He continues: "I tried to reason with the publisher but they nearly laughed at my face. According to them, they want to control when it's time for a new revision since it will compete with my old book. And yes, I
shouldn't have a reason to complain because they claim their contracts are one of the least restrictive in the industry.
"I am thinking of approaching the National Writer's Union. Perhaps, a legal resolution as a last resourt. Please let me know if you could recommend someone that doesn't charge a fortune. Any suggestions to get me out of my contract?"
Well, I have to say that if you signed the contract, unless it's something that the courts would see as unacceptably onerous to you professionally, it's going to be very hard to change things. On the other hand, almost all of the non-compete clauses I've seen have wiggle room because of how they define "competitive". But I'm baffled why they wouldn't want you to revise your work to be more contemporary since it's in their best interests??
For example, when I wrote Wicked Cool Shell Scripts, we retained a non-compete clause in the publishing contract, but tightened it to be very, very specific. None of this "can't write about Unix" or "can't write about shell scripts", but something more in the vein of "can't write a book that would directly, specifically and materially compete with the existing title." And, all non-compete clauses always have the second part "without us having first right of refusal" so even then you should be able to proceed, you just have to give them first crack at the new work.
Perhaps your out is if you can seek a 'memo of clarification' that would detail how the non-compete is defined, something that talked about 'directly competitive titles in the following topic, presented in the following manner'? That is, if you wrote a tutorial introduction to, say, Movie Editing, you should seek clarification whether a reference work on movie editing would be considered competitive or not (I'd hope they'd say "not", which is considerably less restrictive).
If you can, please post the exact wording of the clause out of your publishing contract and perhaps we can find a hole together?
Obligatory note: I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and you need to use anything written here at your own risk. I'm pretty good at reading contracts and negotiations - and I've done it for others more than once - but this is a considerably more informal venue and I can only offer you free advice. Good luck!
Sign up for my weekly AskDaveTaylor Newsletter and you'll receive even more tech and gadget help
right to your inbox, along with exclusive news and industry updates. It's good stuff. I promise!
My sister and I have pitched a book proposal to her publisher, as required by the "Option" in her previous contract for a book that is still in print. The offer from the publisher was very low-ball, even after two weeks of negotiation (which they did willingly, making changes in this and that, but in the end rejected all of our requests completely). We do not wish to publish this book with them as it's not worth it to us. When she told them as much in writing, they replied with the "No Competition Clause" saying they see this book as competition, and that we are not legally able to go elsewhere.
Are we just stuck here?