| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Disturbing clause in contract |
Topic: Disturbing clause in contract
| Author | Message |
| mad fingers | Posted – 10/1/2007 10:50:27 AM | show profile "The author agrees to provide a final draft of the article no later than (date due). The author understands that the editor may request additional research and revisions in the manuscript at this time. Author agrees to provide any additional revisions within the deadline designated by the editor." Doesn't this basically say they can ask me to rewrite as many times as they desire w/o further compensation? I've worked at a number of publications as an editor and have freelanced for a while now, and have never seen this caveat in a contract before. |
| westsidestory | Posted – 10/1/2007 12:55:39 PM | show profile I would interpret this as: you must make as many revisions as they request until the due date. The publication is paying for a finished article to their specifications. If you don't get it right the first time, they will expect you to do it over and over again on your dime until you do. Revisions requested after the due date may be negotiatable with your editor, for either extra time and/or extra pay. This clause is not unusual, and may be typical if the publication has had a bit of trouble in the past with writers who hand in stuff that's really unacceptable and unfixable. Suggested trategy: hand in the story early, so you can do the fixes with plenty of time to spare. |
| traveller | Posted – 10/5/2007 9:27:58 PM | show profile I've seen this clause And it's in several contracts that I've gotten with major glossies. The other poster implied that the additional revisions would need to be made by the original deadline, but I actually think it means that when the editor asks for revisions, they can give you a new deadline for those revisions, which you have to meet. In my (albeit limited) experience, revisions have not been major, and reasonable deadlines were given to me for making those. For example, once an article on hotels was submitted, my assigning editor's boss decided she wanted a "getting there" sentence for each hotel in the roundup. No big deal. But yes, it was more work for no additional pay. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 10/6/2007 12:10:58 AM | show profile Basically, unless the contract specifies your fee is 100% guaranteed they can always ask for more drafts and ultimately kill the piece and just pay a kill fee. Personally, I wouldn't worry about this unless they became unreasonable about rewrites. --Doesn't this basically say they can ask me to rewrite as many times as they desire w/o further compensation? I've worked at a number of publications as an editor and have freelanced for a while now, and have never seen this caveat in a contract before.-- |
| Marie | Posted – 10/6/2007 12:23:37 AM | show profile If, in the requested rewrites, if it's clear that the initial assignment has changed and they're asking for more work to meet the NEW requirements of the changed specs for which you contracted for, you ask for more money, because, well, they're asking for more. But if the rewrites are only to get your piece publishable for what they originally requested, you do it and don't ask for more money. Is this convoluted post clear? In English: If the assignment changed in any way, you ask for more money to accommodate their new slant. If they're asking for more because in some way you didn't fulfll what was wanted in the original assignment, you do it for no extra money. D'accord? |
| eriksherman | Posted – 10/6/2007 3:15:36 PM | show profile | email poster I agree with Marie that a change in direction should mean more money. But - and I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice - that clause doesn't read that way to me. It's saying that the editor can ask for revisions and additional research. There are no limits (not even the word "reasonable") place on what the editor can request, and the editor can give you a deadline that you have to meet, or else you're in technical breach of the contract. Some magazines probably wouldn't be a worry, but I've heard from too many writers (particularly for the women's magazines) who have found themselves dealing with round after round of questions because the publication has a committee form of editing. ------ Free writer resources: http://www.eriksherman.com/WriterBiz |
| Marie | Posted – 10/6/2007 3:32:49 PM | show profile Erik is right. The word "reasonable" or some like phrase like "... will not go beyond what's reasonable" should be in there. You can go further and get them to define what "reasonable" means to them. Most things I've signed have had something like the above in them. If the pub balks on specifying what it might ask you to do, you might want to reconsider doing business with them. |
