Go Ahead, Steal Me
Author Jonathan Lethem sold movie rights to two of his books which never got made. Disappointed, he started the Promiscuous Materials Project where he publishes short stories online and invites filmmakers and playwrights to adapt them. He asks for only a $1 fee and that he get credit as author of the source material. It’s gotten results too; Filmmakers are now at work on adaptations of his stories. Smart move by Lethem to realize letting go of his copyrights is smarter than protecting them at all costs. If a movie or play based on his material takes off, so will his book sales.
Mike
on 15 Apr 09Yes, but if someone makes a blockbuster from one of his stories, he will have made 1$ + the increased sales of his books instead of the increased sales + millions from the box office.
I’m not saying you should always sell movie rights, but sometimes it may be the right move, financially.
David Andersen
on 15 Apr 09Smart move by Lethem to realize letting go of his copyrights is smarter than protecting them at all costs.
That’s not really the dichotomy, is it? There are other options between these extremes. Maybe 37s should give away its book, job advertising, blog advertising because it will result in more software sales. Or not.
David Andersen
on 15 Apr 09And, maybe his books don’t lend themselves well to a movie, or maybe the timing for the story in his books is bad, or the timing in general is bad. Or maybe he should have optioned the rights instead of selling them outright. Real life is surprisingly more complicated than a one-liner.
David Andersen
on 15 Apr 09And a buck huh? What might that say about the quality of his stories? Maybe nothing, maybe something. What not $100 or $1000? What filmmakers are picking them up? Having obscure filmmakers who can’t afford the rights to anything worth more than $1 might speak to their ability to make a good film (it might not too) and the author might be just as obscure as before. Maybe the author simply doesn’t have an agent skilled enough to shop his ideas to the right people in the film industry too.
Dmitry
on 15 Apr 09David: 37signals do give away their book though—you can read Getting Real for free online. They also give a lot through this blog and don’t forget that little framework called Ruby on Rails. It does drive sales.
David Andersen
on 15 Apr 09@Dmitry – I’m aware of all that. The point of my comment is that, just like at 37s, life isn’t as simple as “letting go of his copyrights is smarter than protecting them at all costs.” 37s does choose to make money from activities that they could give away. But they (smartly in my opinion) don’t. Very little is so black and white.
Jackson
on 15 Apr 09David— Matt said it was a smart move for Lethem. Not that everyone should drop all their copyrights.
andy
on 15 Apr 09What a great way to get some interest in your work. Give ‘em the first taste for free, that’ll always keep them coming back.
If movie makers develop a taste for his stories, his price can increase based on the fact that he’s a known good commodity. If movie makers hate his stories for free, they’ll never be willing to pay for them. Better to find out sooner rather than later.
David Andersen
on 15 Apr 09@ Jackson. I know. I think it’s an oversimplification. Also, do you really think Matt posted that to talk only about Lethem, or do you think he might be trying to make a broader point?
Josh Catone
on 15 Apr 09@David Andersen:
What might that say about the quality of his stories?
Just to chime in with my opinion, Lethem is one of the best Amrican writers working today. His book “Motherless Brooklyn,” won the 1999 National Book Critics Circle Award for fiction and was optioned by Edward Norton—who according to IMDB is still working on the screenplay. Lethem also won a MacArthur Fellowship in 2005.
Certainly awards do not make him a better writer, but as a fan, I’d encourage anyone to check out his work.
Anyway, the Promiscuous Materials Project doesn’t include the rights to Lethem’s longer form work. His novels are still options for screen rights via the traditional manner, afaik. The project referred to in that Forbes’ article includes mostly very short work (and some that seem like incomplete scraps) that Lethem has written over the years.
Also, Matt linked to the far less interesting article. He should have written to the Harper’s piece Lethem wrote that is mentioned in the opening paragraph of the Forbes’ article. The ecstasy of influence: A plagiarism, is one of the most brilliant and inventive things I’ve ever read. I forced everyone in my family to read it a couple of years ago, and I’d recommend you do as well.
http://harpers.org/archive/2007/02/0081387
Josh Catone
on 15 Apr 09“He should have written to” should be “He should have linked to”
Ugh, I really need to remember to proofread comments before submitting.
@David
on 15 Apr 09Are you the same David who was begging for the troll hat a few posts ago?... on the 37Signals University post i believe. Just wondering.
August
on 15 Apr 09When authors sell the rights to their work to be made into films or plays or whatever, they get paid either way, and usually quite a bit (unless they’re stupid enough to sign a contract that gives them a percentage of the profits-Hollywood studios are notorious for using creative accounting methods to declare a loss on films to avoid paying out in such cases-Disney did that to the author of the Cheetah Girls books; they made a mint off adaptations, and fudged the numbers so they didn’t have to pay her the 4% net she was promised).
Most work that’s optioned for film adaptation never actually gets adapted, but again, the authors still get paid. And when the option expires, they can sell the right again. If it’s a matter of money, the way royalties work (15% of sales after the advance is earned back—with only 15% of sales going towards paying off the advance), Lethem is almost guaranteed to make more selling the rights to movies that never get made than he is to getting a boost in book sales from rights he sold for $1.
This is only “smart” if his goal is to see his work translated into film, not if it’s to make money from it. I’m with William Gibson, though, in believing that a film adaptation of a novel is not the ultimate desirable form for the novel to take. The novel itself is.
ML
on 15 Apr 09Just to clarify, I don’t think everyone should rush out to drop all their copyrights. Just saying that maybe there are times when people should be less protective of them than they were in the past. I think Lethem provides a good example of how letting go can yield bigger or different benefits down the road.
David Andersen
on 15 Apr 09@ Guy Who Can’t Type His Own Name In The Box:
No.
David Andersen
on 15 Apr 09@ML – Your comment is a far more reasonable and measured assessment than the primary post. Honestly, too many 37s postings are sensational and superficial, which is a shame because you generally post very interesting stuff.
Joseph Sims
on 15 Apr 09Wow… how silly. In some instances, and those instances are growing rapidly as information becomes easier and easier to obtain, it’s far better to let go of the old business model and embrace the new. I think this is what is being done.
He is obviously not a bad author that has to sell stories for a $1… the dollar amount is arbitrary. He has simply realized that the benefit of having movies adapted of his stories is worth more than the money paid for rights to the stories. So instead of placing more obstacles in the way of filmmakers, he removes them, and opens more doors. Maybe some doors will lead to bad films… maybe they all will, but there’s a chance something amazing comes out of it, and isn’t that what creatives are looking for more than money anyway? Especially when money comes when amazing things happens?
Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails gave away albums that the old business model would’ve placed behind price tags, knowing that they could make their money through special edition physical copies, concerts and merch. And NIN even gives away the working files of the songs to be dissected and repurposed. Seth Godin gave pdf versions of his books away, and made money from physical booksales from people who like to own tangibles, idea spread, and recognition. He wasn’t worried as much about the instant as the long term… and now he can do whatever he wants.
In the age we live in creatives will have to embrace the benefits of idea spread.
@David
on 15 Apr 09Awww… i thought an @@David respose would have been clever on your part.
Happy
on 15 Apr 09@Mike: Yes, but if someone makes a blockbuster from one of his stories, he will have made 1$ + the increased sales of his books instead of the increased sales + millions from the box office.
The blockbuster short film (the project is limited to 30 minute films or less) that makes millions from the box office is very rare, maybe even non-existent. There’s not much risk that he’s going to end up missing out on multi-millions in box office receipts.
jhoysi
on 15 Apr 09@Joseph Sims – but Radiohead and NIN were successful first, and knew the market would dictate their worth. This guy’s market has already dictated his worth: $1.
Screams of desperation to me.
Mike Riley
on 15 Apr 09I’m sure many of us have plenty of ideas that we don’t have the time or resources to implement, this is a pretty productive outlet for those ideas. I can’t say that I’d be as successful in disseminating my own content, but I know I’ve come up with concepts for books or movies that I wish I had some way of sharing with the world.
August
on 15 Apr 09jhoysi: You’re kidding, right? Jonathan Lethem is hugely successful already, for a literary author. Literary books pretty much never sell as well as Stephen King or Tom Clancy or whomever (but really, nobody sells as well as those guys). But as far as literary sales go, Jonathan Lethem is already pretty close to the top of the food chain. He’s also won at least one prestigious literary award (and several slightly less prestigious awards and recognitions). He’s officially a ‘big deal’ in the literary world already.
Alejandro Moreno
on 15 Apr 09Nothing is permanent.
This seems like a smart, and may I venture, original move by Lethem. And he seems happy with it. That’s cool.
And when he’s not happy with it anymore, he’ll change it.
The lesson is not “get rid of copyrights”. It’s “adapt to what makes you happier, and keep adapting“
Berserk
on 15 Apr 09@Josh Catone,
That really is a great piece of writing by Lethem. I haven’t quite finished it yet though, since he suffers a bit from I-didn’t-have-time-to-write-a-short-letter-so-I-wrote-a-long-one-instead-syndrome (but that’s alright).
In case anyone missed the link, it’s over here.
hendrik
on 16 Apr 09Reminds me of Stephen Kings’ Dollar Babys:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_Baby
This discussion is closed.