DITCHWALK

A Road Less Traveled

Topics / Books / Docs

About / Archive / Contact

Copyright © 2002-2023 Mark Barrett 

Home > Archives for Publishing

Weekend Reads

By 3 Comments

First, an apology to regular readers for the lack of posts this week. There are a number of issues I want to talk about, but none of them lend themselves to short, pithy notes, and I’ve been finding myself short of available hours. It hasn’t helped that my ISP, Verizon, has seen fit to block access to my own website for five, seven, even ten hours at a stretch. I’m now hopeful, however, that my good and programmatically apologetic friends on the other side of the world have taken my issue to heart and escalated it to a level commensurate with actual customer service.

In other news, the mad sound of hammering you hear behind the curtain is indeed a sign of progress. I have some fiction I hope to be able to put up soon, provided I can navigate all the business and technological hurdles required to do so.  [ Read more ]

Your Publishing Platform Defined

By 13 Comments

The Road More Traveled
If you’ve looked into the current self-publishing boom at all you’ve undoubtedly heard the advice that you must work on your platform to have any hope of being successful as a self-published writer. If you’re at all like me you probably seized on this mushy advice while also struggling to make sense of it. And struggling. And struggling…

At some point the thought may have occurred to you that while the advice is undoubtedly solid, it’s your ignorance of key terms* that makes it hard for you to seize this golden opportunity. What, exactly, is a platform, and how is it most effectively worked on?

Taking the bull by the horns, while also somehow following conventional wisdom, you equate your platform with your website or blog or personal appearances, and equate work on with writing and saying things for free so as to induce other human beings to care about you. (Over time, as you dedicate yourself to this apparently-but-not-really more robust definition of a platform, this exchange of labor and skill for attention may also convince you that you can profit by giving other things away, including the books or stories you naively intended to sell before you became so much wiser about self-publishing.)

At some much later point, when you’re lying by the side of the self-publishing road with an I.V. in your neck and blisters on your hands from crawling those last long miles, you may marvel that personal determination seems to have so little to do with success in publishing or self-publishing. While it’s certainly true that you can’t win if you don’t enter, it’s more likely the case that even if you enter constantly and do everything you’re supposed to do — including working on your platform, whatever that means — you still won’t win.

At which point, if you’re a good and decent sort, you will simply blame yourself for having failed. You will man-up or woman-up as appropriate and acknowledge that you never really figured out what your platform was, or how you could work on it. Being a decent sort, however, you won’t hesitate to encourage others to crack the code by working on their own platform, which will endear you to the next crop of earnest, hardworking fools determined to make a name for themselves with their writing.  [ Read more ]

Judgment

By 2 Comments

Does this remind you of anything?

The settlement agreement was reached Monday night. The lawyers sent a letter to the court at 12:23 a.m. Tuesday announcing a settlement. But in the morning, [Judge] Alsup was less than thrilled with the parties’ stipulation as part of the agreement that the court had held the trademark valid.

Growing stern, Alsup told the lawyers, “I will not let you walk out of this courthouse” with a settlement stating that “a judgment was entered” in favor of Autodesk’s mark. Stern and Jacobs scrambled out of the courtroom, and after back-and-forths between clients and lawyers alike, came back with a new agreement. The final draft said that the parties agreed that DWG is a valid trademark (pdf), but emphasized twice that the court did not rule on the issue. The terms of the settlement were confidential aside from the brief stipulation.

Alsup is “being a good guardian of the law in not wanting to be a party to something that may be used beyond an agreement or concessions between parties,” said Neil Smith, an IP lawyer with Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton who was not involved in the case. He said Alsup was wise to head off the danger of the settlement being “waved around as a finding of validity.”

What this reminded me of was the revised (and original) Google Books Settlement, where two parties — Google and the Authors Guild — are trying to reach agreement in a self-generated dispute that undermines copyright law. Not surprisingly, this settlement advantages both parties, while disadvantaging every copyright holder.

My hope, at a minimum, is that the judge overseeing the Google case will prohibit both parties from making claims about their compliance with copyright law if their settlement is approved. Ideally, however, the judge will void the settlement as being against existing law, just as a judge would void my legal agreement with you that we can break into a third person’s house and steal their furniture.

— Mark Barrett

The Sex Question

By 5 Comments

In a recent post I put forward the idea that sex used in the advertising of nonsexual products betrays products of no particular distinction. At root, however, the previous post was not about advertising. Rather, it was the tip of the iceberg in a larger conversation about the decision to use (or, by extension, not use) sex in any kind of authored content.

The question is not why sex is used in commercials or authored works. We know why it’s used. Our animal brains are hard-wired for sex, apart from any additional sociological or psychological interest we may add as we grow and develop in whatever culture we happen to live in. Sex does in fact sell — meaning attract and hold consumer interest — but that’s not what I’m interested in. Rather, I’m interested in what motivates creators to use sex and its sure-fire, brain-simple appeal in any given instance, and particularly in stories.  [ Read more ]

Ursula K. Le Guin Resigns

By 11 Comments

Rounding the bend toward the finish line in college I found myself with a few electives to burn. Although sci-fi was not and is not a passion of mine, I decided to take a science-fiction survey course because I knew there were good writers working in the genre. Over the course of the semester we read through a stack of classics — some hard science, some soft sci-fi — and I genuinely enjoyed them all.

While I don’t remember the titles of many of the books (I’m terrible with titles), we covered the names anyone would know: Philip K. Dick, Ray Bradbury, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison and Ursula K. Le Guin. I remember Ms. Le Guin particularly because her unusual, rhythmic name somehow matched her powerful prose style.  [ Read more ]

The DRM Distraction: Part II

By 14 Comments

Speaking Truth to Power
Personally, my biggest concern about piracy and DRM these days is the general lack of a direct response to end-user theft at a moral and educational level. It’s as if the idea of calling customers/users on their thieving ways produces a bigger fear of lost sales in management than does the risk of backlash inherent in any DRM solution. Maybe it’s the direct confrontation that makes people uncomfortable. Or maybe it’s the threat that potential customers will feel management is treating them like criminals.

As a writer I don’t really care what the hold-up is. I just know the one thing everyone is running from is a direct confrontation with end users about their thievery. Only a few years ago Napster tried to make a legal case for peer-to-peer file sharing, the end result of which was that it was laughed at and obliterated by the courts. That Napster, a for-profit corporation, was trafficking in copyrighted material, was blindingly obvious to everyone, yet somehow Napster became an anti-establishment darling. How you become the victim when you’re using America’s youth to legitimize copyright theft for your own corporate profits is beyond me, but they pulled it off.

I don’t think it’s a surprise that many of Napster’s most passionate users were college students who felt they were on the cutting edge of a huge counter-culture movement, even though what they were really doing was stealing other people’s stuff. As long as there is intelligent life there will always be a tide of young minds chafing at restrictions, rules and laws. It’s also probably not a surprise that there will always be people looking to co-opt and engineer youthful exuberance for their own ends, as Napster did.

Just as ardent advocates of DRM are determined to distract you and bully you by constantly beating their self-serving drum (see Part I), so too are anti-DRM voices committed to promoting the DRM issue for their own ends. In the publishing industry the leading anti-DRM voice is Cory Doctorow, although to be sure Mr. Doctorow is not alone in has advocacy of free content or in his hostility toward DRM.  [ Read more ]

The DRM Distraction: Part I

By 3 Comments

Reality Refresh
Having looked closely at the publishing industry for the past few months, and having worked in both the software industry and the film industry at various times over the past two decades, I’ve come to a few conclusions about digital rights management (DRM). The most important is that there is no clear-cut solution to the question of piracy, and anybody who tells you they’ve got it all figured out is working their own angle. And that includes Cory Doctorow and me.

Like the subject of abortion in the political arena, DRM is injected into every conversation about content ownership and distribution whether it’s directly relevant or not. If you don’t say the right things to the right people about DRM you risk associations and opportunities that might be of value, not because you’re wrong on the merits, but because you’re giving aid and comfort to the enemy by implying that they are not pure evil. At the same time, those people who don’t buy into a black-and-white view of DRM will think you an idiot for not using the impassioned nuts on both sides to your own advantage.

The correct answer to questions about DRM in the current context is not to be suckered into a debate about technological solutions or the prosecution of college students, but to educate and evangelize about the problems that drive the implementation of DRM technology in the first place. Although most end users who pirate content do so as individuals, the collective effect of these individual decisions hurts copyright holders and content creators in very real ways. Yes, some piracy may be sticking it to The Man, but it’s also killing artists that people apparently want to read, listen to and watch.  [ Read more ]

Site Seeing: Richard Curtis | E-Reads.com

By Leave a Comment

What is there to say about Richard Curtis that hasn’t already been said? If you’re interested in books, publishing, agents, writers, ethics, and the money that holds them all in a gravitational embrace, you have to read Curtis’ posts at E-Reads.com.

You have to. (You don’t always have to agree.)

I first learned of Curtis decades ago when I was trying to get a fix on the book business, to see if I wanted to move toward writing novels. Curtis’ books on the publishing industry — including How To Be Your Own Literary Agent and Beyond The Bestseller — demystified a world that many power brokers would still prefer clouded in cigar smoke.

(There is a revised 3rd edition of How To Be from 2003; Beyond doesn’t seem to have been updated, but I suspect much of the content is still relevant despite the pace of change in the industry.)

— Mark Barrett

Living in the Moment

By 8 Comments

Thinking about my reluctance to recommend an e-reader to anyone, I realized over the weekend that it’s not simply a belief I have that e-reader technology isn’t ready. That’s part of it, but there’s another issue for me — a more global concern that I tend to mute because I don’t think there’s anything I can do about it.

Twenty or thirty years ago, products were rated in two basic ways. How well they did the job they were designed to do, and how reliable or long-lasting they were. Between then and now, however, the question of reliability has changed. It no longer refers to a product’s ability to perform over time, but rather to a product’s ability to perform at all.

I have no proof of this, but I believe the change took place as the products in our lives became predominantly electronic, as opposed to mechanical. Where physical mechanisms used to power most of our devices, those devices are now controlled by circuitry that is inherently more complex, if not unfathomable.  [ Read more ]

Changing the Rules

By 5 Comments

Bear with me — this comes back to publishing…

There was a rule change just prior to the start of the National Basketball Association season, and I think the NBA’s decision sheds some light on the options the publishing industry has for increasing interest in books.

The new rule reads, in part: “A player who receives the ball while he is progressing or upon completion of a dribble, may take two steps in coming to a stop, passing or shooting the ball.”

It is believed to be the first time any league, at any level anywhere in the world, has explicitly allowed two steps.

As the article notes, the rule has always been one step, and that’s been true at every level of basketball. However, as the article also notes, the NBA has been allowing two steps for years, so this rule change only reflects reality. Or at least reality as defined by an unenforced one-step rule, which may be a great deal different than an enforced two-step rule. (Predictable NBA double-speak denial here. Phil Jackson on the obviousness of the sham here.)

Why did the NBA allow two steps against their own rules, and why have they now written this admission into the rulebook?

Enforcement of the one-step rule has been hit-or-miss at every level of basketball. Archival footage shows NBA greats, from Magic Johnson and Pete Maravich to Bob Cousy and Julius Erving, getting away with two steps. Borgia, whose father was also an NBA official, said he cannot remember a time when NBA referees did not allow two steps.

Others insist allowing two steps represents an NBA strategy to aid scorers and make the league more exciting. Legendary point guard and current Knick broadcaster Walt “Clyde” Frazier says the league relaxed traveling standards some time ago to increase scoring.

Enforcement may be hit-or-miss at every level of play, but that’s partly because the traveling call is inherently hit-or-miss. Unlike, say, a missed basket, which is obvious to everyone, a traveling call requires assessing multiple moments which play out in various ways. Did the player pick up his dribble early, but still only take one step (or, now, two)? Precisely because referees have to wait until a player completes a series of moves to know it’s an infraction, it’s not clear a player is traveling until fully after the fact. Even a foul — which is also a tough judgment call in many cases — has only one inciting incident. Traveling is now a multi-step judgment call, which, at the professional level, plays out at blinding speed in a forest of giants.

Enforcement is also not proportionately hit-or-miss when comparing the NBA with major college basketball. You can watch whole NBA games and never see a traveling call, while college games regularly feature such calls. (More proof that the NBA has been lax about the one-step rule for some time.) As to whether the rule has been relaxed in order to increase scoring and excitement (you get better power dunks off a two-step stampede to the rim) I don’t think there’s any question that that’s the case. And I don’t think the NBA is alone in this regard.  [ Read more ]