Previous Entry Share Next Entry
A beige subject line
Will Entrekin on professionalism issues related to editor/writer correspondence.

Wil Shetterly links to the article and offers his views.

A discussion follows.

Nicked from slapfights, your online source of energetic discourse.

I am a little baffled by "If an editor rejects you, the only proper response is to send that editor another submission." That's a response but what if it's clear that that the set of things you will ever write does not overlap with the set of things the editor will ever buy? What are you accomplishing by sending them more work? It just ties the material up for the duration of a rejection cycle.

Digression: How does ownership of the words in letters work again? IIRC the physical document belongs to the person who receives it but who owns the actual words? I know how it works in the UK because of the Diana letters but not how it works in Canada or the US.

[Added later: and how does this apply to email, where there's not really anything physical involved, aside from the medium on which the email is stored?]

  • 1
I was actually thinking about this last week: if someone sends me a long email, could it be fair use to include a sentence or two in a public discussion of my interactions with that person, or a discussion of some aspect of email generally. (E.g., as an illustration of different styles/levels of formality, or of whether people would put things in email that they wouldn't say in person or on paper.)

I realize that even if it could be, the length of the letter would be one of the relevant factors.

[To state the obvious, you are under no obligation to give a professional opinion here.]

Oh, as you know Redbird-Bob, I was only talking about who holds copyright, not whether subsequent use of copyrighted work would be permissible.

I hadn't bothered to follow the links and have no opinion on the broader context here.

  • 1

Log in