Jay Lake on story length, lots to chew over here.
Dean Wesley Smith, turning writing truisms on their heads and shaking them hard. Fast vs. slow writing. All writing is rewriting. And, growing out of the rewrite discussion, redrafting. There's a ton of stuff in here that's really really worth reading.
James Scott Bell on keeping on keeping on and the writer's job.
Scott Lynch does a very nice smackdown on an over-entitled, whiny, "reader" who doesn't think author's should put up tip jars.
The US Register (it really out to registrar) of Copyrights comes down hard on the Google book settlement. For yay!
Kristine Kathryn Rusch on publishing setbacks and bouncing back.
Deadline Dames' Dame Rinda making with the funny on waiting to hear back from the publishing industry.
Steven York's Bad Agent Sydney T. Cat Answers Writer Questions (Badly)
Fred Pohl on Writers of the Future.
Lilith Saintcrow on wordcount.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Kelly, I'm interested to know why you are against the Google book settlement.
While I wouldn't consider myself an expert on the issues at hand I have been paying attention and find myself leaning towards support of the settlement, especially given some of the recent concessions that Google has made (e.g. making the books available to other distributors).
Penny for your thoughts? :-)
Shawn, the short answer is that I agree with much of what Jay Lake has to say about the subject here
Interesting. I was under the (mistaken?) impression but the settlement only dealt with orphaned works. In the case of orphaned works one could make the argument that Google is doing a good thing by making them available to the general public. However, if the settlement is applicable to a broader range of works, then you and Jay correct to be concerned.
I will have to do some more digging...
It deals with any work published before January of this year, and deals pretty cavalierly with books that are even temporarily out of print. If it were only orphaned works I would have much less problem with it but that's not the case, hence my being forced to choose whether to 1) opt out to preserve my rights to sue later which suit would be pointless because of the sums involved. 2) Opt in and potentially collect a tiny fraction of what my work might be worth but more importantly have some control within the Google framework. 3) Do nothing and be opted in by default but with less control than option 2. None of these make me happy with either Google or the Author's Guild. I opted for 2 but not without severe misgivings and a strong feeling that what is in effect a massive rewrite of US copyright should not have happened by negotiation between two parties neither of whom is democratically elected.
Post a Comment