QUOTE: Originally posted by LinnAnn

I think part of the concern is that if someone posts a short story here, say in the critique section, does that mess up the 'first rights' concern. So James, does it pose a problem to post here as a work asking for critique?
love, LinnAnn


I wouldn't do it, but it really is up to an editor. Editors do not like to see stories that have been posted online simply becuase you never know how far that story will travel, or how many have seen it. Even if a critique site has few members, it takes only one bad apple to copy a story they like and post it around for their friends to read, who then post it around for their friends to read. This means an editor never knows how many of his readers have seen a story that's been in a critique forum, and no editor wants to receive a letter from a reader thats says, "Dear Blithering Idiot, what gives? I pay six bucks for your magazine, and the first story I turn to is one I read online six months ago. Please cancel my subscription."

It does happen, and when it happens it does not make for a happy editor.

Having said that, a critique forum such of this is less of a problem that a webzine, and less of a problem than having a story posted on a personal website, and editors are considerably less bothered by critique forums than with these other two venues. But most editors do prefer password protected forums where only members can see the stories.

Open forums do bother many editors. Whether or not it bothers the editor enough to make him pass on a story depends entirely on teh individual editor. From what I've learned just lately, the answer is most often no, it won't make most editors pass up a good story, but here and there you find editors who simply do not want stories that have been posted on open forums.

So I think the best idea is to use critique forums that are password protected. It shouldn;t make all that much of a differnce, but it seems to. Editors have no problems with buying a story posted in password protected sites, even when a hundred or more readers might have viewed it. But open forums do give some editors pause.

So I wouldn't do it, but at the same time, I don't think it's going to kill a story's chances at most magazines.

QUOTE: Originally posted by dbmaine56

LinnAnn,
I'm certainly not a lawyer, but according to the article in WD, yes it does mess up the 'first rights'. It was stated in the article that it didn't matter if 50 people or 10 million people see it. It has still been 'published'. It also stated that if it has been online then as long as you tell the editor then you might be able to work something out with a publication.


There are two sides to rights. There's the legal side, where you either do or don't own first rights. Then there's the editorial side where an editor can buy what he wants and refuse to buy what he doesn't want.

Editors really care about one thing only: is this a story my readers are likely to have seen before? It isn't about whether or not something has technically been "published," it's about whether or not an editor will buy the piece to print in his magazine.

If an editor loves a short story, and if he doesn't think any of his readers have seen that story, very few editors are going to reject that story because posting it in a critique could technically be called "publishing."

Critters is a widely used critiqque forum, and I know a number of selling writers who use it. Eugie Forster runs all her stories through Critters, and usually gets from twenty-five to forty detailed critiques, along with a hundred or more reads, sometime smany more reads, but her stories still sell routinely to top magazines where the editors all know she uses Critters. Seh sold two stories to Realms of Fantasy not long ago that had both gone through Critters. And, yes, I'm jealous. That's a top flight magazine, and one I'd love to break into.

Anyway, yes, if you post a story where it can be accessed by the general public, someone can, if they wish, say that that piece has been technically published. It has been. Whether seen by ten people or twn million people, it can still be technically counted as "published."

But the real world isn't this cut and dried. Editors are always looking for good stories, and they just do not receive enough realy good ones to care much about whether or not a story was posted on a critique forum. A webzine, yes. A personal website, yes. But not because the piece has been technically published, and not because First Rights have suddenly vanished. Editors don't usually want these stories for pragmatic reasons. There's simply too much chance that some of the magazine's readers will already have seen the story elsewhere.

There are always exceptions, but very few editors will refuse to buy first rights because a story was posted on a critique forum.

Another point is that stories posted on critique forums are highly likely to be rewritten drastically before an editor ever sees them, and such stories are seldom left posted for very long. Or shouldn't be. Once a story has received its share of critiques, it should always be removed.

Editors are simply after good stories that none of their readers are likely to have seen before in the form he will publish them in. You usually can't work out a deal with good magazines when the story has been published in a webzine or on a personal website, simply because that story has probably been read by too many people. But posting a story on a critique forum is not the same thing.

There are an awful bunch of stories out there in top magazines right now that have been posted on critique forums. Password protected forums are far and away teh safest bet, but regular critique forums don't steal away first rights automatically, either.

Fortunately, darned few magazines are run by lawyers. Editors still make the decision of whether or not to buy a story, and editors buy stories based on whether or not any of their readers have seen the story before, and not on the technical definition of "published."