Intended type of license

[TomBarth]

I was surprised that this suggestion did not appear to have been made already, but I searched briefly and
couldn't find it.

I would like customers making requests to indicate the type of license they intend to purchase, not in
a way that is binding on them, but indicates their intent. This would be useful to prospective authors in deciding
whether to respond. The indicated price is sort of meaningless without an indication of the license type. In fact, rather
than exactly that, I'd ask the requester to indicate his or her preference by selecting one of the following:

Will buy only FULL license (typically $100/1000 words)
Will buy only UNIQUE license (typically $60/1000 words)
Will buy only USAGE license (typically $40/1000 words)
Would prefer FULL license but will consider UNIQUE or USAGE

(Have I left any meaningful choices out?) I'm not sure I have the typical prices correct, and they are there only to give very approximate guidance and improve
awareness, and are also not binding. Since the request form presently has NO mention of license types at all, maybe something like this would encourage
people to learn about licenses and their terms, while increasing awareness and compliance, not to mention the possibility of improved
prices!

What do you think? Is this a good idea?

[Antonia]

Interesting idea. This actually has been discussed before but I can't find the thread. A few thoughts:

Most buyers are looking for full rights. Adding an additional layer of complexity to the request forms might not be user-friendly. Also, new buyers simply may not know what the going rates are - could be more useful for them to see a bunch of submissions and then decide what rights they can afford.

As an author, I decide whether or not to write for a request based on how long I think it will take and if I believe it will sell regardless of whether the requester buys it. I don't worry too much about their posted price - I set my own price and let the chips fall as they may. If I only wrote for requests where I thought the offered price were fair, I'd sell a lot less.

[TomBarth]

Thank you for responding. I'm a bit surprised that more people didn't comment, but there does seem
to be a lot of lurkers in these forums, who read but don't contribute. So be it.

I'm also surprised that you believe that most buyers want full rights. (I wonder if that's largely
so that they can put their own name on what they buy.) That would seem to be
inconsistent, from a pricing viewpoint, with the offered money amounts, which in most
cases wouldn't realistically support a sole sale of an original article of the length stated.

[Celeste Stewart]

I'm also surprised that you believe that most buyers want full rights.

Many of believe that most buyers want full rights based on experience. Here's some data to back it up from my own sales. I took a look at my spreadsheet detailing 243 articles written and sold to PUBLIC REQUEST customers from January 2006 through November 2009. Here's how they broke down by license type:

243 public request sales total:
225 sold for full rights
10 sold for unique rights
8 sold for usage rights

For me, most buyers (92.5%) want full rights.

I believe most want full rights because:
* The content is exclusive to them
* They can change the content as needed
* They can use the content in many different ways including publishing it on multiple sites, using it in newsletters, submitting it to article directories etc
* They can enter their own keywords
* They can drop the writer's byline

[TomBarth]

Thanks, Celeste, for providing some facts about the type of license actually purchased for your work.

Thinking back on it, I wonder if I assumed from the low price offered in most public requests that
it corresponded to less than full rights.

I think the original suggestion still has merit and would like to see something added about the
kind of license the buyer is likely to want in the request.

TB