Almost all freelancing today is ghostwriting of some sort--either ghostwriting through developmental editing or ghostwriting directly. Although there are still many traditional freelancing jobs, the immense number of freelancing projects that have flooded the market lately are done anonymously. Many freelancing contracts, including my own, explicitly state the rights pass to the employer and then mention that the project is a work-for-hire. I think this is why many employers begin to think they are the "author" of the work. This is not true.
First, although my contract explicitly states the project is to be considered a work-for-hire in order to reassure my employers, it does not and cannot meet the definition of that term according to the copyright office guidelines. Because "work-for-hire" is kind of a misnomer, people assume it means that if I hire someone to write something for me, it belongs to me. The problem is, the "hire" part means you hire me--as a part-time or full-time employee and provide all the benefits including paying some of my social security taxes and withholding tax money for me. The term "work-for-hire" means that Disney or WebFX hires me and anything I write in the course of my job for them belongs to them--not me. You can also apply this to very specific works in the actual freelancing world, but these are not the types of works you are asked to write as a freelancer and in general they are works that would require multiple freelancers to put together simply because of their vast nature.
Does that mean when you hire me you are going to get in trouble and you don't own the copyright. No--however, I can only say no for myself because I do require you to accept the terms of my contract before I will work for you. Many people see my long contract as something scary. In fact, it protects both me and my employer. My contract is a work-in-progress, but it specifically states that all rights to the work pass to my employer until the death of my employer. This statement, not the work-for-hire statement, gives my employer the right to do what he or she wants with my work without fear of me preventing them from doing so. It also prevents me from using the work again, except for samples. (The only reason I can use samples of the work is because this is another clause in my contract. The clause also states that I will not use samples of the work if the employer notifies me not to do so).
But, the fact is that even if you are the copyright holder, you are not the author. Do you have to put my name on the work? No, actually you can't. Another clause in my contract prohibits this unless you have express written permission. You cannot use my name, likeness, etc. to promote or endorse your book (even though I wrote it). If you do this, then I automatically regain the copyright. This is the only way I can control who uses my image and my name.
Technically, the only way you could acknowledge me and avoid "plagiarism" under the terms of my contract (without getting my written permission) is by stating the book was written by a ghostwriter without naming me (but no one does this) or you could publish it under a pen name that you only use for works created by me.
My contract is relatively solid and designed to protect both me and you. If you hire Joe Smoe or Abrahim Ad-Abdul, and they don't have a contract with you, where does that put you? If you don't have a contract, the author owns the copyright on production of the work. If you don't have a contract, that copyright is not passed to you. The thing is that Joe and Abrahim probably don't realize this. They probably think you have the copyright to their work simply because you paid them. You could also probably make the case that you own the work if they stated somewhere in writing to you that you would own all the rights as long as you have a copy of that statement and can prove they wrote the statement. But chances are good even without a contract Joe and Abrahim are not going to come after you and try to prevent you from publishing their stuff. You paid them after all.
The only time you would be in trouble without a contract is the rare chance that your book becomes a New York Times Best Seller. If you are making millions of dollars off of something you paid $75 to get, and you don't have a contract, and the author finds out you are making millions of dollars off that work, the author could technically sue you for that money or a portion of it.
There is one other time where you could be in trouble hiring a ghostwriter and not attributing the actual author. This is in the academic realm. It happens. I have written scientific papers based on research provided to me by my employer. These were then published in academic journals--without my name. In fact, I was never even asked if I would like my name included. The chances of anyone finding out are close to 0%. I am not going to tell, and I doubt the attributed author(s) would tell. But if a fellow academic finds out you are having your papers ghostwritten and you are not at least attributing the real author, you face the chance of losing your job. The irony is that adding an extra person on the author list is generally not something frowned upon. So, if you ask someone to ghostwrite your academic journal submission, ask them if you can use their name to keep yourself fully covered. Again, holding the copyright to something and being the author are two different things.
Thursday, February 20, 2020
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Another one for the English Teacher Wall of Shame
How do these people get jobs teaching? This is a direct quote from my daughter's English teacher:
"and suffered prejudice and discrimmination."
I got it--you are in a hurry and jot off a quick note without checking it. But misspelled words are now underlined in red by every browser I have seen.
This woman has also told her class that a work of fiction is "semi-autobiographical" even though it contains this quote on the copyright page:
Memoirs do not belong in the autobiography sub-genre in my opinion. They border on the fictional side of life. They get away with it by claiming to be "the author's view." Frequently, they are called out for the facts they present that do not stand up to fact checking and even for complete fabrication. We lap them up along with the false reality TV shows and documentaries and amaze ourselves at how something so out there is true. As the old adage says--"if it seems too good to be true, it probably isn't true." Adjusted, I would say "If it seems too entertaining to be true, it probably isn't true."
I say this as someone whose grandmother fully believes I should turn my life into a reality show. Then she says no one would believe it is true, though. I walk into a store for something quick, get in line and the lady in front of me discovers she grabbed the wrong item for her 50 cent coupon. She proceeds to run all the way to the back of the superstore to find the correct item and then returns with it while the rest of us are still waiting. Then she pulls out her checkbook--she has not been writing her check while the checker was ringing things up. She just starts when the checker pushes "total". Finally, I step up, the checker swipes my one item and discovers she has run completely out of receipt tape. She does not have an extra roll ready in anticipation of this moment, but has to send to the office to get one. True story--and it would be believable if it happened once, I suppose. The problem is that it happens all the time to me. While it is happening, I usually explain to the people around me that if they see me in line again, they should probably pick another line. My husband after 20 years no longer believes me when I say I just need to run in and get something and it won't take more than five minutes.
Nobody would read a boring story-true or false. It is our job as writers to make each story we tell (non-fiction or fiction) believable and interesting. How many times have you seen a negative Amazon review about a fiction book that wasn't believable? The problem comes when an English teacher tells her class a fiction work is semi-true just because it is believable. If as an author I write something that is close enough to fact that I deem it a true story, I am not going to market it as fiction.
The term "semi-autobiographical" exists, but the problem is that it has no definition--nor could it. All works of fiction are in some ways semi-autobiographical. Writers create stories and characters based on what they know. By the looseness of the term, semi-autobiographical means anything that is currently classified as fiction. In a society that already enjoys blurring the line between fact and fiction, this is unhelpful. Academia has flagged Dickens as writing many "semi-autobiographical" works that are nothing more than well-researched, believable fiction.
For example, I am currently ghostwriting a fiction book in which the main character is entered into a speech-writing contest by her professor. The person who is the author had originally planned for her to write a literary analysis paper that was entered in the contest, but I changed it because speech class better fit the story. I also gave her a job in a grocery store. Is this ghostwritten work of fiction that will not even bear my name now "semi-autobiographical"? After all, a teacher DID enter me into a speech writing contest when I was in high school, and I had a job in a grocery store. In fact, the layout of the grocery store in the novel is similar to the one in which I worked. By the current definitions, if someone found this out in the future (and discovered that I had ghostwritten this book) they could claim it was. But my experiences, which are not truly related in the novel--but, as Dickens would say, "are written in the way I wanted them to happen--" are not something I would consider autobiographical at all. If Dickens himself admitted that the things in his books were not really how they happened, and if further research has shown these things in his books are not true, then why do we keep insisting his works are "semi-autobiographical" works? All the best fiction is based on life. That does not make it non-fiction.
As authors, we all have a responsibility to honestly inform our readers whether we are writing fact or fiction. Readers, including those in academia, have the responsibility of believing us.
"and suffered prejudice and discrimmination."
I got it--you are in a hurry and jot off a quick note without checking it. But misspelled words are now underlined in red by every browser I have seen.
This woman has also told her class that a work of fiction is "semi-autobiographical" even though it contains this quote on the copyright page:
"The characters and events portrayed in this book are fictitious. Any similarities to real persons, living or dead, is coincidental and not intended by the author." <facepalm>
Memoirs do not belong in the autobiography sub-genre in my opinion. They border on the fictional side of life. They get away with it by claiming to be "the author's view." Frequently, they are called out for the facts they present that do not stand up to fact checking and even for complete fabrication. We lap them up along with the false reality TV shows and documentaries and amaze ourselves at how something so out there is true. As the old adage says--"if it seems too good to be true, it probably isn't true." Adjusted, I would say "If it seems too entertaining to be true, it probably isn't true."
I say this as someone whose grandmother fully believes I should turn my life into a reality show. Then she says no one would believe it is true, though. I walk into a store for something quick, get in line and the lady in front of me discovers she grabbed the wrong item for her 50 cent coupon. She proceeds to run all the way to the back of the superstore to find the correct item and then returns with it while the rest of us are still waiting. Then she pulls out her checkbook--she has not been writing her check while the checker was ringing things up. She just starts when the checker pushes "total". Finally, I step up, the checker swipes my one item and discovers she has run completely out of receipt tape. She does not have an extra roll ready in anticipation of this moment, but has to send to the office to get one. True story--and it would be believable if it happened once, I suppose. The problem is that it happens all the time to me. While it is happening, I usually explain to the people around me that if they see me in line again, they should probably pick another line. My husband after 20 years no longer believes me when I say I just need to run in and get something and it won't take more than five minutes.
Nobody would read a boring story-true or false. It is our job as writers to make each story we tell (non-fiction or fiction) believable and interesting. How many times have you seen a negative Amazon review about a fiction book that wasn't believable? The problem comes when an English teacher tells her class a fiction work is semi-true just because it is believable. If as an author I write something that is close enough to fact that I deem it a true story, I am not going to market it as fiction.
The term "semi-autobiographical" exists, but the problem is that it has no definition--nor could it. All works of fiction are in some ways semi-autobiographical. Writers create stories and characters based on what they know. By the looseness of the term, semi-autobiographical means anything that is currently classified as fiction. In a society that already enjoys blurring the line between fact and fiction, this is unhelpful. Academia has flagged Dickens as writing many "semi-autobiographical" works that are nothing more than well-researched, believable fiction.
For example, I am currently ghostwriting a fiction book in which the main character is entered into a speech-writing contest by her professor. The person who is the author had originally planned for her to write a literary analysis paper that was entered in the contest, but I changed it because speech class better fit the story. I also gave her a job in a grocery store. Is this ghostwritten work of fiction that will not even bear my name now "semi-autobiographical"? After all, a teacher DID enter me into a speech writing contest when I was in high school, and I had a job in a grocery store. In fact, the layout of the grocery store in the novel is similar to the one in which I worked. By the current definitions, if someone found this out in the future (and discovered that I had ghostwritten this book) they could claim it was. But my experiences, which are not truly related in the novel--but, as Dickens would say, "are written in the way I wanted them to happen--" are not something I would consider autobiographical at all. If Dickens himself admitted that the things in his books were not really how they happened, and if further research has shown these things in his books are not true, then why do we keep insisting his works are "semi-autobiographical" works? All the best fiction is based on life. That does not make it non-fiction.
As authors, we all have a responsibility to honestly inform our readers whether we are writing fact or fiction. Readers, including those in academia, have the responsibility of believing us.
Thursday, February 6, 2020
The broken computer blues
My keyboard broke (in case you didn't tell some of my posts have an odd w or two). I am in the middle of a few projects, it will take an entire week to have it fixed while they wait for parts, and I hate using my husband's computer because "shift" is in the wrong place on the right side and I hit all sorts of other keys when I try to use it (and of course I use that shift the most even though my typing teacher would be vastly disappointed in me for not switching sides), so I have not taken mine in yet. Sad, I know.
I cut and paste every single "w" I type (including that one). I touch type, so normally this doesn't slow me down too much, but the problem comes when I paste a formatted w into a document that is formatted differently ( I try to copy only unformatted ones). Or problems arise when I cut and paste other things and forget to copy the "w" when I am through. Then I can end up having to hit ctrl z and spend time copying and pasting an actual "w" into the text.
I also cannot use my "2" or "at" (sorry, I don't want to switch out my "w" for that symbol and then have to copy the "w" again). The 2 on my numeric pad works, though, so I can use that as long as I don't forget.
I could, of course, plug in an alternate keyboard, but as I already said, I touch type. That means I need to have the same keyboard or spend a lot of time getting used to a new one. Apparently the people who design computers do not take this into account as they create thousands of differently designed keyboards. I would have so many mistake key hits I don't think it would make it any quicker than the cut and paste I am now doing.
I did finally spend the day it took to back up my computer, but my plan to take the computer in this week failed. I have had three unexpected appointments come up and one was a meeting with my Congressional representative that required me to give a PowerPoint--something I did not want to attempt on my husband's computer. So, if all goes well, I will deposit my computer at the repair shop on Monday and get it back by Friday--next week. Since I rely on my computer for income, losing it for that long is not something I am looking forward to doing.
UPDATE: It took three trips to the computer repair shop to finally get my computer fixed. After a week of waiting, I got home to discover my j key was no longer working and neither was my DVD drive (something I need). The DVD drive was fixed and I got home only to discover I could no longer use my keyboard at all. That third time, I was like look, I need my whole computer to work when you give it back to me. Please check to make sure it is fully functional before you give it back. Now, I am happy again, although my "o" is finicky, but I can live with that more than I can live without my source of income.
I cut and paste every single "w" I type (including that one). I touch type, so normally this doesn't slow me down too much, but the problem comes when I paste a formatted w into a document that is formatted differently ( I try to copy only unformatted ones). Or problems arise when I cut and paste other things and forget to copy the "w" when I am through. Then I can end up having to hit ctrl z and spend time copying and pasting an actual "w" into the text.
I also cannot use my "2" or "at" (sorry, I don't want to switch out my "w" for that symbol and then have to copy the "w" again). The 2 on my numeric pad works, though, so I can use that as long as I don't forget.
I could, of course, plug in an alternate keyboard, but as I already said, I touch type. That means I need to have the same keyboard or spend a lot of time getting used to a new one. Apparently the people who design computers do not take this into account as they create thousands of differently designed keyboards. I would have so many mistake key hits I don't think it would make it any quicker than the cut and paste I am now doing.
I did finally spend the day it took to back up my computer, but my plan to take the computer in this week failed. I have had three unexpected appointments come up and one was a meeting with my Congressional representative that required me to give a PowerPoint--something I did not want to attempt on my husband's computer. So, if all goes well, I will deposit my computer at the repair shop on Monday and get it back by Friday--next week. Since I rely on my computer for income, losing it for that long is not something I am looking forward to doing.
UPDATE: It took three trips to the computer repair shop to finally get my computer fixed. After a week of waiting, I got home to discover my j key was no longer working and neither was my DVD drive (something I need). The DVD drive was fixed and I got home only to discover I could no longer use my keyboard at all. That third time, I was like look, I need my whole computer to work when you give it back to me. Please check to make sure it is fully functional before you give it back. Now, I am happy again, although my "o" is finicky, but I can live with that more than I can live without my source of income.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)