In light of the online uproar over the
small publisher Alterna’s recent decision to enforce a social media policy
against the creators whose works it publishes, now seems like a good time to
talk contracts. The social media policy in question required creators who have
work published by Alterna to refrain from using blockchains or other automated
means on Twitter to block users from communicating with the creators.
In
general, when a publisher wants to publish your creator-owned work, you will
sign a publishing agreement. This agreement will set forth the terms that
govern your relationship with the publisher, such as how many issues might be
published, how and when you will receive money from sales of your work, and,
hopefully, when and how the contract will be terminated. It is also important
to remember, in most cases, publishers are not the employers of those whose
books they publish. The relationship between the publisher and the creator is
contractual, and the contract governs the relationship between the publisher
and creator.
As
I’ve written before, it is important to read and understand your contracts. In
particular, one thing I’ve seen trip up people before is a reference in the
contract to other terms, conditions, or policies that are not actually
presented to you. It is up to you to seek them out and review them, and if you
sign the agreement, then you are agreeing to them, whether you’ve read them or
not. It is not something I have seen often in the comics publishing world, but
it is prevalent in other industries.
If
the terms the publisher is trying to enforce against you were not originally
agreed upon in the contract, then they are not part of your agreement. You do
not have to agree to them. The original contract should still control your
relationship. If the publisher is attempting to introduce and enforce new terms
or conditions at a later date, then it should be considered a new agreement, or
at least a modification to the original agreement requiring both parties’
consent.
Frankly,
a publisher attempting to enforce a policy that was not previously known or
agreed upon has put themselves in a difficult position. The only real threat
the publisher has is to terminate the publishing agreement, if they are
contractually able to do so. Otherwise, the only options are to continue operating
under the terms of the previous agreement, which renders their new policy moot,
or attempt to get you to agree to the new conditions, which you don’t have to
do. If it’s not clear that they can terminate the agreement without your
consent, then the publisher potentially could be in breach of the agreement by
threatening this course of action or otherwise taking a course of action
harmful to the creator. The final option, and the one it appears a number of
creators are exercising in this case, is to mutually agree to end the
agreement.
I
harp on it a lot, but it is so important: make sure you understand your
contracts and your legal rights. Instances like this, where a publisher
introduces a new policy many of its creators may disagree with, are not common,
but they do occur. By understanding the language in your contracts and your
rights, then you can, hopefully, attempt to navigate the situation without too
much damage to your work or your brand.