An article sold for use rights a while ago. I found the article online and noticed that they changed the title and omitted my author name. I thought oh well - no harm done. They only changed a single word. They changed the title word from "Modern" to "Your". I really enjoyed the fact that they left off my author name.
Now the same article sold again. I want to be fair to the second purchasers. A fact that I didn't think about before - guess I really didn't think that the article would sell more than once.
What I think is a fair resolution would be to delete my author name from the article and have the first purchaser adhere to use rights policy by using the original title. They may leave off the first word "The" if they choose.
The article ID in question is 21953.
Is this a fair resolution? Can this be done? Or should I not really worry about it? Like I said before - no real harm done to me. I only want to be fair to the second purchasers.
Can someone give me their viewpoints of use rights and changing title words? I realize that the customers are not supposed to, but would like to hear from others at where they draw the line. Do other authors take a more strict approach or is it OK to be lenient in this circumstance?
Just Trying to be Fair
Moderators: Celeste Stewart, Ed, Constant
Well...on the one hand, this is really something you have to decide for yourself; it's your article and your name.
On the other hand, deleting an author's name from a use article is a rather serious offense. Many of us refer to articles published through Constant Content as part of our portfolio; if we sell an article with our name in it for usage rights, we expect our name to be there.
In that way, it's a community problem, because the purchaser may try to do the same thing with other authors' works, or other purchasers may try to do the same thing.
You said that you were pleased with the fact that they left off your author name. Have you considered deleting your author name from the text of the article? This way, purchasers will not be obligated to include it (they are obligated to include only the actual text of the article), but at the same time, they will not be in violation of Constant Content rules that are very important to some of the authors.
Just my two cents worth!
On the other hand, deleting an author's name from a use article is a rather serious offense. Many of us refer to articles published through Constant Content as part of our portfolio; if we sell an article with our name in it for usage rights, we expect our name to be there.
In that way, it's a community problem, because the purchaser may try to do the same thing with other authors' works, or other purchasers may try to do the same thing.
You said that you were pleased with the fact that they left off your author name. Have you considered deleting your author name from the text of the article? This way, purchasers will not be obligated to include it (they are obligated to include only the actual text of the article), but at the same time, they will not be in violation of Constant Content rules that are very important to some of the authors.
Just my two cents worth!
Thank You for the Reply
Keesa,
Thank you for taking the time replying to my post. I very much appreciate it. I am a bit surprised that you were the only one.
Since taking off my author name from the article would mean that I would have to resubmit the article, I decided not to worry about it. I will take this as a lesson learned and apply it to future articles.
I took a hard look at how much time that I spend policing all my use rights licensing (not just here on CC but other stuff as well) and I decided that I'm just spending too much time on it. Sounds horrid of me, I know. At the moment I feel if CC doesn't bother why should I? It's not on their priority list and I can see why. I don't like policing use rights anymore than they do. I have come to the conclusion that if the current CC system relies on ethics only and cannot apply fairness to all then I'm just not going to offer use rights on future articles. I got the impression that CC discourages authors from communicating with purchasers. So, I doubt that CC would appreciate an author contacting a purchaser about use rights violations.
I take great care in managing my copyright licenses. Doesn't sound like it, but I do. I know that I'm not the only author who has seen violations in use rights. I read one post from a while ago that asked authors to keep customers from abusing use rights. But in the end - there really isn't a way. This frustrates me. This is a sore spot for me right now - I had to take care of another type of copyright violation (not association with CC). Perhaps due to this other violation I have developed some prejudices. Maybe in the future I will come to terms with use licensing and feel better about offering it.
Thank you for taking the time replying to my post. I very much appreciate it. I am a bit surprised that you were the only one.
Since taking off my author name from the article would mean that I would have to resubmit the article, I decided not to worry about it. I will take this as a lesson learned and apply it to future articles.
I took a hard look at how much time that I spend policing all my use rights licensing (not just here on CC but other stuff as well) and I decided that I'm just spending too much time on it. Sounds horrid of me, I know. At the moment I feel if CC doesn't bother why should I? It's not on their priority list and I can see why. I don't like policing use rights anymore than they do. I have come to the conclusion that if the current CC system relies on ethics only and cannot apply fairness to all then I'm just not going to offer use rights on future articles. I got the impression that CC discourages authors from communicating with purchasers. So, I doubt that CC would appreciate an author contacting a purchaser about use rights violations.
I take great care in managing my copyright licenses. Doesn't sound like it, but I do. I know that I'm not the only author who has seen violations in use rights. I read one post from a while ago that asked authors to keep customers from abusing use rights. But in the end - there really isn't a way. This frustrates me. This is a sore spot for me right now - I had to take care of another type of copyright violation (not association with CC). Perhaps due to this other violation I have developed some prejudices. Maybe in the future I will come to terms with use licensing and feel better about offering it.
-
Celeste Stewart
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:28 pm
- Location: California
- Contact:
I'm not a big fan of usage myself which is why I price it as high as unique and full rights in many cases. I've had just a couple of articles (out of many) that have sold multiple times - usually when they go for use that's it. So pricing it on the cheap ends up not being cost effective. Then, sometimes I find that my name has been dropped or the article altered so that's not cool either. I'm not sure that all customers understand the difference and some just grab the cheap price.
I don't have the time to check up on all these articles nor would I want to. Once sold, I'm done with them. Just my two cents. Besides, plenty sell at the higher prices so I'm not interested in little $5 or $10 usage sales. I'd rather sell one article for $100 for full rights than twenty $5 usage sales but that's just me I guess.
I don't have the time to check up on all these articles nor would I want to. Once sold, I'm done with them. Just my two cents. Besides, plenty sell at the higher prices so I'm not interested in little $5 or $10 usage sales. I'd rather sell one article for $100 for full rights than twenty $5 usage sales but that's just me I guess.
Use Rights
Thank you Celeste! I am really glad that you spoke up and am very pleased to hear from a veteran writer here at CC.
I thought that I was the only author here that felt that way about use rights. Thank you for sharing your viewpoint and your thoughts. I feel better about my decision and you described the same pricing method that I am going to implement. I think it is the only way to achieve this - since you can't put a zero in the use rights pricing field. If you do put a zero then you are offering the article for free.
I thought that I was the only author here that felt that way about use rights. Thank you for sharing your viewpoint and your thoughts. I feel better about my decision and you described the same pricing method that I am going to implement. I think it is the only way to achieve this - since you can't put a zero in the use rights pricing field. If you do put a zero then you are offering the article for free.
-
Celeste Stewart
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:28 pm
- Location: California
- Contact:
I'm sure there will be plenty of people who are successful with use as well and lately it has been quite popular but its my least favorite option.
On the other hand, my few articles that have sold over and over - well, that does feel pretty good - like free money once it's earned itself out but it's so much the exception for me it's not even funny.
On the other hand, my few articles that have sold over and over - well, that does feel pretty good - like free money once it's earned itself out but it's so much the exception for me it's not even funny.
-
Pearl Grace
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:21 pm
Proper Way to Include my Name
I've been reading all the posts and came across this one. I am confused about how to place my name on my articles at the time of submission. I put it on two articles and they were both rejected, stating that I included my byline. So, I am curious, how did you get your names on yours? I thought they couldn't be included.
I am new to CC. I am just trying to figure out all the ropes so I don't have to keep re-submitting. Thanks so much.
Pearl Grace
I am new to CC. I am just trying to figure out all the ropes so I don't have to keep re-submitting. Thanks so much.
Pearl Grace-
Pearl Grace
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:21 pm