Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 1:26 pm
[quote="constant"]But they are not making money off your article, they are just posting it to other sites just to get that link back to their site. I guess I don't see the difference if a person is purchasing a unique license. Your not allowed to sell the article again at this point, so why would it matter if it was posted to other sites for free. <SNIP>[/quote]
I was under the impression that the unique was still a one time agreement of publication. Guess I did not realize they could use it over and over. This doesn't seem to be clear in the terms. This will change my pricing stratagem. Perhaps there should be a scale of unique purchase. For example, using the unique article 1 - 3 times = X$ whereas if you want to use it 4-7 times there is an additional fee bracket, or 10 = times, etc.
I think as a writer the issues become that adding a link, no biggie. However, if they are promoting our work out there through using it on other sites they do not own, and did not purchase for then it may only contain our byline name - and no contact back to us. Also, there is a chain of responsibility. Much easier to go after a mis-use of license if we know who bought it and when. Once you get to extending it onto other sites you no longer have control over what happens with the article.
Say the buyer of unique license decides to use our article for a free link back on a site they don't own. The article gets a lot of hits, so the person who owns THAT site thinks, "hey, I could get some free press out of this too" and they do the same on another site.It could easily end up being a viral abuse of a unique license.
I was under the impression that the unique was still a one time agreement of publication. Guess I did not realize they could use it over and over. This doesn't seem to be clear in the terms. This will change my pricing stratagem. Perhaps there should be a scale of unique purchase. For example, using the unique article 1 - 3 times = X$ whereas if you want to use it 4-7 times there is an additional fee bracket, or 10 = times, etc.
I think as a writer the issues become that adding a link, no biggie. However, if they are promoting our work out there through using it on other sites they do not own, and did not purchase for then it may only contain our byline name - and no contact back to us. Also, there is a chain of responsibility. Much easier to go after a mis-use of license if we know who bought it and when. Once you get to extending it onto other sites you no longer have control over what happens with the article.
Say the buyer of unique license decides to use our article for a free link back on a site they don't own. The article gets a lot of hits, so the person who owns THAT site thinks, "hey, I could get some free press out of this too" and they do the same on another site.It could easily end up being a viral abuse of a unique license.