BilmBlog500

Back in 2011 I did a blog post about some controversy I didn't entirely understand regarding Harlequin's broad efforts to add in or update e-book royalties on some older contracts.  One of the things I discussed was Harlequin's ability to play around some with e-book royalties by self-dealing with various of their international subsidiaries.  And now, lo and behold, Publishers Weekly reports on a lawsuit about just that... This comes not long after Google and publishers announced a settlement of a lawsuit on pretty much the exact terms I'd suggested might be nice. My stopped clock has now been right its two times in a day, but maybe it will be right again anyway!

There was a bit of controversy in June because Harlequin was sending out letters to "increase" their e-book royalty rates, but to levels that were in some instances less than what had become the industry standard. They've now sent out a second round response to some of the complaints that had been received, which I thought I'd comment upon. The Harlequin offer is that they will pay the current industry standard of 25% of net receipts for books in their "single title" program. These are books that come out under Mira or Luna or other imprints that are under the branding of an imprint just like a Del Rey book from Random House or an Obsidian book from Penguin, but not under a broad 4-in-a-month numbered series umbrella like Harlequin Nocturne or Harlequin American. For in-series books, their offer is a scaled royalty of 15-20% of net receipts with escalations based on total digital revenue for the books. They explain this lower royalty by saying, essential...