CGL Speculation #9, Please review ToS before posting Options

[Catadmin]

So, like the music industry, the publishing establishment has fallen behind the technology curve and is trying to enforce old ways of doing things so they can continue to profit instead of adapting?

Not just the RPG industry. It's all publishing companies. They're always behind the curve. And CGL is not the only company to pay after publishing. It is unfortunately getting more and more common.

I think the gaming industry in particular is moving to embrace electronic publishing, they just need to update their SOP.

I have mentioned my concerns about that issue to certain parties and have been assured that provisions are being made to define what "in print" means. Now before anyone gives me grief over this vague statement, please note I am under NDA and cannot speak to specific business practices. The best I can do is say that I am reasonably confident this isn't smoke being blown in my face given the information I have.

So, as a current freelancer, I can say I definitely think things are starting to improve. It just takes a while to get all the i's crossed and t's dotted.

[Catadmin]

Not commenting on AH vs Jason either, but I'm pretty sure a publisher can hire a freelancer at any time for just about any reason. Thats kinda the point of using freelancers and not staff authors.

"Right to Work" and "Work for hire" covers both the hiring and firing practices in most states, including contractors which is what a freelance writer actually is.

[RunnerPaul]

I have mentioned my concerns about that issue to certain parties and have been assured that provisions are being made to define what "in print" means. Now before anyone gives me grief over this vague statement, please note I am under NDA and cannot speak to specific business practices.

I'm not going to give you grief over it, but I would like to give Hardy a challenge over it. If the standard freelancer contract changes to tie payment to the date that the public can purchase the book in any format, electronic or hardcopy, would you be so kind as to make some kind of official announcement about it Mr. Line Developer?

[Demonseed Elite]

Keep in mind that it is possible for freelancers to negotiate contracts. Granted, this is more likely to happen if you're someone who is established working with the company over time, but it is possible. So just because the contract says you get paid after "print" doesn't mean you have to sign it and it doesn't mean you can't try to get the language altered before you sign it.

Back in the FanPro days, their boilerplate contract had some ridiculous indemnity clause. I don't think it was intentional, I think it was just something that was built into whatever template they used for their contracts. But as a freelancer, it was dangerous to sign, because it meant that if someone sued FanPro because of something I wrote (and they published), I was agreeing to take on financial and legal responsibilities to defend FanPro. So, let's say I wrote something about Saeder-Krupp that was pretty harsh, but the editors and line developers approved it (it is run by a dragon, after all). But then the real-life ThyssenKrupp corporation got trigger-happy and decided it was libelous and sued FanPro. Both FanPro and myself would be on the line to pay for legal fees to defend the work, even though FanPro bought it from me and owned it and even though the case my be thrown out as having no merit.

I worked with FanPro to have the language of my contracts changed, so that I was agreeing that the work I was writing was not libel against any party to the best of my knowledge and that my financial obligation to any indemnity was limited to whatever I was paid for the piece. Of course, shortly thereafter, FanPro stopped publishing Shadowrun and CGL didn't have the same indemnity clause in their contracts.

[JM Hardy]

I'm not going to give you grief over it, but I would like to give Hardy a challenge over it. If the standard freelancer contract changes to tie payment to the date that the public can purchase the book in any format, electronic or hardcopy, would you be so kind as to make some kind of official announcement about it Mr. Line Developer?

I think it's safe for me to say that the basic idea of the new contract is to set two clocks ticking. One starts after the electronic release; the other starts after print release. The print release clock is shorter, and in most cases it will kick in first and payment will be made when the time on that clock runs out. If, however, the print release is delayed, the other clock keeps ticking, and if it runs out before the print release comes out, then the product is classified as "published," and the money is due. Thus, once the product comes out, there is a clock ticking toward payment, meaning Catalyst couldn't just release an electronic product, sell copies, hold off printing indefinitely, and not pay anyone until they finally decide to print it. Shorter version: If your book gets sold, the money will be due, one way or the other.

Let me know if I need to clarify that any.

Jason H.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Umm, if I was fired for calling my boss a liar in a private conversation, I would sue the living crap out of my ex-employer for wrongful termination. The law, to the best of my understanding, would protect me in this situation. Please note, I Am Not A Lawyer, and I am not commenting on the situation between AH and JMH in specific or in general. Just pointing out that your example is poor and from what I know inaccurate.

Depends on where you work. In many places you are allowed to get rid of people who are damaging the moral of the other staff. If I tell my friend the boss is a X I generally can't be fired,I am sure there are places where you can be. In some places If I tell a co-worker the boss is X,Y, and Z I can. You are capable of getting rid of the rotten apple before it spoils the bunch. The basic idea is if one employee is damaging the work output of your other employees you should not have to suffer through that. And it usually makes sense to get rid of them in the places you can. Let's say I am a bad employee and my 3 co-workers start working at 50% because I keep bringing down moral. Unless I am worth the lost 150% work+my own normal work it is best to get rid of me is the issue can't be resolved. You may even have to get rid of the entire team due to that one guy because there moral may be permanently damaged.

Now they were freelancers living potentially anywhere in the world for a company incorporated some place I am too lazy to look up but I'll go with Washington and assume my memory is correct. Too put it simply I have no idea what laws they would be following since this is not a area of interest to me.

[Aristotle]

What percentage of Shadowrun players (and possible buyers of new books) know about this, I wonder? I mean, sure, everyone here at dumpshock.com does, but we're just a small part of the community.

The issue I have with this logic is that it equals the dollar of a dumpshock user to the dollars of all other users. I think of dumpshock more as the nielsen family for the game. Our vote counts more. That sounds obnoxious, but here is my reasoning: I'm sure we have plenty of people here who just play, but I bet we have a lot of people here who run games. I run games. I have 6 players who only play Shadowrun with me. They don't run the game or play with other GMs. They don't come here. They don't have any access to what's going on... but they do, because I'm here. I reprsent their gaming dollars too.

When I choose not to play the game, which I've unfortunately done here so long as Bills and the Colemans profit from it, my players don't play it either. They typically end up with the core and sourcebooks for the game I run (christmas and birthday presents from the GM). That's 7 copies of each of the sourcebooks for the group, plus one of everything else that gets published for me (I'm a completer). I already have my core books, but there are 6 copies of each that won't be being purchased because of my presence here. It's not an organized boycott. I don't expect it to change anything, but it is the result of the 'CGL Situation' at one game table.

[Cain]

Not entirely correct. This is the way I wanted Catalyst to behave from day one, before anyone raised a stink about anything. It's not like this situation suddenly convinced me that it's a good thing to pay freelancers on time and treat them with respect. I've freelanced for FASA, Fast Forward Entertainment, and FanPro. If I hadn't known already, that was all the education I needed to know that freelancers should be treated well.

Jason H.

Yeah, but we've established the fact that freelancers not getting paid wasn't your personal fault. Even in your battles with Bobby, he's not even suggesting that. We've also established that raising a stink convinced your superiors to pay up. You're not the target of the lesson, although you may end up as an innocent bystander.

[tete]

Not commenting on AH vs Jason either,

Well I will comment on the actual case as an outsider. At every company and government agency I worked for both would have been suspended and an impartial and independent inquiry would have been conducted. Usually in these cases the manager is either fired or moved to another location, unless the employee had several warnings and several managers had been involved. However being a contractor (freelancer) the contract of the employment firing terms would be scrutinized by the inquiry to see if the manager met all the terms. If he did, the contractor is usually paid out the full amount of the contract or moved to another location. I have been personally involved in two such disputes (one where the manager and employee got in a fist fight) and seen several others at a distance over the years. If CGL did not have an independent inquiry look into the case, that is just unprofessional even at a small company (The fist fight was at a company with less than 50 employees).

[graywulfe]

Not commenting on AH vs Jason either, but I'm pretty sure a publisher can hire a freelancer at any time for just about any reason. Thats kinda the point of using freelancers and not staff authors.

Hence, why I stated that an average workplace is not an applicable comparison.


Graywulfe

[LurkerOutThere]

Really you work at a company that fires management before the inquiry is completed and requires a rigorous enquiry for removal of access to company systems, itself generally a step of an inquiry? Further I hope you realize that contracts and terms vary from location to location. A freelancer being different from a contract employee drawing a salary.

But I spose this is the speculation thread feel free to continue on these wild tangents that don't apply. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Method]

I'm pretty sure a publisher can hire fire a freelancer at any time for just about any reason.

Doh! Obviously I meant "fire a freelancer for any reason". But you all knew that...

"Right to Work" and "Work for hire" covers both the hiring and firing practices in most states, including contractors which is what a freelance writer actually is.

I was going to mention this, but frankly I don't know enough about it. My understanding is that such rules only apply if you employ a certain minimum number of employees (like 50 or something). CGL certainly doesn't have that many, unless freelancers count. Maybe someone with some legal-fu can clarify this for us.

Edit: on second thought, NM. I don't think I care to hear much more of this debate anyway.

[RunnerPaul]

Let me know if I need to clarify that any.

That's pretty much what I was looking for, aside from letting us know which product marks the begining of the new contract era, which given that it sounds like it's just in the planning stages at this point, and the fact that the company isn't likely to make the change retroactive, meaning that the new contracts will start with a book that's not yet even at the "assigning freelancers" stage in the pipeline, it's not something you'd be able to tell just yet.

[Dread Moores]

You need to earn that support, by using good business practices. I'm no publisher, but I imagine that collecting even a percentage of $850,000 would help substantially. You know, the money we already paid them?

And I don't disagree on that, but it still hasn't answered the question posed. If fans are encouraged to stop buying product until practices change/improve (I'm still not sure how we'll know this, short of more information being revealed), what happens? At what point do we start buying again, if we don't get information specifying whether practices have improved or not. If we don't know if they have, or haven't, do we start buying then? And if we don't, what happens long term?

I'm not disagreeing with your point about earning the support. But simply saying "Don't buy!" seems like a very short-sighted way to send notice to the higher ups. Please note, I'm not saying to buy or not buy. For myself, I don't believe I'll be picking up new SR material for a while. (Though to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure I'll be able to resist the lure of TRO:3085 for Battletech. TROs are too much fun to read.) It's a mix of exhaustion with the setting, after running it almost exlusively for a decade or more, and disappointment with CGL from the recent problems. I also have no SR or BT games running currently, or likely in the near (or probably far) future. Encouraging fans to make their voice heard that more transparent processes are necessary, that I could definitely see. But voting with your wallet, without any actual feedback or attempted impact to the management/developers/etc...that seems like it only ends with CGL going out. Now, if that's your goal, totally understandable. If your goal is reforming CGL's bad practices, then I don't see that tactic working so well.

[Cain]

And I don't disagree on that, but it still hasn't answered the question posed. If fans are encouraged to stop buying product until practices change/improve (I'm still not sure how we'll know this, short of more information being revealed), what happens? At what point do we start buying again, if we don't get information specifying whether practices have improved or not. If we don't know if they have, or haven't, do we start buying then? And if we don't, what happens long term?

I'm not disagreeing with your point about earning the support. But simply saying "Don't buy!" seems like a very short-sighted way to send notice to the higher ups. Please note, I'm not saying to buy or not buy. For myself, I don't believe I'll be picking up new SR material for a while. (Though to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure I'll be able to resist the lure of TRO:3085 for Battletech. TROs are too much fun to read.) It's a mix of exhaustion with the setting, after running it almost exlusively for a decade or more, and disappointment with CGL from the recent problems. I also have no SR or BT games running currently, or likely in the near (or probably far) future. Encouraging fans to make their voice heard that more transparent processes are necessary, that I could definitely see. But voting with your wallet, without any actual feedback or attempted impact to the management/developers/etc...that seems like it only ends with CGL going out. Now, if that's your goal, totally understandable. If your goal is reforming CGL's bad practices, then I don't see that tactic working so well.

We'll know when there's a consistent pattern of freelancers getting paid. If we take JH at his word, he's working on that, so it shouldn't be long.

We'll know when Loren L. Coleman pays the money he owes back.

We'll know when the quality of Shadowrun products improves, to the point where even AH is grudgingly giving ground on them. I've said some not-so-nice things about SR4.5 products, but the writing quality hasn't been one of them.

Boycotts are an effective tactic in being heard. You're probably not going to bring down a company with one, but you can send a loud and clear message with one.

[Dread Moores]

We'll know when there's a consistent pattern of freelancers getting paid. If we take JH at his word, he's working on that, so it shouldn't be long.

We'll know when Loren L. Coleman pays the money he owes back.

I'd disagree here. I don't think we'll see any news post in the future saying "Money is all paid back!" That's internal company issues, and have no relevance to the fans. There is no real reason for them to release that info. I realize a lot of fans think this is necessary news to know, but I just don't see that happening. I can understand making it clear that the bad management practices have been cleaned up. But financial issues amongst management, well, I think there's a pipe dream involved if you believe that's hitting the public. Then again, I also get the impression that the standards you feel are necessary will simply continue to change, regardless of what happens in the future.

We'll know when the quality of Shadowrun products improves, to the point where even AH is grudgingly giving ground on them. I've said some not-so-nice things about SR4.5 products, but the writing quality hasn't been one of them.

Ah, so we're back to Ancient History determining entirely what constitutes good now. And here I thought quality was subjective to the reader. Silly me!

Either way, you made your points clear. I don't happen to agree with them, or think they're all realistic, but the thread's already been derailed enough between you and I. Thanks for answering the question though.

[hermit]

We'll know when Loren L. Coleman pays the money he owes back.

We will? A malay printing company will inform us of this fact or what? Ms Tinker will inform us that Topps received whatever they were due?

Or how do you think this will happen? Via announcement by Jason? Who may or may not be slapped with an NDA regarding the Coleman financial situation?

They don't have any access to what's going on... but they do, because I'm here. I reprsent their gaming dollars too.

When I choose not to play the game, which I've unfortunately done here so long as Bills and the Colemans profit from it, my players don't play it either. They typically end up with the core and sourcebooks for the game I run (christmas and birthday presents from the GM).

You have a weird relationship with your gaming group.

[Cardul]

You have a weird relationship with your gaming group.

Does my giving my group high quality painted miniatures in their faction and unit paint schemes
for Battletech also make my relationship with my group "weird"?

What, really, is so weird about his relationship with his gaming group?

[Fuchs]

With regards to the AH/JH situation: If you can work for the Bills/Coleman duo "for the greater good of Shadowrun", you can work with AH too for the same reason.

[Deadmannumberone]

With regards to the AH/JH situation: If you can work for the Bills/Coleman duo "for the greater good of Shadowrun", you can work with AH too for the same reason.

Everything points to JMH being willing to work with AH, and that AH is not willing to work under JMH.

[hermit]

What, really, is so weird about his relationship with his gaming group?

Him making all decisions for his players. Well, the gifts really are a nice touch though.

[Jaid]

Everything points to JMH being willing to work with AH, and that AH is not willing to work under JMH.

no, that isn't quite fair to say.

it was pretty much a race to see who could get AH out of there first. Jason probably wanted to do it in such a way that didn't have AH cancel his contracts (if only because that makes a lot more work for Jason to do before those books come out, not to mention the new material is rushed and definitely shows it in places), but by shutting AH out of the freelancer forums, he pretty much had decided AH wasn't going to be working as a freelancer anymore. in fact, as i recall, he's on the record as having been writing an email to AH when AH wrote him the email that he was quitting. i don't particularly feel like digging through half a dozen threads of CGL speculation, but if you *really* want me to track down the exact quote i'm thinking of where jason mentioned writing an email, i probably could.

but yeah, it's fair to say that the problem is on both ends in the AH/JMH side of things.

edit: actually, i rather expect i was going to get asked for them anyways. here you go:

I had just received word that Bobby had been removed from the freelancer forums, and was preparing an e-mail to him, when he grabbed me on AIM to chat. Had I completed the e-mail, I would have looked up all of his contracts, but since I was talking to him on AIM I thought, hey, why not just confirm with him instead of wading through a spreadsheet? I'm deeply, deeply deeply deeply deeply sorry that I did not memorize in advance who wrote which sections of books that were already fully written before I became line developer.

Jason H.

Sorry for the lack of clarity. I indeed made the request, but I was waiting for confirmation that it had actually happened (the tools to make the removals happen are in other people's hands). Once I received that, I started composing an e-mail that, as it turned out, I never sent.

Jason H.

[Grinder]

When I choose not to play the game, which I've unfortunately done here so long as Bills and the Colemans profit from it, my players don't play it either. They typically end up with the core and sourcebooks for the game I run (christmas and birthday presents from the GM). That's 7 copies of each of the sourcebooks for the group, plus one of everything else that gets published for me (I'm a completer). I already have my core books, but there are 6 copies of each that won't be being purchased because of my presence here. It's not an organized boycott. I don't expect it to change anything, but it is the result of the 'CGL Situation' at one game table.

That's weird, somehow. The players I know would start their own campaign with one of them as GM if they're hooked to the Shadowrun setting enough. And most of them buy their own core rulebooks and sourcebooks and don't receive it as a gift from the GM.
None of the Shadowrun players I know frequent this board and only a few know about the CGL mess. And none of those cared about it. They don't care who writes the books, they don't care about the treatment of freelancers and regular employees - they buy the books they want and are content with it. Don't know if they represent Joe Average Shadowrun player, but I guess so.

[nemafow]

That's weird, somehow. The players I know would start their own campaign with one of them as GM if they're hooked to the Shadowrun setting enough. And most of them buy their own core rulebooks and sourcebooks and don't receive it as a gift from the GM.
None of the Shadowrun players I know frequent this board and only a few know about the CGL mess. And none of those cared about it. They don't care who writes the books, they don't care about the treatment of freelancers and regular employees - they buy the books they want and are content with it. Don't know if they represent Joe Average Shadowrun player, but I guess so.

Most of my players wouldn't by a book for themselves, not because they don't like the setting, the rules or hate roleplaying, but because they are soooo stingy. Not even the core book, unless it was on sale for less than $10. But thats an entire different situation.

[Fuchs]

In my experience most players want to be players, not GMs. So they play whatever game has a GM willing to gm.