Science Fiction Microstory Contest discussion
Should we make the group private?
My feeling is that it should be private.Sometimes entries are kind of trying out an idea, or an early version for something that later might be submitted to a competition or magazine, and it might be too similar.
It would still be possible to keep a presence in LinkedIn, saying each month what the theme is and notifying about winners, as a way to draw people to sign up for the group to try their hand.
That keeps it more like a writers' group rather than a place to publish finished work.
I think it would depend on whether any of the members intend on publishing the work here. When I joined the group a few months ago, which I've really enjoyed by the way, I looked at it as more of a way to improve my own writing, whilst sharing my ideas and creativity with others. I really never planned on publishing the short stories posted here. I say leave it public, but that's just my opinion.
Though, Chris, writing things as a way to improve writing skills could also be a reason to make it private, just as musicians usually rehearse in private ...
Yes, I see your point in that, Andy. Would making the group private really affect finding new members, do you think? Doesn't it only add the extra step of having to ask the group permission to join, kind of like a Facebook or Linked-in group? Yes, it would make posts private, but I'm not sure whether that would affect new members to the group or not. Maybe, then, we should do a trial of privacy and see how it goes. :)
You're right, it probably wouldn't make that much of a difference. If you're signed up to Goodreads already it's just click 'apply' and then be approved. If you're not, you'd have to sign up to Goodreads anyway, so there's a signing up process for people new to Goodreads anyway ...
I agree that it would be good to make the group private. With the wonderful writing and ideas here it benefits the writers to have maximum control of their work. "Advertising" the contest on LI and other social media outlets, not to mention word of mouth, is the best way to get more participants. I think making the group private won't discourage someone who is truly interested, IMHO.
I'm totally against private- the only people who could possibly suffer are those trying to get conventional publishing contracts - It makes no difference to anything we publish ourselves or in anthologies. It is just garbage to suggest that stories wont get published by others. Many anthologies even say which of the umpteen stories have been previously published and where. If one is thinking of working through an agent to get a traditional publishing deal, then okay, but unless you are connected to some very big noises, preferably by close gene snips, then forget it.
Turning this group private would be a huge mistake. The more readers one has the better one does- that is the way to market in the modern world.
Another minor exception are few competitions that may see GR as publishing- but then how many of you are regularly entering them anyway, and are they worth it? Not often.
I realise I'm going to lose this argument- but please try to consider the reality of this- not the total rants that the mostly ex- agents and log-toothed hacks spout in LI writers groups about how to get published.
Perhaps if the majority want private we can run a parallel thread for those writers that want to be read, gaffs and all, rather than waiting until they produce their literary masterpiece. I know I've got as much chance of a 'literary' contract as I have of walking across Antarctica- so private is like kissing death to me.
As many will have noticed - I have plenty of loose gaffs. That's the other thing- the more you hide from the public the greater the trauma when your now perfect copy that you revise for ten years, editing five times, gets rubbished.
The group should remain public. Changing the group to private will not change the fact that a story has been published on the Good Reads platform, and by publishing definition constitutes a published work (let's not split hairs here or delude ourselves). Also, we are presenting flash fiction stories. By remaining public, a publisher may want a story with additional material added or not care at all that it first appeared here. The public feature presents us like debutantes to any curious publishing entities that may check out our other social media and web presences and give us opportunities that hiding behind a private group will thwart.
By going private, we are sending the snooty message, rather than being open and encouraging to all aspiring writers. It is good that our stories are out there warts and all. The writer's craft does not spring into existence in perfection like Athena from the head of Zeus. It is good and instructive to see folks evolve and change in their craft.
So, to me, going private is a bad idea all around.
Are they published- when to a private group? I'm not arguing- but confused. How many have to read a work before the piece is counted as published?- pedantic perhaps, but some books are out months before publishing with beta-readers galore.Sort of against some of the wait of my strong support for public- but does putting work before say fifty associates really count as publishing, whether on GR or around the table in the local pub?
Surely private is private even on GR, or before say a committee in the European Commission. Do you actually know Marianne, or are you just a guessometer like me?- okay- gasometer more like, in my case.
A case study in how to weaken ones own case.
Just FYI - I say I agree with Andy - go private. Maybe this will help. Ck out the link. Interesting contrast between a copyright and a trademark. Laws vary by country.Jus sayin. :-)
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymy...
These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they are written, and no copyright notice is required.
◾ Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not, only damages are affected by that.
◾ Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and don't grant you any permission to do further copying except perhaps the sort of copying the poster might have expected in the ordinary flow of the net.
◾ Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable social purposes. Ask yourself why you are republishing what you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it in your own words.
◾ Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's a concept from trademark law. The ownership of names is also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name copyrighted.
◾ Fan fiction and other work derived from copyrighted works is a copyright violation.
◾ Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply. Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright violation into the criminal realm.
◾ Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder; often it's not that hard to ask permission.
◾ Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail you got isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it. The law doesn't do much to protect works with no commercial value.
Here's the issue as I see it. First, let me explain, I am a web designer and developer by trade. I own Impress Design and Marketing. I do work for small and large companies all day long, including SEO, advertising and social networking promos. Exclusive content matters for lots of reasons, and definitely matters to a lot of publishers.Publishers very often stipulate that any work submitted be original and unpublished. Sometimes they are ok with simultaneous submissions, sometimes not. But they are usually clear about Published/not published work. They almost always assume something is published if it shows up on your own blog / website or any site that is publicly accessible. That would be our Goodreads site.
LinkedIn is a private group and anything that was done there would NOT show up under any sort of search and is not considered "published". (Basically, it is like meeting somewhere and all of us discussing our work as a writer's group.)
Getting more exposure isn't really much of an issue, as I see it. That's a whole other topic (Sharon's ideas are correct). There are over 11,000 members in our LI group and we get maybe 30 - 50 participants throughout the year?
As things are, any Goodreads work posted is "published". That limits what you can do with it as an author. So, if you have a story that you think you might be able to publish elsewhere (get paid for it) - or want to publish - it shouldn't be posted here.
We could create a private members only site, then the stories could be shopped elsewhere. Either way, we should all be aware of the limitations.
Whether we go private or stay public - I'm indifferent. However I do think "advertising" what the new prompt is and perhaps the winner in the LI group will help generate participation."If the forum or Web board is private and intended for the purposes of encouraging feedback or community support, then most editors and literary agents will consider the work unpublished. But just in case, you may want to take it down once you’ve received feedback so it doesn’t appear online."
In the rare case someone may want to submit their story to a publication- I would suggest waiting until the last few days of the contest to post it and then delete it later.
Google can take quite a bit of time to crawl a new webpage and may not re-crawl it for several days/weeks after for updates. So the odds of your story showing up in search results are pretty slim.
For example, the initial post for the January Stories thread was posted Jan 3rd but was not even crawled and subsequently added to search results by Google until Jan 18 and hasn't been crawled since.
The December Stories thread wasn't crawled until December 31st.
Also, I googled "The Watchtower Jot Russell" - which was Jot's entry in November. It did not return the stories thread or the post. But it did return Jot's Goodreads profile activity, and because he checked "Add to my Update Feed *" it showed up there.
Just some perspective.
I delete mine after each contest now. Unless we go private, I will enter future stories just prior to the deadline and delete after I see the finals list (if mine is not in the running). Easy enough.
Ben - that's probably a good idea. I am thinking about entering my 7 Deadly Sins story into a contest so you just never know on down the line when you might want to do something with a story.
Mod
More clarification to a gray area:http://writersrelief.com/blog/2013/11...
from copywrite.gov:
"A work is considered to be “published” when copies are distributed to the general public/ target audience through sale, lease, or lending. Mere printing or making copies of your work is not considered to “publication of your work.” For a website, if it has already been posted to the Internet, it is considered published. Note: Publication is not a requirement for copyright registration. Publication is defined as the distribution of copies of a work to the public by sale or transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. A work is also published if there has been an offering to distribute copies to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display. The public display of a work, without more, is not considered publication.)"
Since I do not do my microstories for money, only exposure, I am not worried about the rights thing. If someone wanted to publish one of my stories, I would tell them where it appeared whether on a private forum or not and let them decide if they wanted it or not.
Some other interesting links:http://amazingstoriesmag.com/2015/03/...
http://flashfictiononline.com/main/su...
One last thing, our dear Terms of Service that grants Good Reads a license and why it don't matter whether the thread is public or private, you have grant a right:By posting any User Content on the Service, you expressly grant, and you represent and warrant that you have a right to grant, to Goodreads a royalty-free, sublicensable, transferable, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide license to use, reproduce, modify, publish, list information regarding, edit, translate, distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, and make derivative works of all such User Content and your name, voice, and/or likeness as contained in your User Content, in whole or in part, and in any form, media or technology, whether now known or hereafter developed, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing for any purpose at the sole discretion of Goodreads. If you submit works to the Service via the “My Writing” or “Ebook” features, our Terms of Use for Writers apply to those works.
Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, you are hereby granted a non-exclusive, limited, personal license to use the Service. Goodreads reserves all rights not expressly granted herein in the Service and the Goodreads Content (as defined below). Goodreads may terminate this license at any time for any reason or no reason
Ummmmm well now. That's unfortunate verbiage.
Thank you, Ben, Jack, Carrie, Marianne, Richard,. . . enormously valuable information. A question--how would publishing in a closed Goodreads group differ from publishing on LI in a group, so far as publishers are concerned? Would a search tool find the GR one but not the LI one? (Carrie's test search would seem to contraindicate that.) Or have publishers or publishers associations/journals indicated that they don't count LI-group appearance as "publication" but do count a GR-closed-group appearance as "publication"? I ask because these seem rather equivalently nonpublication, since closed to outsiders; and I know that, a dozen years ago, in a writing workshop-retreat overseen by experienced publishing professionals (who presumably knew--but perhaps not--on this issue), I handled one workshop's "publication, only for circulation among ourselves," of a chapbook, on which we placed precisely that statement; and we were given to understand this did not count, to publishers, as publication. Ben, great discussion of some copyright issues.
Jack and Carrie and others, I'm finishing up a much-edited novel which I'm first shopping to the "majors" and a few small presses, but if it doesn't move fairly quickly shall be publishing myself, in which case I'll need a pub designer/e-formatter/e-marketing pro; you both sound good.
Oh, forgot--I did have it happen that one story posted here (while we were on LI) went on to win an award in a traditional magazine's contest, and, perhaps from excess caution, I told them about the "publication" in the contest. Being very nice people, they said, though they would not then publish it, I definitely could keep the award. --the thing is, as a couple people here have said, we don't necessarily know at the time of posting a story what we may do with it.
Setting aside the public/private or published/not-published debate for a moment, is anyone else uncomfortable with Goodreads terms of service? By posting here, we are giving them the right to do as they please with any story/content posted here."...grant, to Goodreads a royalty-free, sublicensable, transferable, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide license to use, reproduce, modify, publish, list information regarding, edit, translate, distribute,..."
I would read this that even if something is posted and then removed, they still have rights to it.
How will this impact an future anthologies and their rights to our stories there? Isn't their 'terms of service' awfully close to what we tried to avoid with the week or more of wordsmithing in our contract for the most recent anthology?
Uh ... hmmm. Danger, Will Robinson! Danger! Sharon, that doesn't sound good to me. This is pushing us more and more to our own website.
I don't like this TOS BS. BTW - My book 4, Invasion, Conspiracy, and The Long Ride, in my Fall of the Americas series is now available from CreateSpace (paper) and Amazon (ebook). I am not putting it out on Smashwords, just yet.
What about this idea:make the group private and give it a label something like 'inner circle - members only' but also create another 'outer circle' group that is basically identical but exposes less.
Give this 'outer circle' group say 4 threads
1.) a "Welcome & Enquiries" thread outlining what we do and how to join ... and where anyone can post and ask something about the group.
2.) a list of Current Members thread in case someone googles a members name who wants to be found and finds their way here via that route ... but it wouldn't be compulsory in case any one of us didn't want our name posted in such a list.
3.) a The Challenge For The Month thread ... which could include possibly a bit about why it was chosen, such as Sharon wrote re 'the endings issue' etc,
So this month, anyone coming to/happening upon, the 'outer circle' group would see the rationale for the challenge plus the details of the challenge, so,
For the February 2016 contest:
Writing Prompt:
Siblings separated by a catastrophe meet ten years later, on the opposite side of a conflict.
Required Elements:
1. One is wearing a uniform that doesn't belong to him/her/it.
2. Last Line should be: "I wish it could have been different."
(but they, i.e., 'outer circle' guests, would be told that they have to actually join the closed - 'inner circle' - group if they want to participate in the actual contest.)
4.) an Excerpts & Comments thread- where an excerpt only would posted, optionally, by each or any author (of the 'inner circle' group) of their previous month's work (accompanied, if they wish, to by a brief - eg 250 word - self-critique of that piece.) That should be ample to whet the appetite of any potential new member whilst still protecting the author against the machinations of what can and can't have been published re submitting stuff to other platforms. And this thread would (possibly) also accept brief comments by 'outer circle', i.e., guest participants.
[Of course a simpler way of achieving the same effect would be to just have the group as we have it now but with most threads 'closed' to non members and just a few (such as the four I mentioned above) 'open' to everyone. But I don't know if that can be done on GR.]
p.s. re GR's T.O.S. does it mean that they have rights over our work ONLY while our work remains posted on GR or is it that they have such rights over any work that was ever posted on GR?
Interesting re GR's TOS. Wonder if that clause in enforceable; some contract clauses aren't. And wonder if having a copyright notice on a piece changes the issue.
Wonder how passage of the TTP will affect our copyrights.
Wonder how much changing to someone's website will affect/help with any of these issues--e.g. with web crawlers and e.g. with copyright issues.
;
The 'published' is to protect us- the works are our copyright. The distribution decisions stay with us. Now if a publisher believes that they have lost something because the author has put the material on GR- then fine- that's up to them.
GR has no copyright on our IP - any more than I have any copyright on any of their's because it's on my computer.
This whole debate is arse about face.
If GR is really claiming anything different, if these publishers know anything the general public (the likes of me) don't- well then no one would use GR- would they- I wouldn't.
It pays to read a site's TOS, and GR is no better or worse than most. That is why if you write a story you want a "for real" publisher to publish, rather than self-publishing, it is better not to have it on the Internet beforehand. We keep our copyrights on GR, but we have allowed them a license to host the stuff on their site, and as such, the works are to be considered published.More definitions:
http://www.pw.org/content/copyright
I have to say, if we choose the private option, I will probably bow out as I think it is goes against what I thought the contest was all about: good will, advancing our skills as writers and inviting anyone in to play.
In the end, I don't feel strongly enough about this matter to vote one way or the other (if we had a vote on it) so I will just 'go with the flow' on this one. I think both sides of the argument have merit, but for me I am here to learn and to hone my skills as a writer and so whether the group is private or public doesn't seem to make that much difference in that regard.
Actually I'm not so sure any more, though at first I thought private would be a little better with no real practical burden for people joining.Given GR's ToS, though, it doesn't make a lot of difference whether public or private as a group, in terms of GR's license to reuse material. This would probably not ever be an issue either unless any of us becomes the next JK Rowling.
The TOS are more one-sided than LinkedIn or Wattpad, as examples, both of which make clear the non-exclusive license applies only to user content appearing on their own specified website.
It's really a question of how worried one is in the unlikely event that GR in the future reuses your material or sells on the right to do so, both of which it technically could do ... but is it likely?
So if one is really concerned, the upshot is not to post (=publish) here anything one is likely to want to publish elsewhere at any point. That's Marianne's position.
And Richard's position is that it doesn't matter as he strongly advocates a self-publishing route, so in that case one would be in control of the decision to publish or not oneself...
Thanks Andy. The problem you succinctly stated is the problem one must consider. If an author plans for his/her entry to be lost to GR then no problem. Now, if the entry wins the contest and is selected into the collection to be marketed, then what? Does Jot have to have releases from GR to sell, or even publish, the collection? I think so, but perhaps not. Perhaps the ToS speaks to this situation.
The license is non-exclusive and ownership is retained by the author - it's just that anything that any of us might publish elsewhere has the potential to be published also by GR or whoever they might assign that right to, ad they can repurpose it in any way.I don't think they would: but it means the normal terms in any publishing contract are compromised by the mere existence of another party who has a license to the work, and one which in principle also impacts on the rights one would normally negotiate about: like for repurposing, use in other media and translation.
BTW I don't think GR is intending to be sneaky or anything: their ToS for the creative writing section and for ebooks are more balanced and are more like Wattpad's. It's probably just that we are using the groups, which would normally be for discussions, for the purposes of writing stories.
Thanks - I think you are saying since the license is no longer exclusively the author's, the work cannot be marketed as such. Right?
Exactly, or enter into any contracts where it matters to the other party as in Paula's story.Then it's just a question if that's an issue for anyone.
Andy, thanks for the clear and wonderful job of interpreting the GR terms of service here. (Leaves me wondering whether we could consider moving this to GR's creative writing section; could that even work for us, and if so how much does its TOS differ from the groups-section's?)Ben, your wrote "Now], if the entry wins the contest and is selected into the collection to be marketed"---whoa/wait, no. The anthology's stories include the winners plus a certain number (generally, 2) selected by the stories' own authors. That's been firm so far in this group. Let's keep this discussion to the issue of the contest's location. Thanks.
I think it boils to a distinction between those us who want traditional publishing contracts, and those of us who are more pragmatic, in some cases through experience, about the corporate mincer.If I wanted to hide something I wrote from others, I'd keep it in a box with all the other what the hell is thises? under the bed.
As Marianne says, the ToS looks comparatively standard. Afaic, it has the potential for a bunch of free advertising I'm too lazy to do by myself.
I'm all for keeping things open.
That sounds like one scary bedroom, JJ ...
Paula - correct, just thinking ahead out loud.
The TOS being non exclusive, I could put all my entries here also up on Wattpad. The author retains copyright. I think the main thrust of the Good Reads license, practically speaking, is that the content lives forever on the servers, even when deleted for public viewing and the wording covers that. It is so you cannot get Good Reads for copyright violation.
If Google and Good Reads ever merge, then, yeah, I bet whole stories would show up on Google Books.
Since our stories are short, any substantial reworking of a story constitutes new material and new copyright and is a new work. If not posted here or anywhere else on the Internet, that new work could be shopped around and Good Reads would have no say.
And a question: Have any other discussion group moderators explored the TOS? Should we consider outreach by asking around or the Help folks? (Don't laugh too hard at the suggestion).
Andy, it's fairly minimalist. Just me and my imagination - I hope!
After following the discussion, I'm swayed to allow the group to remain open. I understand the reasoning on the GR's TOS, but I'm still not keen on them. Without a convenient alternative for an open contest, I'd agree with staying here and keeping it open.BTW- I did a little bragging on my FB Author's page about winning January's Contest by posting a link to our Goodread's group which also had the Future is Short Volume 2 cover in the picture link. To date (without paying for boost) there have been 2,017 people reached. I'm sure Stephen King could scoff, but that's a pretty respectable number in my book.
Sharon- that reach is fantastic- and you never know, but it is plausible for content to go truly viral when it starts to develop that scale of footprint.
The main draw back I see is that we want to expand the group to include more people and making it private might restrict that.
Thoughts?