QUOTE (Dr. Funkenstein @ Apr 5 2010, 09:15 PM)
You have to read the complete conversation to understand everything I was talking about. It started with my comment that it was odd that they would have a draconian NDA but not include a clause about gaining ownership of the copyrights as part of the contract. Which was implied to be the case elsewhere, though you seem to be saying it does include one once payment is made. (Which still brings me to ask why they'd do it that way rather than just assume it from the beginning).
I understand what you're talking about. And it's a standard contract, very typical for a setting without advances and royalties. The writer is expected to create a certain amount of words for a certain amount of pay, and in exchange for that pay, copyright of the piece (ownership) is transferred to the buyer. It's Catalyst's choice that this transfer of pay/copyright takes place 30 days after publication; it's in their contract language.
Note that the contract also allows either party to terminate the contract before the conditions for pay/copyright transfer take place. In this case, you're seeing the writers using that, but it's also there for the benefit of the publisher. If the writer isn't making deadlines or is delivering sub-par writing, it allows Catalyst to terminate the contract and find another author to work with.
QUOTE (Dr. Funkenstein @ Apr 5 2010, 09:15 PM)
Also, if you're regularly not getting paid and haven't been getting paid for years... and know others you're working with haven't been getting paid in years... why do you continue to do it? Then, all of a sudden, decide to go and wave the copyright ownership dick around? I don't quite get that logic either. Especially since it would have just reinforced the tendency for them not to pay you or anyone else since you don't seem to have a problem with it through your inaction and continued compliance.
Well, as to why freelancers continue to do it, it's pretty much for love of the game. That's the only reason I continued to write for
Shadowrun for eight years. And I can't speak for the other freelancers, but my struggles with the publishers have been on-going for a long time. I had my falling out with Catalyst in 2008, long before this current situation. And that was after numerous attempts to communicate with management, who simply decided to ignore both me and the line developer who was trying to reach out to them on my behalf. And for the record, I did terminate a contract in 2008, for the Manhattan e-book. But it wasn't public knowledge and wasn't nearly as attention-getting as the current situation. I find it sad and unfortunate that one of the writers that Catalyst found to replace me on the Manhattan e-book recently reached out to me to let me know that know he is waiting for payment from Catalyst and understands my reasons for doing what I did back then.
Also, as for why you're seeing a sudden appearance of terminated contracts and withheld copyright, it's pretty simple. The freelancers lack trust and confidence in Catalyst Game Labs. In the past, many freelancers were more forgiving about late payments because they weren't too concerned about the future of the publisher or the behavior of management. With the alleged "financial mismanagement", many writers feel they have to act more forcefully now.
QUOTE (Dr. Funkenstein @ Apr 5 2010, 09:15 PM)
I mean exactly what I said. In addition to getting paid for your work through the lawsuit, you'd also gain the ownership for future use of the material back. That would cover things such as inclusion of any of the material in future sourcebooks or storylines. But going about demanding to get paid while simultaneously removing any chance of earning the money to get paid is kinda goofy. Actually suing them seems to make a lot more sense than stomping about and withholding the copyright, especially if you ever hope to get paid at all.
Copyright law doesn't quite work like that. At least, not easily. Copyright law, in the United States, errs on the side of the copyright-holder. So once that copyright-holder is the publisher, a claimant writer will have an uphill battle. Getting it to cover future references to the material in separate works is even more unlikely.
I actually spoke to two separate lawyers a number of years ago on this topic and both recommended withholding copyright as the best immediate course of action. Apparently, lawsuits like this don't tend to end well for the writers, at least not in this type of industry. Usually the RPG companies owe so many different outfits money (and usually larger sums) that if a lawsuit is won, the publisher declares bankruptcy and the writers usually end up with very little in the settlement. But that's just speaking from my experience, I'm not involved in this current situation and I'm not privy to any discussions the current writers may have had with lawyers.