in which something should be published, or by what method it should be distributed. Publishers have rights too, surely. (And don't call me Shirley.) Those two apart, I'd agree with most of the others.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Actually, having read the list again, there are a few others I'm not too sure about. I don't think I'd want to take the risk of spending a fortune in publishing and promoting a comic or character that the creator could take to another publisher any time he felt like it. If I'm taking the financial risk of funding a project, don't you think there's something to be said for me owning part of the property? That's how Dragons' Den operates, and as I've been compared to Duncan Bannatyne, if it's good enough for him...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi, Kid. I think it was Scott McCloud (who put the draft that was approved forward) wrote: "This version of the Bill is my proposed "final draft." with annotations as it appeared in The Journal. The original Summit version spoke of control of format and distribution rather than approval and included an additional article about labeling which had been a hot topic at the time, but should be adequately covered by format." I have to say that if the publisher is paying for the work to be published in A4, A3 or A5 then that is up to him as long as the creator has been paid. I look at it this way: if the publisher starts messing about and does not pay you and there is no legitimate reason then, yes, the creator can take his work to another publisher. However, I'd say that a contract should specify that a publisher will publish 6, 8 or 12 parts/issues and then decide whether he/she wishes to re-new a contract with the creator for more. The idea that a publisher gets up to issue 7 and the creator says "blah blah is offering me more for the series so I'm going with them!" -NO! I guess it stems from publishers going out of business and leaving creators in limbo or, as I know only too well, publishers who DO NOT honour contracts, delay payments and sell the book(s) to foreign publishers when they do not have that right under the contract signed with the creator. Problem is so many creators never saw the benefits of their work that went on to make publishers millions. A lot of US creators ended up homeless, eating at soup kitchens and even, sadly, killing themselves because they got very badly screwed by fat cat, crooked publishers. I think every creator has to look at the deal they make with a publisher and that means IF they sign up to a deal they stick to it just as much as the publisher. Alan Moore bleated about being ripped off over Watchmen but the so-wise-to-the-nasty publisher-games Moore did an absolutely STUPID thing. He put in the contract and signed that contract, that when the series/book went out of print the rights reverted to him. It never went out of print. He should have stipulated that "after first printing" rights reverted to him because then he could have re-negotiated with DC again. There is aninherent fear with comic creators, especially in the US, that they'll have a comic published by, say, DC, and it gets optioned to be a movie and they'll get no money. Personally, so long as the creator gets the money they do not need a "seat on set" to guide every aspect of the movie (that's ridiculous). You need to know WHAT you can ask for and that IF you got cheated then you have back-up from the community (sorry, laughed there). BUT a creator also has to remember that they cannot turn to a publisher and say: "I want this published on high quality 90gsm paper stock and it's to be in the Treasury Edition format and I have the final say on if it looks right before the printer goes ahead!" It is down to common sense and, yes, you are right, there are some "odd" things there but, despite all the work I did in the early to late 1980s on getting UK creators Rights I've never seen an official Bill of Rights from the UK -I think we tend to get creator rights cover from UK and European/international publishing law.

    ReplyDelete