Iconic Star Wars Book Author Claims Disney Owes Him 4 Years of Overdue Royalties
As noted in the prior thread, movie novelizations are almost always work-for-hire jobs, meaning that the authors are not entitled to royalties but get paid a fixed amount and may receive sales-based bonuses. (In a work-for-hire arrangement, the author is commissioned to write something, and the employer owns the copyright and thus also the royalties for licensing, republication, etc.)While 70s/early 80s era Fox was known for its artist-friendly legal deals (see, e.g., letting Lucas keep Star Wars), it would have been extremely unusual for Lucasfilm to have hired ADF on anything but a WFH basis. And indeed, the copyright record for the novel Splinter of the Mind's Eye shows that the "Star Wars Corporation" owns the copyright, not ADF, and was an "employer for hire." (https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=4&ti=1,4&...) On that note, the copyright registration for Aliens (the novelization) also shows that it was a work-for-hire. https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=65&ti=51,...  (Contrast to an original work, where the author is the copyright claimant: John Scalzi's Old Man's War https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=2&ti=1,2&...)In other words, ADF is not being denied royalties. He wasn't owed any in the first place, unless he somehow negotiated a non-standard WFH agreement that almost nobody in the industry gets. (ADF was a big name for sci-fi novelizations back in the day, so it's possible that he did have such an arrangement, but if that's the case he needs to show that he has that type of contract.)EDIT: grammatical fixes and added linksEDIT 2: Note that the SFWA has unilaterally made claims about what they think Disney is trying to do (acquire assets without the corresponding liabilities). This claim would be correct if, as ADF claims, he owned the copyrights to the novelizations or his WFH agreement somehow obligated Fox/Lucasfilm to pay him royalties. But otherwise it's simply wrong, and Disney itself has never actually made statements to that effect. Moreover, such a claim would not comport with how M&A works in the U.S.