#HarperCollins strike

[willowheartswarriors]

Congrats to the HarperCollins union on ratifying their new contract!

Source on Twitter

[forewordreviewsmag]

We've got an update on the HarperCollins strike!

"More than 200 workers at one of the largest publishing companies in the country have been on strike for months now. Striking workers at HarperCollins Publishing held a rally last week at the steps of News Corp, the publisher's parent company, and plan to stay out longer. NPR's Andrew Limbong reports."

Read this article from NPR to learn more!

Striking Harper Collins employees on the picket line [Photo: @EmmaKupor]

[lilithsaintcrow]

“Because HarperCollins is the only union shop among the Big Five, the stakes here are high. It is pushed by necessity to set the labor standards for the rest of the industry: when it raises its wages, Penguin Random House raises its wages too. The hope among supporters both in and out of the union was that the new agreement would spark similar structural changes at the other Big Five houses, and maybe even inspire other houses to unionize.”

There’s going to be a backlash, of course—the rest of the Big Five will do what they can to punish the union shop. I don’t see any real change occurring until Amazon is dealt with and there’s a resurgence of mid-size and large publishers; the former probably won’t happen for nearly a decade and the latter will require the industry tanking first.

By “Amazon being dealt with” I mean the monopsony aspects; I don’t think the government subsidizing of Amazon and other megabillion corporations will be halted until there’s another Great Depression and concomitant social unrest.

We’re in the fucking Gilded Age, we know how that played out, and those in power are willfully ignoring any lessons learned in favor of keeping their grasp on said power.

In other words, I’m not an optimist, even though the end to the HC strike is very good news. I wish it was enough.

[soleadita]

i’d say someone should force the harpercollins execs to watch newsies but they’d probably miss the fucking point

[unaffordableamericanlandwhy]

Human’s Striking 4 A Decent Living!

Why hasn’t anyone protest against some of these greedy landlords? These greedy landlords are the cause of so many people not being able to afford to even be able to live payday to payday. I call this price gouging!!!

Who are these landlords? Who is really buying our American real estate? And why? Every time a group goes on strike, a big percentage of the reason is because those in the group cannot afford rent.

Whoever is buying our American real estate is bringing down American businesses. Employers are being blamed for their employees not being able to afford rent, when it is really the greedy landlords that are the fault for many of our homelessness.

We are losing our American way of life. From small business, to affordable housing, even some of our corporations can’t afford rent.

For many, the answer is to build new affordable housing that will likely not be affordable. There seems aplenty of places that are now for lease and rent that sit empty due to the monthly rent rate. So why built more to just sit empty? Make laws against rent greed...which I call price gouging!!!

[beezlebutch]

I want to talk about a book I just read but I can't because it's published by Harper Collins. Harper Collins treat your fucking workers right!

[libraryleopard]

January reads

Rebecca by Daphne de Maurier

These Fleeting Shadows by Kate Alice Marshall

The Wolf and the Woodsman by Ava Reid

Yerba Buena by Nina Lacour

Fine: A Comic About Gender by Rhea Ewing

Exit Plans for Teenage Freaks by Nathan Burgoine

Juniper and Thorn by Ava Reid

The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson

The Dreaming: Waking Hours by G. Willow Wilson, Nick Robles, Javier Rodriguez, M.K. Perker, and Matheus Lopes

Act Your Age, Eve Brown by Talia Hibbert

Slip by Marika McCoola and Aatmaja Panda

The View Was Exhausting by Mikaella Clements and Onjuli Datta

The Hacienda by Isabel Cañas

The Demon in the Wood by Leigh Bardugo and Dani Pendergast

The Confessions of Frannie Langon by Sara Collins

Sleeping With the Dictionary by Harryette Mullen

Even Though I Knew the End by C.L. Polk

This Will Be Funny Someday by Katie Henry

The Animals at Lockwood Manor by Jane Healey

His Hideous Heart edited by Dahlia Adler

Kindred by Octabia Butler

[emeryleewho]

I keep seeing posts talking about the WGA/Sag-Aftra strike, which yes, good, but in all this "support writers" sentiment I'm seeing no one talk about book writers, which I think is something people should know more about right now.

We are at an all-time high for book bans, namely targeting queer & PoC-authored books. This means that a lot of schools and libraries are no longer stocking diverse YA books, and if you're not in publishing, you may not realize this but school & libraries are by far one of the biggest markets for diverse YA books.

This means that in 2023, YA book sales are down. This is also in part because Barnes & Noble (the largest physical book retailer in the U.S.) is no longer really stocking YA hardcovers. This means that marginalized authors and debut authors are struggling to sell books.

But it's a LOT worse than that. In the past couple of years, marginalized authors are *really* struggling to get new book deals. Most books are acquired by a publisher about 2 years before they release to the public, so this isn't all that noticeable yet, but a LOT of marginalized authors I've spoken to (myself included) have been unable to sell a new YA book since 2020. So while I had a book out last year, even if I sell one right now, you won't see it until 2025-2026. That's three to four years without a new release or the income I get from publishing those books.

On top of that, Big 5 publishers have started closing imprints (namely their diverse imprints) and have started telling their marginalized YA authors to just go. I've had multiple authors tell me their publisher basically said, "eh, we don't care to put in the work for you anymore. You can just go somewhere else". Of the authors who *are* getting offered new contracts, we're being offered pay far below the cost of living and we're being handed contracts that split our payments 4 or 5 ways and require we sign over our work to be used to train AI so they can replace us a few years down the road.

Authors are freelancers who own our IPs, which means we can't unionize the way Hollywood writers can, and despite authors showing up in droves to support HarperCollins employees when they went on strike for fair wages, we're being hung out to dry when it comes to our own rights.

If you enjoy diverse books, especially diverse YA, please understand that many of the authors you loved over the past 3-5 years are being forced out of the industry. We're being exploited, and we have no way to defend ourselves. Our books sales are drying up thanks to anti-queer legislation, our rights are being eaten up by AI, and our publishers are degrading us while profiting of us and refusing to share those profits with us.

Within the publishing industry, we've all been watching this decline happen over the last decade, but outside of it, I know most people have no idea what's going on so please spread the word. And if you care about diverse books especially in YA, please support marginalized authors in any way you can. The industry needs to be reminded that it needs us before we're all eliminated from it.

[lilithsaintcrow]

“We’re on Day 58 of the strike, with no idea of how much longer this will stretch on. I admit it: I’m terrified and exhausted. I also have never believed in our mission more.”

[archaalen]

AP News: HarperCollins union approves contract, ends 3-month strike

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Harpercollins wants authors to sign away AI training rights

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/11/18/rights-without-power/#careful-what-you-wish-for

Rights don't give you power. People with power can claim rights. Giving a "right" to someone powerless just transfers it to someone more powerful than them. Nowhere is this more visible than in copyright fights, where creative workers are given new rights that are immediately hoovered up by their bosses.

It's not clear whether copyright gives anyone the right to control whether their work is used to train an AI model. It's very common for people (including high ranking officials in entertainment companies, and practicing lawyers who don't practice IP law) to overestimate their understanding of copyright in general, and their knowledge of fair use in particular.

Here's a hint: any time someone says "X can never be fair use," they are wrong and don't know what they're talking about (same goes for "X is always fair use"). Likewise, anyone who says, "Fair use is assessed solely by considering the 'four factors.'" That is your iron-clad sign that the speaker does not understand fair use:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/27/nuke-first/#ask-questions-never

But let's say for the sake of argument that training a model on someone's work is a copyright violation, and so training is a licensable activity, and AI companies must get permission from rightsholders before they use their copyrighted works to train a model.

Even if that's not how copyright works today, it's how things could work. No one came down off a mountain with two stone tablets bearing the text of 17 USC chiseled in very, very tiny writing. We totally overhauled copyright in 1976, and again in 1998. There've been several smaller alterations since.

We could easily write a new law that requires licensing for AI training, and it's not hard to imagine that happening, given the current confluence of interests among creative workers (who are worried about AI pitchmen's proclaimed intention to destroy their livelihoods) and entertainment companies (who are suing many AI companies).

Creative workers are an essential element of that coalition. Without those workers as moral standard-bearers, it's hard to imagine the cause getting much traction. No one seriously believes that entertainment execs like Warner CEO David Zaslav actually cares about creative works – this is a guy who happily deletes every copy of an unreleased major film that had superb early notices because it would be worth infinitesimally more as a tax-break than as a work of art:

https://collider.com/coyote-vs-acme-david-zaslav-never-seen/

The activists in this coalition commonly call it "anti AI." But is it? Does David Zaslav – or any of the entertainment execs who are suing AI companies – want to prevent gen AI models from being used in the production of their products? No way – these guys love AI. Zaslav and his fellow movie execs held out against screenwriters demanding control over AI in the writers' room for 148 days, and locked out their actors for another 118 days over the use of AI to replace actors. Studio execs forfeited at least $5 billion in a bid to insist on their right to use AI against workers:

https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/mje/2023/12/06/a-deep-dive-into-the-economic-ripples-of-the-hollywood-strike/

Entertainment businesses love the idea of replacing their workers with AI. Now, that doesn't mean that AI can replace workers: just because your boss can be sold an AI to do your job, it doesn't mean that the AI he buys can actually do your job:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/07/25/accountability-sinks/#work-harder-not-smarter

So if we get the right to refuse to allow our work to be used to train a model, the "anti AI" coalition will fracture. Workers will (broadly) want to exercise that right to prevent AI models from being trained at all, while our bosses will want to exercise that right to be sure that they're paid for AI training, and that they can steer production of the resulting model to maximize the number of workers than can fire after it's done.

Hypothetically, creative workers could simply say to our bosses, "We will not sell you this right to authorize or refuse AI training that Congress just gave us." But our bosses will then say, "Fine, you're fired. We won't hire you for this movie, or record your album, or publish your book."

Given that there are only five major publishers, four major studios, three major labels, two ad-tech companies and one company that controls the whole ebook and audiobook market, a refusal to deal on the part of a small handful of firms effectively dooms you to obscurity.

As Rebecca Giblin and I write in our 2022 book Chokepoint Capitalism, giving more rights to a creative worker who has no bargaining power is like giving your bullied schoolkid more lunch money. No matter how much lunch money you give that kid, the bullies will take it and your kid will remain hungry. To get your kid lunch, you have to clear the bullies away from the gate. You need to make a structural change:

https://chokepointcapitalism.com/

Or, put another way: people with power can claim rights. But giving powerless people more rights doesn't make them powerful – it just transfers those rights to the people they bargain against.

Or, put a third way: "just because you're on their side, it doesn't follow that they're on your side" (h/t Teresa Nielsen Hayden):

https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/19/gander-sauce/#just-because-youre-on-their-side-it-doesnt-mean-theyre-on-your-side

Last month, Penguin Random House, the largest publisher in the history of human civilization, started including a copyright notice in its books advising all comers that they would not permit AI training with the material between the covers:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/19/gander-sauce/#just-because-youre-on-their-side-it-doesnt-mean-theyre-on-your-side

At the time, people who don't like AI were very excited about this, even though it was – at the utmost – a purely theatrical gesture. After all, if AI training isn't fair use, then you don't need a notice to turn it into a copyright infringement. If AI training is fair use, it remains fair use even if you add some text to the copyright notice.

But far more important was the fact that the less that Penguin Random House pays its authors, the more it can pay its shareholders and executives. PRH didn't say it wouldn't sell the right to train a model to an AI company – they only said that an AI company that wanted to train a model on its books would have to pay PRH first. In other words, just because you're on their side, it doesn't follow that they're on your side.

When I wrote about PRH and its AI warning, I mentioned that I had personally seen one of the big five publishers hold up a book because a creator demanded a clause in their contract saying their work wouldn't be used to train an AI.

There's a good reason you'd want this in your contract; the standard contracting language contains bizarrely overreaching language seeking "rights in all media now know and yet to be devised throughout the universe":

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/19/reasonable-agreement/

But the publisher flat-out refused, and the creator fought and fought, and in the end, it became clear that this was a take-it-or-leave-it situation: the publisher would not include a "no AI training" clause in the contract.

One of the big five publishers is Rupert Murdoch's Harpercollins. Murdoch is famously of the opinion that any kind of indexing or archiving of the work he publishes must require a license. He even demanded to be paid to have his newspapers indexed by search engines:

https://www.inquisitr.com/46786/epic-win-news-corp-likely-to-remove-content-from-google

No surprise, then, that Murdoch sued an AI company over training on Newscorp content:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/oct/25/unjust-threat-murdoch-and-artists-align-in-fight-over-ai-content-scraping

But Rupert Murdoch doesn't oppose the material he publishes from being used in AI training, nor is he opposed to the creation and use of models. Murdoch's Harpercollins is now pressuring its authors to sign away their rights to have their works used to train an AI model:

https://bsky.app/profile/kibblesmith.com/post/3laz4ryav3k2w

The deal is not negotiable, and the email demanding that authors opt into it warns that AI might make writers obsolete (remember, even if AI can't do your job, an AI salesman can convince Rupert Murdoch – who is insatiably horny for not paying writers – that an AI is capable of doing your job):

https://www.avclub.com/harpercollins-selling-books-to-ai-language-training

And it's not hard to see why an AI company might want this; after all, if they can lock in an exclusive deal to train a model on Harpercollins' back catalog, their products will exclusively enjoy whatever advantage is to be had in that corpus.

In just a month, we've gone from "publishers won't promise not to train a model on your work" to "publishers are letting an AI company train a model on your work, but will pay you a nonnegotiable pittance for your work." The next step is likely to be, "publishers require you to sign away the right to train a model on your work."

The right to decide who can train a model on your work does you no good unless it comes with the power to exercise that right.

Rather than campaigning for the right to decide who can train a model on our work, we should be campaigning for the power to decide what terms we contract under. The Writers Guild spent 148 days on the picket line, a remarkable show of solidarity.

But the Guild's real achievement was in securing the right to unionize at all – to create a sectoral bargaining unit that could represent all the writers, writing for all the studios. The achievements of our labor forebears, in the teeth of ruthless armed resistance, resulted in the legalization and formalization of unions. Never forget that the unions that exist today were criminal enterprises once upon a time, and the only reason they exist is because people risked prison, violence and murder to organize when doing so was a crime:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/11/11/rip-jane-mcalevey/#organize

The fights were worth fighting. The screenwriters comprehensively won the right to control AI in the writers' room, because they had power:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/01/how-the-writers-guild-sunk-ais-ship/

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

--

Eva Rinaldi (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rupert_Murdoch_-_Flickr_-_Eva_Rinaldi_Celebrity_and_Live_Music_Photographer.jpg

CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en

[thebookbin]

UPDATE:

You can check out some of the details of the contract and the benefits here.

This just goes to show what working together for labor rights can do.

In solidarity! ✊

Bookish News You Need To Know

HarperCollins Publishing Union is on Strike NOW

Since July, HarperCollins workers have been bargaining with their corporation to receive fair wages, diversity commitments in the industry (which has remained 90% white), and for their right to collectively bargain. To stave off the strike HarperCollins agreed to come to the table, but refused to engage in good faith.

HarperCollins UAW 2110 has been on strike since 10 November.

How you can help:

All this information comes straight from the union. Visit their website for the most up-to-date information. Follow their lead when it comes to direct action!

Donate to the strike fund! You can use this link here or make our cheques to: ATTN Lynne Weir Region 9A UAW 111 Founders Plaza, 17th floor East Hartford, CT 06108 "HarperCollins" on the memo line

Bring supplies to the picket line Email dm @hcpunion on instagram to see what they need right now. But in general things that would be helpful are: lunch, gluten-free and vegan options, hand-warmers, and scarves.

Don't boycott HarperCollins titles The union is asking you not to boycott, because they still support their authors and want them to succeed. Improved conditions for HarperCollins workers means improved conditions for HarperCollins authors.

Contact HarperCollins and share the news Your support for the union should be addressed to peopleteam@harpercollins.com and brian.murray@harpercollins.com

If you're near NYC, join the picket line 195 Broadway, New York, NY 10007

DO NOT REVIEW HARPERCOLLINS BOOKS UNTIL THEY PROVIDE FAIR CONTRACTS TO THEIR EMPLOYEES. And if they are nominated for any awards like the GoodReads Choice Awards withhold your vote on HarperCollins titles.

Reblog this post This isn't part of the official union instructions, but it would really help spread the word around the tumblr book community.

Sources: HCP Union social medias: Twitter Instagram The Citizen's Guide to Following the Money and Holding the Powerful Accountable free ebook PDF MorePerfectUnion @harpercollins