You know those cartoons where two or three enemies fight so hard they become a rolling ball of punches and kicks? And that they don’t notice at first that they have rolled off a cliff, but are suspended in the air for a second before falling? Nowadays, the Norwegian book industry feels like one of those cartoons. Contracts and money are negotiated between authors and publishers, or more specifically between the authors’ and publishers’ organisations. The only problem is that everything is ice front and misery. Everyone is so furious with each other that they are in the process of sabotaging the system which is one of the pillars of Bok-Norge, namely the one, the indisputable, Normal contract. How could that happen? When you buy a book, the money you pay for the book is distributed among those who have worked to create, publish and sell it: author, publisher and bookshop. Some authors, for example Jo Nesbø and Maja Lunde, write books that are sold on large pallets and are under thousands of Christmas trees. Someone else, like an experimental poet or an unknown debutant, can count on selling a few hundred copies of their work. SOLIDARITY: Best sellers like Jo Nesbø could negotiate better terms for their books, but are bound by the solidarity in the Norwegian book industry. Photo: Heiko Junge/NTB. Photo: Heiko Junge / NTB But due to the standard contract, and the code of honor that has existed in the industry, all authors receive an equal share of the income that comes from the books they have written. Both the experimental poet and Maja Lunde get fifteen percent of the so-called booklet price, that is, 85 percent of the retail price, for the first five thousand copies that are sold, and twenty percent if the book becomes a bigger success than that. Authors who could easily negotiate better terms, because they bring a lot of money into the publisher’s coffers, do not do this, and the publishers do not offer it either. In other words, the standard contract is completely basic. It is also old-fashioned, and based on the fact that books are paper products and little else. In spring, it was ready for the parties to negotiate a new normal contract: the Publishers’ Association on behalf of the publishers, the Norwegian Authors’ Association and the relatively newly started Authors’ Association on behalf of the authors. QUALITY AND SOLIDARITY: The Norwegian Writers’ Association, here led by Heidi Kriznik, sees itself as an artists’ organization whose task is to promote artistic quality. Photo: Cornelius Poppe / NTB Photo: Cornelius Poppe / NTB The relationship between the two writers’ associations has not always been a loving embrace, to put it mildly. The authors’ association sees itself as an artists’ organization which has as one of its aims to maintain respect for artistic quality. They have criteria for membership: To join, you must have published at least two books, and these books must be read and rated as good enough by a literary council. If they were open to anyone who wrote, it is not certain that they would be able to stick to the same agenda. But a consequence of this was that a number of people who earned money from writing books were not allowed to become members of the Authors’ Association. Many were bitter at being rejected, others just frustrated because they wanted a union and had nowhere to go. Then, in 2018, some of these writers formed what became known as the Writers’ Union, a trade union open to anyone who makes an income from writing fiction. They are affiliated with LO. FOR EVERYONE: The relatively newly started Authors’ Association is led by Eystein Hanssen, and is affiliated with LO. Photo: Vidar Ruud/NTB. Photo: Vidar Ruud / NTB In most matters, the two writers’ associations had similar interests, and they have lived side by side, often in a kind of tense alliance, for several years. Until 2022. That’s when there were quarrels in Bok-Norge, because a number of authors believed that they had received too little royalties from their publishers. The reason was that the publishers must have chosen an interpretation of the Standard Contract that was particularly advantageous for themselves, and gave the authors too small a share of the income from books where the rest of the edition had gone on sale – so-called “realisation”. The authors were furious, and one publisher after another agreed that they had been wrong. Large sums were paid in arrears. But when it came time to negotiate the Normal Contract, the Authors’ Association insisted on the question of realisation, of how much money should actually accrue to the author of books on sale, had to be clarified once and for all before they could negotiate on any of the other points. It had to do with the fact that several of the authors they represented were still in conflict with their publishers. The Publishers’ Association did not want that, and the negotiations went into a deadlock. This irritated the Authors’ Association, which believed it was more important to resolve other problems in the outdated Normal Contract. Thus, they entered into negotiations with the employers’ side – without the Authors’ Association. And this is where it hardens. The Authors’ Association claims that the Publishers’ Association assured them that they would negotiate with the two authors’ associations together, before they walked away from this in secret. They feel lied to, and will not accept the outcome of any negotiation where they are not involved from the beginning. In other words, they want to put an end to the preliminary results from the negotiations between the Publishers’ Association and the Authors’ Association, and go back to the beginning. They believe that the Publishers’ Association is engaged in union-busting by pitting the two associations against each other, and criticizes LO for contributing to the same, by helping the Authors’ Association. On the inside, there are also murmurs that there is too close a friendship and acquaintance between individuals in the Authors’ Association and the Publishers’ Association, and that key decisions in practice will be taken at the chamber. FIGHT OVER THE REVENUE: How the revenue from the sale of a book should be distributed between booksellers, publishers and authors is one of the things that is fought over in the book industry. Photo: Lise Åserud/Scanpix. Photo: Lise Åserud / NTB The Authors’ Association, for its part, bristles at the demand that their negotiations with the Publishers’ Association should mean nothing, and sees it as an attack on their right to negotiate. They deny that the negotiations have been secret. They also want the unions to negotiate together, but based on the work that has already been done between them and the employer side. On the inside, they will say that the Authors’ Association is desperate because they are late to the game, and that their insistence on resolving the conflict about realization first has cost them dearly – and undermined the trust they need among their own members. They are convinced that, with LO’s lawyers at the forefront, they will be able to reach a better agreement than what the Authors’ Association wanted. For its part, the Authors’ Association is convinced that the Publishers’ Association has chosen to negotiate with the Authors’ Association because they see them as the weaker of the two associations, and the easiest to manipulate. QUIET IN THE BOAT: The publishers, here at Aschehoug and Gyldendal at Sehesteds Plass in Oslo, initially did not want to debate the conflict. Photo: Jon Olav Nesvold/NTB Forleggerforeningen, for its part, would probably say that they have experienced the Authors’ Association as more pragmatic and easier to work with. But it probably suits them well that the party on one side of the table is in conflict. For a long time they refused to debate the issue. When managing director Heidi Austlid eventually came on the scene, she said that the publishers are also warm supporters of the Normal contract. They are nevertheless met with great hostility from the Authors’ Association, which both feels cheated and wants to say that the employer side speaks with two tongues. For the publishers have also submitted a 55-page consultation response to the draft of the new Book Act, where it may seem as if they are looking to marginalize the authors on every other page. On behalf of the publishers, law professor Ole-Andreas Rognstad argues that it may be contrary to EU legislation to require a publisher to use the standard contract. The Publishers’ Association also asks that what they call the “commercial players” be treated equally in the law. In practice, this means that the author does not get any special position in relation to the work they themselves create, but is placed in the same bag as all the others who have an interest in selling the book, such as publishers and bookshops. Strictly speaking, it is not so strange if the Authors’ Association feels that the organization that sends this is not necessarily that concerned with the rights of creative people. This is also why many of them suspect that an agreement between the Publishers’ Association and the Authors’ Association could mean an end to the flat royalty in the standard contract, and be replaced by a minimum royalty. This means that the big fish among the writers, such as the skate Nesbø and the shark Lunde, can negotiate for a greater remuneration, while the small herring – the poet, the debutante – must settle for worse terms than today. Goodbye, solidarity. None of the other parties say they are considering a minimum royalty. But trust is at rock bottom, and everyone is firmly entrenched in their own corner. No amicable solution is in sight. The Writers’ Association asks the Writers’ Union to join their race, and the Writers’ Union shouts no. The Authors’ Association asks the Authors’ Association to join them, and the Authors’ Association just snorts. Thus, the end of visas can become two normal contracts, which in itself is a breach of the old principle that it is an agreement for everyone – i.e. what all parties say they want. But there is always a danger for those who choose to fight on the edge of a cliff, that everyone will fall off in the end.
ttn-69
Everyone hates each other in the Norwegian book industry. It can have serious consequences. – Speech
