Mary, thanks for this post. Other than conversations with acquiring editors, where else do packagers get their ideas for pitches, in particular high concept or unique pitches (of which there are few)? Pitches themselves are too short for copyright protection, akin to slogans, really. In the IP world, generally the way to protect a fresh concept is via an NDA, but good luck getting an agent or editor to sign off on that. The case Jane discussed had more, materials, etc. that pushes it closer to copyright but generally authors with a high concept idea can only rely on the agents they disclose it to, which is another way of saying Know Thy Agent first to determine if they’re the type to take another’s idea and run with it.
Great comment, thanks Geoff! The whole point of being a packager is to learn the market, learn what agents and editors are looking for, and work these pieces into combinations that seem fresh, timely, are spins on existing tropes, or all of the above. The "where do packagers get their ideas" is the whole point of getting together and starting a packaging company. I also don't think that the concept is the only ingredient worth considering. Matching an idea with the right writer is also part of the alchemy. We used to have writers sign NDAs before reviewing materials for the purpose of creating audition samples, but now we hand-select writers for auditions and have largely done away with NDAs. We don't cling to our concepts and we work hard to generate an atmosphere of trust and collaboration. That's where the packaging conversation and the topic of this particular lawsuit diverge. I agree with you, though: In this particular Crave series case, it goes way beyond an idea and what could feasibly be copyrighted, and it involves a breach of trust (as far as I can tell, looking at it from the outside). IP, packaging, and publishing are all about relationships and the people involved, not just the ideas or the execution.
Mary, thanks for this post. Other than conversations with acquiring editors, where else do packagers get their ideas for pitches, in particular high concept or unique pitches (of which there are few)? Pitches themselves are too short for copyright protection, akin to slogans, really. In the IP world, generally the way to protect a fresh concept is via an NDA, but good luck getting an agent or editor to sign off on that. The case Jane discussed had more, materials, etc. that pushes it closer to copyright but generally authors with a high concept idea can only rely on the agents they disclose it to, which is another way of saying Know Thy Agent first to determine if they’re the type to take another’s idea and run with it.
Great comment, thanks Geoff! The whole point of being a packager is to learn the market, learn what agents and editors are looking for, and work these pieces into combinations that seem fresh, timely, are spins on existing tropes, or all of the above. The "where do packagers get their ideas" is the whole point of getting together and starting a packaging company. I also don't think that the concept is the only ingredient worth considering. Matching an idea with the right writer is also part of the alchemy. We used to have writers sign NDAs before reviewing materials for the purpose of creating audition samples, but now we hand-select writers for auditions and have largely done away with NDAs. We don't cling to our concepts and we work hard to generate an atmosphere of trust and collaboration. That's where the packaging conversation and the topic of this particular lawsuit diverge. I agree with you, though: In this particular Crave series case, it goes way beyond an idea and what could feasibly be copyrighted, and it involves a breach of trust (as far as I can tell, looking at it from the outside). IP, packaging, and publishing are all about relationships and the people involved, not just the ideas or the execution.
Thanks for broadening my horizon on publishing.