And I should post about S&S and this contract change, and their rather pitiful claim that print on demand is a legitimate and perfectly acceptable way to keep a book in print and hence in their possession. From Publishers Lunch:
S&S Replies Further To Guild
Simon & Schuster is sending a letter to agents and authors that asserts the "Authors Guild has recently perpetrated serious misinformation" about changes in their contract language and criticizes the Guild for not "having undertaken any effort to have a dialogue." They say that "contrary to the Authors Guild assertion, using technologies like print on demand is not about 'squirreling away' rights, nor does it mean that 'no copies are available to be ordered by traditional bookstores.' Print on demand is simply a means of manufacturing a book, making it widely available to retailers and consumers."
But the publisher concedes that their standard position has changed as previously described--now believing "the current high quality andaccessibility of print on demand titles indicates to us that such minimums [levels of sales activity] are no longer necessary." They do note that "as always, we are willing to have an open and forthright dialogue on this or any other topic."
But commentary on that, perhaps, soon...