Derivative for a new request

[Cyndy Hardy]

Hi, Ed.

I've got an article that I could rework a bit for a current request. Since it's only eligible for usage sale anyway, would it pass CC's criteria if I submit a derivative for usage only with full disclosure to the new client?

[Celeste Stewart]

Hey Cyndy,
Don't mind me barging in here but does the requester want full rights or use? If he indicated that use is okay, then I'd submit the article you have for use. If not, why not take the knowledge that you learned initially and come up with a fresh article just for the requester?

I just don't see requesters going for usage articles too often so it would seem like a waste of time to do anything other than write something completely original. Of course, I have no clue what the request is and it's getting late so who knows...

[Cyndy Hardy]

I never mind you weighing in, C.

The article in question already sold on CC for usage. It's written for a different industry than what the requester needs. This is a public request, by the way.

What I want to do, is rework the article to suit the new request. I'm concerned CC's guidelines won't allow me to submit an article so similar to another, however, this is perfectly ethical in the profession -- provided the client is aware they are buying a derivative.

I just want to make sure CC is okay with it.

[Elizabeth Ann West]

I submitted 2 articles on the HD DVD BLu Ray thing. The more expensive one ended up selling... both were approved.

[Ed]

Cyndy, I don't see a problem with this, as long as you don't copy/paste any information directly from the first article into the new article. Your intent to disclose this information is also appreciated - this is not something I can police.

When a requester asks for several articles on the same subject, we know that there may be articles that are very similar. However, if a writer submitted several articles about a certain topic, and each article contained the same information (and even replicated wording), these articles would not pass muster.

Thanks for chiming in, all.
Ed

[Elizabeth Ann West]

Just so everyone doesn't think I broke the rules... one of my articles was on what happened, and the causes leading up to the decision. The other article, the one that sold, was on the effects of the decision, such as console wars, regular DVDs, home entertainment systems...

There was some overlap of information, but it was analyzed differently, so there I didn't plagiarize myself.

[Cyndy Hardy]

This is entirely different from plagiarism.

See, I'm caught in a paradox because my existing article is written for the mortgage industry and the request is for the boating industry. The *subject* is credit, which is virtually the same in both industries.

The buyer can't purchase my article and change it himself because it is only available for use. I can't change it and resubmit because it would be too similar to the original -- which the client might otherwise buy.

I own the rights to the article, but I've agreed to CC's terms *for sales I make through CC.*

I have two choices: do not throw my hat in the ring with this buyer and lose a good chance at making the sale; or contact the buyer outside CC, since CC has indicated it will not accept anything less than a new article -- which may have its own consequences.

Sorry, but rewriting an article to a degree it will pass Copyscape on the first one isn't a rewrite -- it's a new article.

I hate saying "in the real world" because this is just as real, but for lack of a better reference -- in the real world I could sell one article all day long by changing it to meet needs of different industries. That ability is fundamental to a freelance writer's income.

Anyway, I brought this forward for the same reason I would disclose a derivative to a client -- it's the ethical thing to do. I'd rather be able to submit a rewrite and take my chances along side other writers with the buyer.

I have considered that CC brought this client to the table. But many of our buyers advertise the same projects on multiple sites.

It's worth discussing and hopefully finding a win-win solution.

[Ed]

Going back to your first question (sorry, it's the weekend and I have now had my coffee) - sure, submit it for usage while just changing the wording. You do not have to disclose; the buyer knows that under usage rights, the article may have been published elsewhere.

Sorry for being confusing/irritating.

Ed

[Celeste Stewart]

Okay, so your original article is 900 words or so, right? Shoot, it would take less time to do a sweet little rewrite than worry about the technicalities of doing it the deriverative way... I know it's good to find out what the accepted practice/ethical thing to do is but seriously, I'd just do a quick re-work on it. YOu'd have a completely new article without much time spent and the customer would have an original article of excellent quality. I bet you can do it in less than a half hour.

You could also point the customer in question to the original article and propose a rewrite "along similar lines yet completely unique." I've done this successfully in the past. Many customers like the original but don't want it because it's not "unique" which would ding them SEO-wise. However, by showing them what's possible and acknowledging their concerns about uniqueness, it helps to get the go-ahead (and the sale).

[Ed]

I agee that this is the best way to go - Google does not like duplicate content, and that's why customers so frequently purchase exclusive rights rather than usage.

But it's up to you.

ED