| Author | Message | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3702 Registered: 05-2006 |
I would like to see a rule established here, either formally or tacitly, that when you are trumpeting the recent, current or imminent publication of your poem in an online or hardcopy journal that you do not post the poem in an open forum such as Essential Oils or Primordial Sound, and that if it is still up at Creative Visualization or Biofeedback that you ask to have it removed or moved to a locked forum. This goes along with the recent discussion of IPBC honors or wins constituting publication, and the subsequent decision to lock our own archive forum Electromagnetism. Fred * * * * * (Message edited by sandiegopoet on April 07, 2008) Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29329 Registered: 11-1998 |
Most (98-99%) who post an announcement, post only the link, Freddie, not the actual poem. As to the poem still being "live" on any of our forums, that's a rare occurrence given the length of time that it normally takes from submission to acceptance to publication. Really, it's the poet's or the publication's concern if the poem is still publicly viewable in places other than the publication who is securing first rights. If they don't mind, I'm not sure we must. The "previously published" issue is of importance only to those journals who have an issue with it. I don't think we need to go to extremes. In the past, if poets have experienced problems in this regard, they usually let us know and we handle it. Basically, if the pub has a problem with the poem being displayed elsewhere, they contact the author, not us. It's the poet's individual risk, not Wild's. We locked the archives as a pre-emptive measure to avoid numerous e-mails from poets making requests. In the rare case of work still being live, it's their risk, their responsibility. I don't think we need mandates, formal or informal. I think most poets who publish know their rights and responsibilities. Love, M | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3704 Registered: 05-2006 |
Steven Schroeder, on another forum, made the point that exclusivity of access to a work is one of the primary elements that a journal "possesses" that might draw readers to it. (Good poems is obviously another.) I am very concerned with intellectual property, not only in art, but in the broader vistas of economics. In a post-industrial age, the US economy's primary comparative advantage on the world marketplace is the intellectual property we create. Failure to protect this diligently will hurt us all smack in the centers of our wallets and purses. I consider people who think everything should be available for free on the Net to be fools. That said, I adamantly support the concept of promoting exclusivity of access to works of art. Just like "why should I buy the CD or pay for a download in MP3 when I can get it free from da-da-da?" -- one can as easily say "why should I buy River Styx with featured poet da-da-da when I can read all those same poems for free at la-la-la?" I do not think it is only a matter that the journal and the poet need be concerned with, with poetry forums such as WPF being out of the loop. To my way of thinking, the poetry community as a whole needs to stand for protection of rights to control intellectual property, in this case poems. Fred Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29330 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Freddie -- We at Wild are concerned with this issue, or we wouldn't have locked the archives. As to live work, it's normally archived within 30-90 days, so the exposure time is minimal. I understand your concerns with intellectual property, particularly considering your past issues where this subject matter is concerned. And I sympathize with those concerns. Wild is not out of the loop. We've done what we can by locking archives and responding to member requests. As to standing there, guarding the door, that's extreme. It's the responsibility of poets to educate and protect themselves, and journals as well if they are concerned with protection of first rights, but police states at poetry forums is a bit of overkill. Most mags will tell you that what they are want and are "purchasing" from the author is first serial rights or one-time rights (it is a rarer mag who wants exclusive rights). That allows them to print the work for the first time, but then rights revert to the author. Which means the author is then free to do with the work whatever he wishes (display it, print it in a book, re-publish it another journal, put leaflets on car windshields, etc.). It is normally considered "good manners" to indicate where the poem was first published with an acknowledgement if it is reprinted elsewhere, but no one will penalize you if you don't. It's a matter of etiquette, and not formally enforced since profits from poetry are so small. Poetry is a loss-leader at most publishing houses, except for the rare Pinsky, Oliver, Olds, Clifton, etc. Many big publishing houses don't even publish poetry. Of those who do, they do so on an almost humanitarian basis and the publication of books on other subjects supports the poetry runs (which lose money). And small presses (the largest publisher of poetry) remain small presses for a very good reason -- there's no profit in poetry. If first and/or subsequent rights are violated, it is at the poet's or journal's expense. As far as money out of anyone's wallets, it is the journals who will suffer from lost sales and, therefore, their responsibility to protect and defend. As to our own personal wallets? I've had a lot of publication credits, Freddie. My wallet is not fat from acceptances and certainly no thinner from violation of my intellectual property. As soon as poetry starts paying big bucks (when is that ever going to happen?), then I think we need to worry. Love, M | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3708 Registered: 05-2006 |
~M~, I don't think that the issue is literally how much money is at stake, but the principle. I am not advocating in Draconian fashion some kind of vigilante committee or cadre of sentinels. I began this thread with -- I would like to see a rule established here, either formally or tacitly, This could be as simple as a two-line statement in the header to Primordial Sound. "Violators" would merely be referred to that statement. No executioners. No Stalinistic purges. Fred Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29331 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Freddie -- Principles are great, but who is going to investigate: "Violators would merely be referred to that statement". I don't have time to go around checking who's published where all over (on and off the net) and to chase after people, yelling at them for not notifying us to remove live work. Do you? If so, you got the job! *grin* Do you actually believe that people read the statements we post at the top of our forums? Oh, I've got a lot o' mail in my box that points people to our obviously visible statements that says otherwise. Trust me -- they don't read it ( before or sometimes even after they write to us *LOL* ). Love, M | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29332 Registered: 11-1998 |
P.S. Bottom line is this, Freddie -- it's up to an author whether he cares or not if a work is displayed elsewhere (with or without acknowledgements) after its publication in a journal. Poetry forums and journals are no longer involved at that point, except that journals may be a bit peeved that the author didn't acknowledge them as "first publisher." But most journals are too involved with the next issue to care much. Be careful not to confuse first serial rights with exclusive rights. At this point, what I'm more concerned about is poems/authors being rejected by those journals who don't accept "previously published" work. And display at workshops being considered by journals as in the "previously published" category. That's why we locked the archives -- to protect our poets from these types of rejections. As to what happens after the work is published, that's the author's choice. After all, rights to display his work have reverted back to him. He can display it anywhere he wants. It's his breach of etiquette if he doesn't go back to where it was/is displayed and acknowledge the publication. Not exactly our concern. | ||
| Will Eastland
Intermediate Member Username: dwillo Post Number: 539 Registered: 07-2006 |
Fred, I share your concerns about property rights and have other concerns about the "open borders" here at Wild. Specifically, a few online journals I've looked into state in the guidelines that poems that appear online at a workshop in their finished versions would not be accpeted. In order to enforce that, they must google poem titles or unique phrases to see what they find. Perhaps they only do this on a random basis, but it is something some Zines are concerned about. This has caused me to wonder if others who do not specifically state their policy also shy from work they can find online at workshops. Let me just say that I am laboring under no illusions here as to why any of my poems have been rejected anywhere, I am sure it has everything to do with quality, editorial bias, etc and very little if nothing to do with the fact that some of them can (now could) be found archived here. To prevent issues with this type of thing, I have begun (today actually) going back to older posts and deleting the content myself. I don't like doing this, as a forum is a community, and I like to review older work of others, but the google cache holds nearly the entire history of the world, it seems. I would not be at all unhappy if all the workshop forums were locked to non-members, as this would keep the google-bots, and Zine editors (and plagiarists) out as well. I know this is not in at least one of the interests of WPF-- attracting new members. No good answers, but thought I'd voice my concerns. I want either less corruption, or more chance to participate in it. ~Ashleigh Brilliant | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29333 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Will -- your work is protected here at Wild. All work over 30 days is locked in the archives. Even a google search on a title or line will result in a File Not Found 404 error now. I tested this on several people's work, so I know this is true. And public exposure of live work is only at issue for 30 days, far less time than it normally takes to submit and be accepted. Most journals have response-to-submission windows that extend out for many weeks or months. For instance, I'm still waiting to hear back from journals I submitted to in December 2007. The only people who can read your prior work at Wild are members. Period. No outside person or source can access it. So, there is no need to delete it here in this community as it is not on public display. Love, M | ||
| Will Eastland
Intermediate Member Username: dwillo Post Number: 540 Registered: 07-2006 |
M, I'm glad to hear it (and did some google work to test it--you are correct.) This was not a huge issue for me--it obviously hasn't kept me from posting--just a minor concern, and thanks for addressing it. The poetry mentoring I get here is invaluable, and it's great to know you all are looking out for us in this way, too. Now about the intellectual property thing . . .  I want either less corruption, or more chance to participate in it. ~Ashleigh Brilliant | ||
| Gary Blankenship
Moderator Username: garydawg Post Number: 23322 Registered: 07-2001 |
I get puzzled by lots of things, but this one nearly tops the list - Why should Wild, its owners and staff be concerned if a member posts a poem published or not as an announcement or for any other reason. Isn't it the poet's responsibility to take due diligence for whatever they are concerned about re publication or any other subject? But then I am puzzled as normal... Smiles. Gary Celebrate Walt with Gary: http://www.poetrykit.org/pkl/tw10/tw4conte.htm | ||
| Judy Thompson
Advanced Member Username: judyt54 Post Number: 1060 Registered: 11-2007 |
i agree with Fred, and with Gary. With Fred, because it seems at least a courtesy to allow the magazine (online or off) to have that poem to themselves for the time that the issue is current. Seems only fair. Post a link, yes. but at least wait until the ink is dry on the magazine page before posting the poem here. If I had a poem published online, I would indeed post a link. I owe the magazine whatever readership i could garner them. But at least let them have the right to the readership. Who will bother to trot over to X. Magazine.com to read a poem that has already been shown off here? | ||
| Andrew Dufresne
Advanced Member Username: beachdreamer Post Number: 1407 Registered: 01-2006 |
Could we have a few more rules please? I think we'd all be better off. In fact I would like to have a rule that on Thursdays a Brinks truck drives up my house and drops off seven bags of non traceable bills. On Fridays I would like a rule that states that every one must tell the truth all the time and if they don't, they break out in hives. I have a few more, but why be greedy? ad | ||
| steve williams
Board Administrator Username: twobyfour Post Number: 2160 Registered: 01-2003 |
Fred the bottom line is the author puts the poem here. Wild doesn't censor other than for illegal/inappropriate language or personal attacks. thus, since the author is responsible for their own content, this issue lies in the author's lap not with the site. As Will has stated, you are free to edit your own posts, in fact you can go back through the poems and put the links in them as they are published and/or take out the poem itself. Its up to the author to protect their own rights. but then M just said this but nobody reads her posts so doing it again.  s | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29336 Registered: 11-1998 |
Excerpt from: The Business of Writing: Minding the Details, An introduction to the financial and legal aspects of selling your writing, from 2000 Writer's Market TYPES OF RIGHTS First Serial Rights. First serial rights means the writer offers a newspaper or magazine the right to publish the article, story or poem for the first time in any periodical. All other rights to the material remain with the writer. The qualifier "North American" is often added to this phrase to specify a geographical limit to the license. When material is excerpted from a book scheduled to be published and it appears in a magazine or newspaper prior to book publication, this is also called first serial rights. One-Time Rights. A periodical that licenses one-time rights to a work (also known as simultaneous rights) buys the nonexclusive right to publish the work once. That is, there is nothing to stop the author from selling the work to other publications at the same time. Simultaneous sales would typically be to periodicals without overlapping audiences. Second Serial (Reprint) Rights. This gives a newspaper or magazine the opportunity to print an article, poem or story after it has already appeared in another newspaper or magazine. Second serial rights are nonexclusive, that is, they can be licensed to more than one market. All Rights. This is just what it sounds like. If you license away all rights to your work, you forfeit the right to ever use it again. If you think you'll want to use the material later, you must avoid submitting to such markets or refuse payment and withdraw your material. Ask the editor whether he is willing to buy first rights instead of all rights before you agree to an assignment or sale. Some editors will reassign rights to a writer after a given period, such as one year. It's worth an inquiry in writing. Electronics Rights. These rights cover usage in a broad range of electronic media, from online magazines and databases to CD-ROM magazine anthologies and interactive games. The magazine contract should specify if, and which, electronic rights are included. The presumption is that unspecified rights are kept by the writer. Subsidiary Rights. These are the rights, other than book publication rights, that should be covered in a book contract. These may include various serial rights; movie, television, audiotape and other electronic rights; translation rights, etc. The book contract should specify who controls these rights (author or publisher) and what percentage of sales from the licensing of these sub rights goes to the author. Dramatic, Television and Motion Picture Rights. This means the writer is selling his material for use on the stage, in television or in the movies. Often a one-year option to buy such rights is offered (generally for 10% of the total price). The interested party then tries to sell the idea to other people, actors, directors, studios or television networks, etc. Some properties are optioned over and over again, but most fail to become dramatic productions. In such cases, the writer can sell his rights again and again, as long as there is interest in the material. Though dramatic, TV and motion picture rights are more important to the fiction writer than the nonfiction writer, producers today are increasingly interested in nonfiction material; many biographies, topical books and true stories are being dramatized. . | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3710 Registered: 05-2006 |
~M~, Thanks for the itemization of author's rights and how "use" of a literary work may be assigned or sold. * * * * * Steve, I am simply at a loss to figure out where in my comments here I have advocated censorship of work on the part of WPF in the interests of maintaining some putative exclusivity of access to same held by a journal in which the work appears. I frankly believe that many poets do not realize that posting their poem here as they declare "Look what I just had accepted to *****" vitiates the exclusivity of access to the poem "held" by the journal. I only wanted for a convention to be adopted (perhaps I overstated by using the word RULE, but I thought that the word "tacit" would nudge the semantics in that direction) that posting your poem along with your self-congratulatory rave would be discouraged. I also thought it would be good to have a convention that poets ask to have their poems-just-published removed if for whatever reason those poems were still "up" on any of the regular forums. I have been told several times in this thread that everything is the poet's responsibility. If everyone would take a moment and read what I actually wrote in my original post, it would be clear that I was placing the onus on the poet to refrain and to request. At no point did I advocate that WPF take any kind of punative or censorious measures if the poet did not elect to refrain or request. * * * * * It seems to me that Internet Law and conventions of conduct on the Internet are currently being written. Caselaw is emerging even as I write this. (I have spoken with two attorneys about a similar matter regarding defense of my URL.} Protocols established in 2000 may be out of step with emergent caselaw. Further, it is quite obvious that many journals are transitioning to Internet form, or are attempting to manage a website companion to their hardcopy zine, and may not be fully aware of both legal restrictions and "conventions of the marketplace." * * * * * In any case, I weary of this thread. I feel I have tried to make a reasonable point, and what I have actually advocated has been blown up like the Michelin Man. I know that many editors Google every poem they are seriously considering publishing, and if they find that it "comes up" on a blog or in a poetry forum, that's it: into the reject pile. A friend of mine coordinates an annual poetry contest for young people. Every year Google turns up plagarized poems misrepresented as the poet's own. * * * * * But again, I am weary. Fred Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| Judy Thompson
Advanced Member Username: judyt54 Post Number: 1063 Registered: 11-2007 |
i got what you were saying, Fred, big time. it's the "oh boy I just got a poem accepted and it will be out next month, oh boy here it is" syndrome. Doing that might well result in losing the acceptance, and credibility with many editors, since money rarely changes hands in these things, and if an editor discovers that you have pre-posted a poem he accepted from you, I'd not blame him for being upset. | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29337 Registered: 11-1998 |
Yeah, Freddie -- I'm pretty weary myself. No one blew you up like the Michelin Man, BTW. But if you start a discussion, you are gonna get responses. I'll keep it short. Since you know we've got a locked archive now, and you know that we archive every 30 days or so, then the following ain't gonna happen here, right?: "I know that many editors Google every poem they are seriously considering publishing, and if they find that it "comes up" on a blog or in a poetry forum, that's it: into the reject pile." There -- that's addressed. OK, now this one: "I only wanted for a convention to be adopted (perhaps I overstated by using the word RULE, but I thought that the word "tacit" would nudge the semantics in that direction) that posting your poem along with your self-congratulatory rave would be discouraged." Since less than 1% post the actual poem with their announcement (the overwhelming majority, if not all, only post the link when they post their announcement), there's not really a problem. If you see a copy of the actual poem posted along with an announcement of publication here at Wild, please tell me where it is. 'Cause I can't find one. There, that point's addressed. As to what's live, the length of the submission process normally takes care of that. It's no longer "live" when it's read by an editor and/or it's published. It's in a locked archive because more than 30 days have elapsed. So, there's no problem there either. That's a non-issue too. So, what's the problem and why do we have to adopt a convention for what nobody does?  Love, M | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29338 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Judy -- as far as I know, no one does this here: "it's the "oh boy I just got a poem accepted and it will be out next month, oh boy here it is" syndrome." They sometimes post an announcement that something they've worked on here at Wild will be published soon, but that poem is long gone off the regular boards and is now in the locked archive when they do. They rarely, I'd say so rarely it's never, post the poem along with the announcement. No search engine search is going to find the actual poem here. Outsiders will get a File Not Found 404 error. Why is everybody worried about what doesn't happen here? I'm just confused, is all. Not trying to be argumentative. Love, M | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29339 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Freddie (et. al.) -- I just realized that what you might have had issue with, Fred, was this: "I frankly believe that many poets do not realize that posting their poem here as they declare "Look what I just had accepted to *****" vitiates the exclusivity of access to the poem "held" by the journal." The problem there is that the majority of journals aren't "purchasing" exclusivity. They are "purchasing" First Serial Rights, which is quite different. This only gives them a right to publish the work first in any periodical, not to an exclusive appearance. Most informally expect to be able to be the sole displayer of that work for however long their issue is live (and most of us go along with that), but they don't get exclusive. To get exclusive, they'd have to get you to sign off on All Rights. And an author would have to be crazy or naive to sign an All Rights. As soon a journal publishes under a First Serial, it's my understanding that all rights revert to the author, and by that, I mean immediately, if I'm not mistaken. So, they don't hold an exclusive right to the work. It's just good business practice to allow them sole display, but it's not a requirement. The author still retains rights to his own work. And Wild is not a periodical, so the work displayed isn't "published" here and isn't violating any periodical's right to "publish it first in any periodical". One-Time Rights are even less exclusive. The work can be sold to and appear in multiple journals, simultaneously. If you are in doubt about what a journal is "purchasing" from you when they accept your work, ask for an explanation in writing. Most will clarify exactly what their definition of First Serial, One-Time, and Electronics Rights includes. They may ask for more rights, but that doesn't mean you have to give it to them. Hope that clarifies things, but if you find out something different, let me know. I think everybody, even journals, need to get straight on what constitutes "published." Display in a workshop is NOT published. Love, M | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3711 Registered: 05-2006 |
RE: Exclusivity They are acquiring exclusivity for a specified time window. In some sense it's like a reservation at a restaurant: a temporally-bounded claim. No permanence or perpetuity is implied. Regardless of the "legal mumbo-jumbo," one of the only reasons a journal is worth reading (or worth paying for) is because that's the only place where the poems or stories you want to read can be found. * * * * * RE: Doesn't happen here All one has to do is go to the post that is the fourth one down from the top here at Essential Oils, entitled "I'm excited to announce . . .". * * * * * As far as getting a response from an editor during the time the poem is still "up" on the non-archived boards, I have had this happen several times since January 1, 2008. * * * * * Fred (Message edited by sandiegopoet on April 07, 2008) Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29340 Registered: 11-1998 |
I think we posted at the same time, Freddie. Read my note above. Love, M | ||
| Tina Hoffman
Advanced Member Username: tina_hoffman Post Number: 1775 Registered: 05-2007 |
no comment lol Dare to dream a positive vision, and see it come true! | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29341 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Freddie -- it's not all legal mumbo-jumbo. It's your rights as an author we're talking about here. Don't sell away more of your rights than you need to. And don't give away exclusivity (for any window of time) if they don't ask for it specifically. You may be sorry about that one day if a bigger journal or publisher wants to print the work. If money's changing hands, you might let them talk to you about exclusivity (a week, a month, a year) and even then, only in specific/rare cases. In not, then I say hold tight to your rights and exercise them. At best, if we're talking print journals that charge for their issues, they're making money off you (and in most cases, poetry specifically, not even paying you for it except, at best, one or two free issues or a free subscription). Why give them the right to do anything they want with it and/or the right to restrict you as the author? Even sole right to display for some specific time period? They should have to pay you for that. Love, M | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3712 Registered: 05-2006 |
This seems so simple to me. I really don't understand why others want to make it so complicated, unless I have pissed off so many people by taking a stand here that it no longer matters what I say. A journal wants some kind of exclusivity. It is a matter of marketing economics. If I hear one more allegation that I am arguing for absolute exclusivity I am going to scream. I am arguing for partial/conditional/bounded/temporary exclusivity. When I was a champion debater in high school, I learned that you could often win a debate by changing the assertions of your opponent from conditional or qualified assertions to unconditional or unqualified assertions -- this, a variant of reductio ad absurdum -- and then pointing to the extremism of your opponent's position in subtly condescending tones. I sincerely believe that is what is happening here. And speaking sincerely -- I am angry. However out-of-line I may seem in bringing up this topic, I did not deserve the debater's scalpel. The handwriting on the wall has changed to fluorescent graffiti. As best I can tell, I have pissed off ~M~ and probably Steve; and some of this has occurred back channel, so that the emotional flames in this thread are partially the result of imported tinder. ~the end~ Fred Longworth Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| nia sunset
Advanced Member Username: nia Post Number: 1287 Registered: 04-2006 |
* * * * * RE: Doesn't happen here All one has to do is go to the post that is the fourth one down from the top here at Essential Oils, entitled "I'm excited to announce . . .". * * * * * Could you please tell me what I did wrong... I try to understand, thank you, with my love, nia  http://www.freewebs.com/butterflywingsofnia/ "Carry the beauties;wash the badnesses with your poetical spirit" | ||
| Emusing
Senior Member Username: emusing Post Number: 5548 Registered: 08-2003 |
Nia you did nothing wrong as far as I know. You did not "pre-post" a poem, that is, put a poem on Wild before it was published. This poem has already been published and is in print. I have the copy in my hot little hand so there is no worries at all. Isn't that correct M? Love, e www.wordwalkerpress.com | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3713 Registered: 05-2006 |
In my view, right when a poem is "hot off the press" in a zine is the worst time to post it on the web in an open forum. This means that the free thing (the post on the net) is in direct temporal competition with the thing you have to pay for (the journal). The longer the time difference -- either before or after -- between the publication of the poem and its appearance for free on a forum, the less that the two are in competition. Fred Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| Emusing
Senior Member Username: emusing Post Number: 5549 Registered: 08-2003 |
Hi Fred, I see no reason for Nia's post to be removed. I totally understand what you're saying with regard to a zine but this is not a zine, it's a published quarterly journal as you know. So it's already in print and they've had their first rights. It's a published book in print form already accepted and distributed by the publisher. Gotta hit the hay! e www.wordwalkerpress.com | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3714 Registered: 05-2006 |
E I use the term "zine" as a short form of magazine. Ultimately, it makes no difference whether the journal is on the web or in hardcopy. The issue of "first rights" utterly misses the point. The point is an economic one: competition for resources. I'm sorry if I keep belaboring this, but I believe I am absolutely right on this point; and also believe that others need to be better informed. In economics the value of an item is significantly determined by the quantity of the item that is available. One only has to consider the "value" of parking spaces in congested urban settings to see how powerful simple availability can be in determining value. If I have a literary journal, there are finite ways wherein I can give my journal value. In the case of a hardcopy publication, the attractiveness of the journal (good paper, good-looking cover), the quality of poems, the name-recognition of some of the contributors, the past history of the journal (e.g. continuously publishing for 18 years), the affiliation of the journal (e.g. published by the literature department of a major university) -- all these impart that mysterious thing called value to the publication. And just as with the parking spaces, the sheer availability of the resource adds or subtracts value. In my mind, it doesn't matter whether it's poems or parking spaces -- the same economic dynamisms are operative. And further it doesn't matter whether money is involved. The journal may be available for free on the Web, and the parking spaces may be "free" in that there are no meters and only a sign saying "2-hour parking." Now, an editor wants some kind of claim on a poem or story. The editor wants the poems or stories in the journal to be hard to find anywhere but in the magazine. If the editor understands economics, s/he realizes that this temporary or partial exclusivity, when applied to the entire constellation of poems and stories in the mag, enhances the mag's value. The editor may have only first rights, but in an economic model the editor understands that first rights really means temporary restriction of access to intellectual property. Practically speaking, if two avenues of access to intellectual property are available at very different times, the time difference does not lessen the value of the item. Consider two apartments across the street from one another. One is for rent in January; the other in June. Though they are "in competition," it is very weak competition because the person who needs a place in January is probably not the same person who needs a place in June -- and vice versa. However, if the apartments are available at the same time, or nearly so, then they are in direct competition, and -- as we all know -- this tends to bring the price down as TWO LANDLORDS compete for the same number of prospective tenants. The value of intellectual property is determined by the same economic principles, whether value is measured in dollars or utiles. * * * * * Now, if you think this is a small problem, consider this. The ONLY comparative advantage that the United States has in the world marketplace (other than military might) is our intellectual property. The US is in a post-industrial phase. Failure to protect intellectual property will, I believe, lead to economic ruin for the US. And I, for one, am willing to defend the value of intellectual property anywhere and everywhere I have the opportunity -- even if the context is a simple book of poems. Fred Longworth MBA/Finance 1990 #1 in his graduating class Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3715 Registered: 05-2006 |
Postscript Consumed with battle, I lay down in the salt marsh among golden nasturtiums. Above weary shoulders, pampas grass waved in majesty. A family of scaups emerged from the waters and waddled past me unafraid. Somewhere close: the scent of jasmine, the gutturals of crows. It seemed that here I could bleed and die, or gather the shattered pieces of my vision like an idol fallen off the altar — and make my way to uncontested ground. There, to weld my fragments. But oh! — I longed to join the golden throng, close upon the thick brown mud. Was it the sun that reached its long arm down and grasped my own? Was it the rasp of the snowy egret rising above the steely lagoon? I only know that something inside me ascended, like a spirit reaching toward Heaven, only infinitely more substantial. And with this I stood and walked. * * * * * Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| LJ Cohen
Moderator Username: ljc Post Number: 9199 Registered: 07-2002 |
Fred--I understand your argument. As a writer, I am sensitive to the rights and often confused by the marketplace and what those rights actually mean. I found this in my net search on exclusive vs non-exclusive rights: "Exclusive vs. Nonexclusive Rights What does it mean when a publication wants "exclusive" or "nonexclusive" rights to something? When a publication asks for exclusive rights, they are asking that the piece not appear anywhere else while they are exercising their right to it. There is often a limit on the length of time a publisher will request exclusive rights -- one month, three months, one year -- and then that piece may appear elsewhere. Nonexclusive is just the opposite; Publisher A may feature your piece on their website for a year, but because their right to do so is nonexclusive, you can sell the piece to Publisher B and have it appear elsewhere at the same time. Just make sure Publisher B doesn't want exclusivity! The "nonexclusive right to display, copy, publish, distribute, transmit and sell digital reproductions" means you are allowing your material to be sold elsewhere, by someone else. This does not mean that you will see any profits from these arrangements. It does mean that you can sell your own work to other places at the same time -- but be aware that the original purchaser may make your material available to fee-based databases or other content sources without ever reimbursing you another penny." http://www.writing-world.com/rights/rights.shtml The bottom line is that each journal/venue is going to have its own rights policy and it is a *contract* between the writer and the publisher as to what those rights limit or allow. On a philosophical level, I do believe that out of courtesy, one ought not to make a work available in other forms if it is being published, but only for the timeframe of that issue, unless it is otherwise spelled out in the contract. In any discussion of rights that I have read, the message to authors is not to sign or give away rights that are not specifically being purchased or contracted. Most journals DO NOT expect exclusivity in perpetuity. Most do not expect exclusivity at all and if individual works are available freely elsewhere, do not believe that impacts on the journal/anthology/issue they are publishing, as it is a whole and unique publication of a group of work. It's not that I don't care about the publisher's rights, but this is an area where authors must understand and protect their rights to their intellectual property. Once in a Blue Muse Blog LJCohen | ||
| Will Eastland
Intermediate Member Username: dwillo Post Number: 542 Registered: 07-2006 |
Fred, I agree with you in principle, which is why I am very careful about what I do with my work once it has been accepted and the hard copy comes out (oddly, all my acceptances have been print--so far, no love from the web-zines  ). You stated, and I myself believe, that "a journal wants some kind of exclusivity." The problem is that if there is a difference between what a journal wants and what it requires, then a poet is legally free to do with the accepted/published work as s/he sees fit. Ethics may dictate to you and I that we withhold a poem from appearing in any other venue from acceptance until the issue in which it appears is no longer current, but ethics is primarily a personal matter. Regarding this statement, "The editor may have only first rights, but in an economic model the editor understands that first rights really means temporary restriction of access to intellectual property." If you and I were running a journal, this would be unquestionable. However, it is potentially fallacious to assume that all editors operate under such an economic mindset. Those that do are foolish not to require whatever level of exclusivity they desire. While it may seem gauche at best to post a poem online concurrent with the publication, everyone may not see it that way, especially those from cultures in which captitalistic ethics and mores may not be as prominent. The sad thing is, there may well be a good number of journals who do check for/notice postings online of work they are about to or just have published. Yes, this harms the value of the zine in my opinion. But it probably does more harm to the chances of that poet being published there again. Of course, it may be that I am imposing my ethics and economic philosophy on a bunch of editors who really don't care. If that is the case, I guess I am being overly cautious. But that caution causes me no harm, and it may well truly protect me. In any case, I don't think that Wild is bound to require more of the poet than the publication does. I want either less corruption, or more chance to participate in it. ~Ashleigh Brilliant | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29344 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Freddie -- you did not piss me off ( drive me nuts, yes, sometimes you do, but I'm used to it *LOL* ). I don't mind discussing these issues at all. I welcome them. It helps us clarify our own understanding of important principles of doing business as writers. And helps me guide people here at Wild about what is good to do and what is not. Author rights is an extremely important issue. Lisa and Will are right in what they have outlined. I further recommend that everyone not let their desire to be published (generally or by a specific mag) cause them to sign away more rights than they wish or intend. While you feel the way you do, Freddie, about a journal's right to exclusivity, that doesn't mean everyone shares or needs to share your viewpoints. Even the journals themselves. I respect how you feel about exclusivity, Freddie, and what you feel mags should have a right to. Even if I don't necessarily understand why you're only looking at it from their side and their economic viability and not your own. You can't say, "A journal wants some kind of exclusivity," because that's not true in every case. And First rights really does not mean temporary restriction of access to intellectual property. Unless the journal asks for exclusive. And many don't. Those that don't normally ask for first serial with non-exclusive. Of course you can believe they should have temporary restriction, Freddie, and give that to them if you want. Or only submit to journals that require an exclusive since you believe that's what the journals should have. Bottom line: we at Wild don't know what rights arrangements have been contracted between an author and a journal. And while we can make recommendations for their own protection, we cannot dictate how an author feels about those rights and how he exercises them. I did a quick search of many of the mags that I admire and have either published with or submitted to/will submit to. The vast majority request either one-time or first serial with non-exclusive. They say it right there in their submissions guidelines. This is not to say that they all ask for non-exclusives. Just that the majority that I looked at do. A lot of journals realize that asking for exclusives (either temporary, for a specific term, i.e., while a journal is live, or in perpetuity), particularly if they've not financially compensated an author for that work (which is most poetry journals), is asking a lot. Those journals know that if they want to keep attracting good authors (for free, I might add), then they best not ask for more than what they should be entitled to. To ask for an exclusive (even while that issue is live) and not pay money for it is asking a lot. If an author has retained his rights (signed one-time, which goes so far as to allow simultaneous sale/display, or first serial) and wishes to display the work and the journal hasn't required exclusivity, then the author is well within his rights to display the work if he chooses. And you and I can't dictate that he can't. You can say you don't agree with this philosophy and we respect that and will honor that with regard to you/your work (and anyone else who feels this way) here at Wild. But we can't make blanket statements about what everyone (journals or authors) should do. Nor make assumptions about what rights contracts authors have negotiated. Those are personal choices and should remain in the author's hands. Remember, Freddie -- the rights to your own work should remain yours, not the journal's. You are negotiating a contract with them that allows them to make money from your work. Think about your rights first. And whether you are being adequately compensated when a journal requests an exclusive for whatever term they specify. Hell, I work at a mag. I know about the economics here of what you're saying. However, even I would hesitate to give a mag exclusive unless they were really great, I wanted to be published by them, and it was the only option they were offering me. The writer in me tells me to protect myself first. Love, M P.S. Given how strenuously you are championing journals' exclusivity rights, Freddie, you're making me very suspicious that you're really secretly the Editor-in-Chief of Poetry magazine. You're not, are you? If you are, I have a bone to pick with you about what you consider "previously published." But since you pay me for term-limited exclusivity, well, then, I guess we can negotiate.  | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3719 Registered: 05-2006 |
Will, Supply and demand -- and allied economic principles -- really don't care whether you believe in them or not. Much like gravity, they do what they do. An editor may not subscribe to the ideas I present above; but that does not mean they are not operative. It only means that the editor may not understand why his or her journal possesses "draw" or lack of it. Fred * * * * * ~M~ and Lisa, It's a common thing for people to think "intellectual property" is all about individual citizens protecting their individual rights. And certainly that's a significant element of it. I have utter control over the following intellectual property: URL: www.repairaudio.com dba's: Stereotech Classic Audio Repair Vintage Audio www.repairaudio.com I also have copyright control over a great many poems and (in my professional capacity) many articles in trade publications for electronics servicers. * * * * * That said, in the US the marketing of goods, whether physical or intellectual in nature, is frequently conducted via collective entities. And whether these collective entities are stores, co-ops, faires, rep firms, or -- in the context of literature -- journals and publishing houses, most of them use restriction of access to the commodity as a means of enhancing value. In this light, a journal can be seen as a marketing tool I use to promote my literary work; and the journal, acting as all economic entities do in its self-interest, will perform various actions, informed and uninformed, schooled and unsophisticated, to promote the slate of work each "issue" embraces. So, as long as (pardon cliche) I don't "give away the farm" it is my interest to support the grain co-op's interests. Put differently, I have given the journal temporary rights to my work in exchange (it is, after all, a quid pro quo) for their promise to do something to promote my work as part of a collective entity. Thus, "intellectual property" is more than a private personal matter. Since the economy functions largely as "competition among collectives," if one is an ardent supporter of intellectual property rights, one needs also to support the rights of these collectives. If some dodo created a site called www.undress.net/stirring and featured all the poems in the current issue of Stirring plus numerous pictures of good-looking naked people, I would support Stirring's efforts to deal them a death blow. They would have not only stolen, but corrupted the quality of many artists' work. * * * * * Enough said for now. I need to go to work as San Diego's vintage audio maven. Fred Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| Will Eastland
Intermediate Member Username: dwillo Post Number: 544 Registered: 07-2006 |
Fred, A simple question: If a given journal doesn't care (and we can only assume that they care about as much as they require), why try to make the poets they publish care? Are we discussing universal moral imperatives now? (Message edited by dwillo on April 08, 2008) I want either less corruption, or more chance to participate in it. ~Ashleigh Brilliant | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3720 Registered: 05-2006 |
Two reasons, Will: A. For the same reason that, although a child may not care about the consequences of doing drugs or unprotected sex, we try to exert some measure of influence to curb these behaviors. B. Because the respect for intellectual property, both in its individual and its collective forms, needs to be encouraged and promoted. And yes, to a degree I am discussing moral imperatives, though others, who care less deeply about the matter, may not consider it important enough to associate with ethics. Fred Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| Emusing
Senior Member Username: emusing Post Number: 5550 Registered: 08-2003 |
From the editor of California Quarterly: "The poet is free to publish, republish ad infinitum in any form unless someone actually pays him money for a specific "right." CQ does not buy rights; all rights revert to the author." e www.wordwalkerpress.com | ||
| nia sunset
Advanced Member Username: nia Post Number: 1293 Registered: 04-2006 |
Thank you for all explanations, I am learning, with my love, nia (Message edited by nia on April 09, 2008) http://www.freewebs.com/butterflywingsofnia/ "Carry the beauties;wash the badnesses with your poetical spirit" | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29349 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest Freddie -- I understand theoreticals and your wish to discuss them. And it's not that I necessarily disagree with you (well, not entirely on all scores) on a theoretical level. I appreciate what you're saying and what you're attempting to get us to think about. But, honestly, we live in the real world. You're never going to get all journals and every author to see if from your side and as it benefits a collective. And so we have to depend on agreed upon definitions of what rights and exclusivity mean when it comes to intellectual property. Frankly, if a journal doesn't want or ask for exclusivity, that's that. You don't get to twist their arm and make them, no matter how good you think it might be for them or for a collective. I see the current model of rights and exclusivity as a balance between journal rights and author rights. And no balance is ever perfect. Both parties are normally making concessions in the other's interest. Honestly, Freddie -- most authors realize that publication in a periodical/journal includes the etiquette of not permitting another periodical/journal (that's periodical/journal, not workshop) to display it simultaneously. It's unwritten code, but it's not legally required, if exclusivity hasn't been demanded or granted. And that's what's under discussion here -- what's legal, what's illegal. However, If you don't like the current model and want to change the technical legalities, petition the various journals and governing boards that regulate rights and exclusivity. That's your right as an individual citizen. We've got a lot of beginning authors here just starting to submit their work who may not be aware of what their rights offer them and unintentionally do "give away the farm" (sign an All Rights, for example) because they don't understand that's what they're doing or being asked to do. Once they do understand their rights, and if they want to join you on the collective economic ground, that's great. It's their choice, after all, as it is yours and ours. Since you believe as strongly as you do in the collective as it applies to the restriction of access to the commodity, I recommend you only support, read, and submit to journals that demand first serial rights with exclusives. I extrapolate that to mean we won't see you at Stirring anymore. That's sad. As to the theoretical Stirring example you give, I'm afraid the dodos would have to acknowledge Stirring as first publisher and get the permission of all the authors appearing in the current issue of Stirring in order to do that. And frankly, if they did, there is probably not a damn thing Stirring could do about it. Except maybe not accept future submissions from those authors since that would be our right as a mag. But since we didn't ask them or pay them for exclusives, we can't hold them to it, and no longer accepting their submissions could be interpreted as punitive action for no infraction. That's the risk of non-exclusives and free enterprise, Freddie. It's a bitch, ain't it? Love, M | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3722 Registered: 05-2006 |
Dearest Freddie -- I understand theoreticals and your wish to discuss them. And it's not that I necessarily disagree with you (well, not entirely on all scores) on a theoretical level. I appreciate what you're saying and what you're attempting to get us to think about. But, honestly, we live in the real world. You're never going to get all journals and every author to see if from your side and as it benefits a collective. And so we have to depend on agreed upon definitions of what rights and exclusivity mean when it comes to intellectual property. Frankly, if a journal doesn't want or ask for exclusivity, that's that. You don't get to twist their arm and make them, no matter how good you think it might be for them or for a collective. I'm not trying to twist their arms. What I'm saying is that certain principles of the marketplace are operative whether or not people subscribe to them, and irrespective of whether people believe in them. These principles are more fundamental than than any particular laws and regulations concerning intellectual property. I see the current model of rights and exclusivity as a balance between journal rights and author rights. And no balance is ever perfect. Both parties are normally making concessions in the other's interest. Again, the issue in my mind is not really rights but how a marketplace establishes value for an intellectual commodity. Honestly, Freddie -- most authors realize that publication in a periodical/journal includes the etiquette of not permitting another periodical/journal (that's periodical/journal, not workshop) to display it simultaneously. It's unwritten code, but it's not legally required, if exclusivity hasn't been demanded or granted. And that's what's under discussion here That's what YOU are discussing. I am looking at economic principles which undergird both the written law and unwritten conventions and etiquette. -- what's legal, what's illegal. However, If you don't like the current model and want to change the technical legalities, petition the various journals and governing boards that regulate rights and exclusivity. That's your right as an individual citizen. I have no interest at this point in changing the technical legalities, nor have I advocated such anywhere in this discussion. We've got a lot of beginning authors here just starting to submit their work who may not be aware of what their rights offer them and unintentionally do "give away the farm" (sign an All Rights, for example) because they don't understand that's what they're doing or being asked to do. Once they do understand their rights, and if they want to join you on the collective economic ground, that's great. It's their choice, after all, as it is yours and ours. And if you wish to advise them on how to protect their rights as authors, then all power to you. Since you believe as strongly as you do in the collective as it applies to the restriction of access to the commodity, I recommend you only support, read, and submit to journals that demand first serial rights with exclusives. I extrapolate that to mean we won't see you at Stirring anymore. That's sad. That is the biggest not sequitur I've encountered so far. Again, you are twisting my argument. I am talking about restriction of access to a commodity as a means of enhancing value. How you get from that to me being a spoiler and not submitting to Stirring is beyond me. As to the theoretical Stirring example you give, I'm afraid the dodos would have to get the permission of all the authors appearing in the current issue of Stirring in order to do that. And frankly, if they did, there is probably not a damn thing Stirring could do about it. Except maybe not accept future submissions from those authors since that would be our right as a mag. But since we didn't ask them or pay them for exclusives, we can't hold them to it, and no longer accepting their submissions could be interpreted as punitive action for no infraction. That's the risk of non-exclusives and free enterprise, Freddie. It's a bitch, ain't it? The dodos would do nothing of the kind. They would simply steal the content and post it without anyone's permission. Love, M * * * * * Lois, I have been published in CQ three times, or maybe four. What they say in your quote is no doubt true. What I'm saying has to do with how value is established for intellectual property in a marketplace; and that, specifically, value is enhanced by some degree of restriction of access to the commodity. * * * * * Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 29350 Registered: 11-1998 |
"I'm not trying to twist their arms. What I'm saying is that certain principles of the marketplace are operative whether or not people subscribe to them, and irrespective of whether people believe in them. These principles are more fundamental than than any particular laws and regulations concerning intellectual property." OK. Principles are great, Freddie. "Again, the issue in my mind is not really rights but how a marketplace establishes value for an intellectual commodity." OK "That's what YOU are discussing. I am looking at economic principles which undergird both the written law and unwritten conventions and etiquette." OK "I have no interest at this point in changing the technical legalities, nor have I advocated such anywhere in this discussion." OK "And if you wish to advise them on how to protect their rights as authors, then all power to you." I'm only giving them information. It's up to their lawyers to advise them. "That is the biggest not sequitur I've encountered so far. Again, you are twisting my argument. I am talking about restriction of access to a commodity as a means of enhancing value. How you get from that to me being a spoiler and not submitting to Stirring is beyond me." I would say it was a logical assumption I made, more than an unwarranted conclusion. And I apologize. However, I do wonder how you can support restriction of access to a commodity as a means of enhancing value and then also support a magazine that does not or will not support restriction of access to a commodity as a means of enhancing value? Isn't that a contradiction, or do you only support it in theory? "The dodos would do nothing of the kind. They would simply steal the content and post it without anyone's permission." Then they would be breaking the law. Love, M | ||
| Emusing
Senior Member Username: emusing Post Number: 5552 Registered: 08-2003 |
Freddie, I understand your point perfectly. This comes from a personal point of view and a desire on your part to preserve the intellectual property rights of yourself and others. There is a difference between focusing on the actualities in the marketplace and making an example of a poem in a thread (and a poet who was very proud of her poem and pleased to share it with someone) as an example of someone who is posting their poetry and compromising the intellectual property rights of the publisher. THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE. As I have mentioned and quoted directly from the editor of this particular issue, there is no cause to point a finger at a poem on this board which does not in fact make your point. I see that what you are trying to do has an ethical purpose and that your wish to preserve the spoken and unspoken rights to a creative work (or perhaps anywork) because you wish to preserve its value. I think this is a personal choice and I believe you have made your point on your view very well. As M said, there is no standardization of intellectual property rights with regard to poetry. The agreements are between the poet and the publisher on a case by case basis. I champion your right to speak in favor of preservation. I would ask that you apologize to Nia for making an example of her poem when it was was not violating any rights of the publisher spoken or unspoken according to both poet and publisher. You might find a specific example that speaks directly to your point in order not to offend (inadvertently) other poets on the board. e www.wordwalkerpress.com | ||
| Will Eastland
Intermediate Member Username: dwillo Post Number: 545 Registered: 07-2006 |
E, One small quibble with your understanding of Fred's point. If the last sentence of your first paragraph ended, "...as an example of someone who is posting their poetry and compromising the value/marketability of the issue in which the poet's work appears," you would be closer to what Fred is getting at. However theoretical this stance may be, it does impact us all (probably only slightly for now) whether we care or not. Will I want either less corruption, or more chance to participate in it. ~Ashleigh Brilliant | ||
| Emusing
Senior Member Username: emusing Post Number: 5554 Registered: 08-2003 |
Thanks Will for pointing that out. This is the whole thing in context: "RE: Exclusivity They are acquiring exclusivity for a specified time window. In some sense it's like a reservation at a restaurant: a temporally-bounded claim. No permanence or perpetuity is implied. Regardless of the "legal mumbo-jumbo," one of the only reasons a journal is worth reading (or worth paying for) is because that's the only place where the poems or stories you want to read can be found. * * * * * RE: Doesn't happen here All one has to do is go to the post that is the fourth one down from the top here at Essential Oils, entitled "I'm excited to announce . . .". " The statement was that "they are acquiring exclusivity for a specific time window." In this specific case which was exampled here by Fred, this is not true. They are not acquiring exlusivity whether we consider they should have it or not. This is strictly subjective as to whether someone who posts a poem wishes to post their work to share with a group in an internet poetry forum (as opposed to a blog, a website, etc.). This is between the poet and the publisher. It's really apples and oranges here. One is the factual rights and one is the theoretical. In this case, it is the theoretical viewpoint of Fred and whomever else shares this view, not the view of the poet he chose to make an example of, nor its publisher. e www.wordwalkerpress.com | ||
| M. Kathryn Black
Senior Member Username: kathryn Post Number: 5437 Registered: 09-2002 |
Fred, email Nia and apologize to her then get some rest. Everybody has their issues and you said you were weary. Next time be prepared to spend 10.00 dollars on a ten dollar problem. After reading this thread I saw the problem as first costing 50 cents then going up exponentially as more and more people got offended. Nia wants to leave the Poetry Board. That is unacceptable. As an American you should be more sensitive to other cultures. Always, Kathryn But little by little, as you left their voices behind, the stars began to burn... -Mary Oliver | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 3726 Registered: 05-2006 |
To Kathryn, You wrote: That is unacceptable. As an American you should be more sensitive to other cultures. Please -- do not rebuke me for insensitivity. Clearly, from your words, you yourself hold my feelings in low regard. That, my dear, is known as prejudice. * * * * * To Lois, Lois wrote: "The statement was that "they are acquiring exclusivity for a specific time window." In this specific case which was exampled here by Fred, this is not true. They are not acquiring exlusivity whether we consider they should have it or not. " If you take the word "exclusivity" in an absolute sense, you are correct. But I did not mean this in an absolute sense, rather in a comparative, provisional, or bounded sense -- which I have indicated above repeatedly. Thanks for considering these issues. * * * * * To Nia, Irrespective of any comments I have made here about you, your poetry, or your publication -- which by the way on its artistic merits I applaud -- it is not my desire that you leave WPF. You have as much right to participate in this community of poets as I do. Fred Unofficial Forum Pariah recent victim of alien abduction | ||
| nia sunset
Advanced Member Username: nia Post Number: 1309 Registered: 04-2006 |
That's ok, I am not leaving, I didn't misunderstand you, but ok, I am not going on to talk about this. I want to be in peace with everyone, it means with you too, I hope you have already known me now, let's start again from the begining, I am glad to meet with you Fred, and hope we both welcome to our poetical voyages. And please don't let me misunderstand you,Thank you, with my love, nia http://www.freewebs.com/butterflywingsofnia/ "Carry the beauties;wash the badnesses with your poetical spirit" | ||
| Emusing
Senior Member Username: emusing Post Number: 5562 Registered: 08-2003 |
Communication is the universal solvent.... a very wise man said. I do believe this is true. Thanks Fred! Understood! All best, e www.wordwalkerpress.com | ||
| M. Kathryn Black
Senior Member Username: kathryn Post Number: 5442 Registered: 09-2002 |
Fred, sorry if I came off sounding prejudicial towards you. I felt angry and we all know what that can do. I apologize. Always, Kathryn But little by little, as you left their voices behind, the stars began to burn... -Mary Oliver | ||
| Andrew Dufresne
Advanced Member Username: beachdreamer Post Number: 1436 Registered: 01-2006 |
Fred-- you're a vintage audio maven? Cool! ad |
